Related
One of my columns is called from. I can't change the name because I didn't make it.
Am I allowed to do something like SELECT from FROM TableName or is there a special syntax to avoid the SQL Server being confused?
Wrap the column name in brackets like so, from becomes [from].
select [from] from table;
It is also possible to use the following (useful when querying multiple tables):
select table.[from] from table;
If it had been in PostgreSQL, use double quotes around the name, like:
select "from" from "table";
Note: Internally PostgreSQL automatically converts all unquoted commands and parameters to lower case. That have the effect that commands and identifiers aren't case sensitive. sEleCt * from tAblE; is interpreted as select * from table;. However, parameters inside double quotes are used as is, and therefore ARE case sensitive: select * from "table"; and select * from "Table"; gets the result from two different tables.
These are the two ways to do it:
Use back quote as here:
SELECT `from` FROM TableName
You can mention with table name as:
SELECT TableName.from FROM TableName
While you are doing it - alias it as something else (or better yet, use a view or an SP and deprecate the old direct access method).
SELECT [from] AS TransferFrom -- Or something else more suitable
FROM TableName
Your question seems to be well answered here, but I just want to add one more comment to this subject.
Those designing the database should be well aware of the reserved keywords and avoid using them. If you discover someone using it, inform them about it (in a polite way). The keyword here is reserved word.
More information:
"Reserved keywords should not be used
as object names. Databases upgraded
from earlier versions of SQL Server
may contain identifiers that include
words not reserved in the earlier
version, but that are reserved words
for the current version of SQL Server.
You can refer to the object by using
delimited identifiers until the name
can be changed."
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms176027.aspx
and
"If your database does contain names
that match reserved keywords, you must
use delimited identifiers when you
refer to those objects. For more
information, see Identifiers (DMX)."
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms132178.aspx
In Apache Drill, use backquotes:
select `from` from table;
If you ARE using SQL Server, you can just simply wrap the square brackets around the column or table name.
select [select]
from [table]
I have also faced this issue.
And the solution for this is to put [Column_Name] like this in the query.
string query= "Select [Name],[Email] from Person";
So it will work perfectly well.
Hi I work on Teradata systems that is completely ANSI compliant. Use double quotes " " to name such columns.
E.g. type is a SQL reserved keyword, and when used within quotes, type is treated as a user specified name.
See below code example:
CREATE TABLE alpha1
AS
(
SEL
product1
type_of_product AS "type"
FROM beta1
) WITH DATA
PRIMARY INDEX (product1)
--type is a SQL reserved keyword
TYPE
--see? now to retrieve the column you would use:
SEL "type" FROM alpha1
I ran in the same issue when trying to update a column which name was a keyword. The solution above didn't help me. I solved it out by simply specifying the name of the table like this:
UPDATE `survey`
SET survey.values='yes,no'
WHERE (question='Did you agree?')
The following will work perfectly:
SELECT DISTINCT table.from AS a FROM table
Some solid answers—but the most-upvoted one is parochial, only dealing with SQL Server. In summary:
If you have source control, the best solution is to stick to the rules, and avoid using reserved words. This list has been around for ages, and covers most of the peculiarities. One tip is that reserved words are rarely plural—so you're usually safe using plural names. Exceptions are DIAGNOSTICS, SCHEMAS, OCTETS, OFFSETS, OPTIONS, VALUES, PARAMETERS, PRIVILEGES and also verb-like words that also appear plural: OVERLAPS, READS, RETURNS, TRANSFORMS.
Many of us don't have the luxury of changing the field names. There, you'll need to know the details of the RDBM you're accessing:
For SQL Server use [square_braces] around the name. This works in an ODBC connection too.
For MySQL use `back_ticks`.
Postgres, Oracle and several other RDBMs will apparently allow "double_quotes" to be used.
Dotting the offending word onto the table name may also work.
You can put your column name in bracket like:
Select [from] from < ur_tablename>
Or
Put in a temprary table then use as you like.
Example:
Declare #temp_table table(temp_from varchar(max))
Insert into #temp_table
Select * from your_tablename
Here I just assume that your_tablename contains only one column (i.e. from).
In MySQL, alternatively to using back quotes (`), you can use the UI to alter column names. Right click the table > Alter table > Edit the column name that contains sql keyword > Commit.
select [from] from <table>
As a note, the above does not work in MySQL
Judging from the answers here and my own experience. The only acceptable answer, if you're planning on being portable is don't use SQL keywords for table, column, or other names.
All these answers work in the various databases but apparently a lot don't support the ANSI solution.
