Here is my table
Table Suppliers in Database A
ID(AUTONUMBER) | SupplierCode(Unique) | SupplierName
001 supp001 TestA
002 supp002 TestB
003 supp003 TestC
Table Suppliers in Database B
ID(AUTONUMBER) | SupplierCode(Unique) | SupplierName
001 supp001 TestA
003 supp003 TestC
In this case, i want to insert supp002 to table Suppliers in Database B
And it will skip supp001 and supp003 because the SUPPLIERCODE exists
Can anyone help me with this condition
note: SQL Server query not MySQL
Might as well make it an answer
insert into databaseB..suppliers
Select * from databaseA..suppliers where id not in (select id from databaseB..suppliers)
The table references should be correct, but I can't verify. You might want to go databasea.dbo.suppliers if that's the correct full name
Assuming the two databases are on the same server and both tables are part of the "dbo" schema, inserting only those records in the A table that don't already exist in B into the B table can be handled like this:
INSERT INTO DatabaseB.dbo.Suppliers
SELECT ID,SupplierCode, SupplierName FROM DatabaseA.dbo.Suppliers
WHERE SupplierCode NOT IN
(SELECT SupplierCode FROM DatabaseB.dbo.Suppliers)
If the tables in A and B belong to a different schema, replace the "dbo" above with the appropriate schema name(s).
If the databases reside on different servers, this article that discusses creating linked servers may be useful but the syntax will be similar.
Create Linked Servers
I do not normally recommend using In or Not in statements i usually uses joins so try this
Insert into DatabaseB
(SupplierCode,
SupplierName)
Select SupplierCode,
SupplierName
From DatabaseA A
Left join DatabaseB B
On A.SupplierCode = B.SupplierCode
Where B.SupplierCode IS NULL
Related
I have a table of customer contacts and their role. Simplified example below.
customer | role | userid
----------------------------
1 | Support | 123
1 | Support | 456
1 | Procurement | 567
...
desired output
customer | Support1 | Support2 | Support3 | Support4 | Procurement1 | Procurement2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 | 123 | 456 | null | null | 567 | null
2 | 123 | 456 | 12333 | 45776 | 888 | 56723
So dynamically create number of required columns based on how many user are in that role. It's a small number of roles. Also I can assume max 5 user in that same role. Which means worst case I need to generate 5 columns for each role. The userids don't need to be in any particular order.
My current approach is getting 1 userid per role/customer. Then a second query pulls another id that wasn't part of first results set. And so on. But that way I have to statically create 5 queries. It works. But I was wondering whether there is a more efficient way? Dynamically creating needed columns.
Example of pulling one user per role:
SELECT customer,role,
(SELECT top 1 userid
FROM temp as tmp1
where tmp1.customer=tmp2.customer and tmp1.role=tmp2.role
) as userid
FROM temp as tmp2
group by customer,role
order by customer,role
SQL create with dummy data
create table temp
(
customer int,
role nvarchar(20),
userid int
)
insert into temp values (1,'Support',123)
insert into temp values (1,'Support',456)
insert into temp values (1,'Procurement',567)
insert into temp values (2,'Support',123)
insert into temp values (2,'Support',456)
insert into temp values (2,'Procurement',888)
insert into temp values (2,'Support',12333)
insert into temp values (2,'Support',45776)
insert into temp values (2,'Procurement',56723)
You may need to adapt your approach slightly if you want to avoid getting into the realm of programming user defined table functions (which is what you would need in order to generate columns dynamically). You don't mention which SQL database variant you are using (SQL Server, PostgreSQL, ?). I'm going to make the assumption that it supports some form of string aggregation feature (they pretty much all do), but the syntax for doing this will vary, so you will probably have to adjust the code to your circumstances. You mention that the number of roles is small (5-ish?). The proposed solution is to generate a comma-separated list of user ids, one for each role, using common table expressions (CTEs) and the LISTAGG (variously named STRING_AGG, GROUP_CONCAT, etc. in other databases) function.
WITH tsupport
AS (SELECT customer,
Listagg(userid, ',') AS "Support"
FROM temp
WHERE ROLE = 'Support'
GROUP BY customer),
tprocurement
AS (SELECT customer,
Listagg(userid, ',') AS "Procurement"
FROM temp
WHERE ROLE = 'Procurement'
GROUP BY customer)
--> tnextrole...
--> AS (SELECT ... for additional roles
--> Listagg...
SELECT a.customer,
"Support",
"Procurement"
--> "Next Role" etc.
FROM tsupport a
JOIN tprocurement b
ON a.customer = b.customer
--> JOIN tNextRole ...
Fiddle is here with a result that appears as below based on your dummy data:
We have lots of tables in MS SQL that created without table relations many years ago. Now we are trying to create a relationship between these tables. The problem is in many of these developers used fake ids in the tables.
For example:
TABLE A, ID(primary key) -> TABLE B, AID needs to be relational. But developers used some fake ids like -1,-2 to solve some problems in their side. And now when I try to create a relation between TABLE A, ID(primary key) -> TABLE B, AID, I am getting errors.
TABLE A
ID | NAME
1 | name01
2 | name02
TABLE B
ID | NAME | AID
1 | name01 | 1
2 | name02 | -1
3 | name03 | -2
Is there way to solve this problem and is it meaning full what developers did, they didn't use any relations in sql, they are controlling everything in code-behind.
Thanks
You need to add those to your reference table. Something like this:
insert into a (id, name)
select distinct aid, 'Automatically Generated'
from b
where not exists (select 1 from a where b.aid = a.id) and
a.id is not null;
Then you can add the foreign key relationship:
alter table b add constraint fk_b_aid foreign key (aid) references a(id);
The general idea of referential integrity is exactly that you can't have invalid references.
So the best course of action here would be to suck it up and manually clean it up. Create the missing entries in the other table, or delete the records.
You can also ignore checks on existing data. If you are using sql server management studio to create relations there is option to do that just like in this screen shot
Hope it helps
I would like to create one location on sql server where I store the report-date and all queries and procedures should relate to this one value.
In that way I only have to change the report date on one location and it is valid for all related queries and procedures.
I started with a scalar function that retrieves a value from a table, but this slows down the queries enomoursly.
I tried an inline table valued function, but have no idea how to include this into a query.
I tried with a table that contains the report-date and used a cross join.
But it says:
The multi-part identifier could not be bound
Maybe some of you have an idea what to do here?
One possibility is to create a table, let's say TblReportDate with two columns: id and reportDate.
Then add one row with id 1 like following:
+----+------------+
| id | reportDate |
+----+------------+
| 1 | 04.04.2018 |
+----+------------+
Now join the table with a LEFT JOIN and use the >= operator to compare with the id-column of the main-table:
SELECT * FROM mainTable
LEFT JOIN TblReportDate ON mainTable.id >= TblReportDate.id
I need to localize a SQL Server 2008 database. After investigating recommendations, I have found that it is best to have separate tables or each of the languages for the strings. That way different sorting settings can be set for each table. For example, a typical Product table has ProdID, Product Description, and Price fields. The recommended solution is to set the table structures to have the Product table be ProdID and Price. Then a specific table for each language would have