Simple solution
Lets say the column name is from ; So the column name in query can be referred by table alias
Select * from user u where u.from="US"
In Oracle SQL Developer, pl/sql you can do this with double quotes but if you use double quotes you must type the column names in upper case. For example, SELECT "FROM" FROM MY_TABLE
Inside my database I have some tables that use a column with a reserved word name for example user, I have created it using " as "USER" but when I want to get it I have realized that I have to put it in capital letters, I have already investigated and I obtained that when placing " oracle respects it as case sensitive, they somehow know how to avoid this and obtain my column without the need for it to be written as defined, that is, case insensitive.
I am working Oracle with Firedac, on the Firedac side, do you know if something can be done so that this can be solved by having to put the column name as it is?
No.
You chose to have a column that conflicts with a reserved word, so you had to quote it when you declared it. You also need to quote this identifier everytime you use it - and a quoted identifier is case-sensitive by design.
I would strongly suggest avoiding having column names that conflict with SQL reserved word (or keywords). There is no benefit, and many drawbacks. You could just rename that column to usr, username, userid, or else. Declare the new name as a unquoted identifier, and you will never need to worry about this all afterwards.
How do I create a table in H2 with a column named GROUP? I saw an example that used something like [*] a while ago, but I can't seem to find it.
Trailing Underscore
Add a trailing underscore: GROUP_
The SQL spec explicitly promises† that no keyword will ever have a trailing underscore. So you are guaranteed that any naming you create with a trailing underscore will never collide with a keyword or reserved word.
I name all my columns, constraints, etc. in the database with a trailing underscore. Seems a bit weird at first, but you get used to seeing it. Turns out to have a nice side-effect: In all the programming as well as notes and emails, when I see the trailing underscore I know the context is the database as opposed to a programming variable or a business term.
Another benefit is peace-of-mind. Such a relief to eliminate an entire class of possible bugs and weird problems due to keyword collision. If you are thinking, "No big deal - what's a few SQL keywords to memorize and avoid", think again. There are a zillion keywords and reserved words, a zillion being over a thousand.
The answer by Shiva is correct as well: Adding quotes around the name, "GROUP", does solve the problem. The downside is that remembering to add those quotes will be tiresome and troublesome.
Further tip: For maximum compatibility across various SQL databases, do your naming in all lowercase. The SQL spec says that all names should be stored in uppercase while tolerating lowercase. But unfortunately some (most?) databases fail to follow the spec in that regard. After hours of study of various databases, I concluded that all-lowercase gives you maximum portability.
So I actually suggest you name your column: group_
Multiple word names look like this: given_name_ and date_of_first_contact_
† I cannot quote the SQL spec because it is copyright protected, unfortunately. In the SQL:2011 spec, read section 5.4 Names and identifiers under the heading Syntax Rules item 3, NOTE 111. In SQL-92 see section 5.2, item 11. Just searching for the word underscore will work.
I've been facing the same problem recently, my table has columns "key" and "level", both of which are keywords. So instead of renaming the actual tables or bastardising the DB/configuration in any other way, just for the coughing test, the fix was to put the following in the driver configuration in application.properties:
jdbc.url=jdbc:h2:mem:db;NON_KEYWORDS=KEY,LEVEL
And beyond that, I did not have to change a thing in Hibernate/entity settings and JPA was happy and never complained again.
see details here:
https://www.h2database.com/html/commands.html#set_non_keywords
You have to surround the reserved word column name in quotes, like so
"GROUP"
Source (direct link): h2database.com
Keywords / Reserved Words
There is a list of keywords that can't be used as identifiers (table
names, column names and so on), unless they are quoted (surrounded
with double quotes). The list is currently:
CROSS, CURRENT_DATE, CURRENT_TIME, CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, DISTINCT,
EXCEPT, EXISTS, FALSE, FOR, FROM, FULL, GROUP, HAVING, INNER,
INTERSECT, IS, JOIN, LIKE, LIMIT, MINUS, NATURAL, NOT, NULL, ON,
ORDER, PRIMARY, ROWNUM, SELECT, SYSDATE, SYSTIME, SYSTIMESTAMP, TODAY,
TRUE, UNION, UNIQUE, WHERE
Certain words of this list are keywords because they are functions
that can be used without '()' for compatibility, for example
CURRENT_TIMESTAMP.
I've been having this problem with SQL generated by JPA... Turned out I was using a variable name called limit.
Caused by: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLSyntaxErrorException: Syntax error in SQL statement "CREATE TABLE EXPENSE_LIMIT (ID BIGINT NOT NULL, LIMIT[*] DECIMAL(19,2), ACCOUNT_ID BIGINT, EXPENSE_CATEGORY_ID BIGINT, PERIOD_ID BIGINT, PRIMARY KEY (ID)) "; expected "identifier"; SQL statement:
Where my model class had a field called limit.
The fix is to specify column name as
#Column(name = "`limit`")
I tried to create table named 15909434_user with syntax like below:
CREATE TABLE 15909434_user ( ... )
It would produced error of course. Then, after I tried to have a bit research with google, I found a good article here that describe:
When you create an object in PostgreSQL, you give that object a name. Every table has a name, every column has a name, and so on. PostgreSQL uses a single data type to define all object names: the name type.
A value of type name is a string of 63 or fewer characters. A name must start with a letter or an underscore; the rest of the string can contain letters, digits, and underscores.
...
If you find that you need to create an object that does not meet these rules, you can enclose the name in double quotes. Wrapping a name in quotes creates a quoted identifier. For example, you could create a table whose name is "3.14159"—the double quotes are required, but are not actually a part of the name (that is, they are not stored and do not count against the 63-character limit). ...
Okay, now I know how to solve this by use this syntax (putting double quote on table name):
CREATE TABLE "15909434_user" ( ... )
You can create table or column name such as "15909434_user" and also user_15909434, but cannot create table or column name begin with numeric without use of double quotes.
So then, I am curious about the reason behind that (except it is a convention). Why this convention applied? Is it to avoid something like syntax limitation or other reason?
Thanks in advance for your attention!
It comes from the original sql standards, which through several layers of indirection eventually get to an identifier start block, which is one of several things, but primarily it is "a simple latin letter". There are other things too that can be used, but if you want to see all the details, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL-92 and follow the links to the actual standard ( page 85 )
Having non numeric identifier introducers makes writing a parser to decode sql for execution easier and quicker, but a quoted form is fine too.
Edit: Why is it easier for the parser?
The problem for a parser is more in the SELECT-list clause than the FROM clause. The select-list is the list of expressions that are selected from the tables, and this is very flexible, allowing simple column names and numeric expressions. Consider the following:
SELECT 2e2 + 3.4 FROM ...
If table names, and column names could start with numerics, is 2e2 a column name or a valid number (e format is typically permitted in numeric literals) and is 3.4 the table "3" and column "4" or is it the numeric value 3.4 ?
Having the rule that identifiers start with simple latin letters (and some other specific things) means that a parser that sees 2e2 can quickly discern this will be a numeric expression, same deal with 3.4
While it would be possible to devise a scheme to allow numeric leading characters, this might lead to even more obscure rules (opinion), so this rule is a nice solution. If you allowed digits first, then it would always need quoting, which is arguably not as 'clean'.
Disclaimer, I've simplified the above slightly, ignoring corelation names to keep it short. I'm not totally familiar with postgres, but have double checked the above answer against Oracle RDB documentation and sql spec
I'd imagine it's to do with the grammar.
SELECT 24*DAY_NUMBER as X from MY_TABLE
is fine, but ambiguous if 24 was allowed as a column name.
Adding quotes means you're explicitly referring to an identifier not a constant. So in order to use it, you'd always have to escape it anyway.
I have a query that by all rights should not possibly fail, and I can't for the life of me figure out why
INSERT INTO Grocery_Store_Prices(Store,Item,Brand,Price,Unit,Quantity,Note)
VALUES("Kroger","Cheesy Poof","Cartman",0.51,"fart",15,"what is going on");
When I try to run the query I get "Syntax error in INSERT INTO statement" with the Note field highlighted. If I omit the Note field and its value, the query works fine. Is there something really obvious I'm missing, or is there an Jet SQL quirk buried here???
The table it's acting on is:
Grocery_Store_Prices
ID -- autonumber primary key
Store -- Text
Date -- Date/Time
Item -- Text
Brand -- Text
Price -- Currency
Unit -- Text
Quantity -- Number (double)
Note -- Text.
"Note" is a reserved word in Microsoft Access. You need to surround it with square brackets:
INSERT INTO Grocery_Store_Prices(Store,Item,Brand,Price,Unit,Quantity,[Note])
VALUES("Kroger","Cheesy Poof","Cartman",0.51,"fart",15,"what the ____");
Helpful list of reserved words here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/286335
Some consider it best practice to always encase field names in square brackets, just so you don't have to worry about it.
Good luck!
Note is a reserved word, so try renaming that column.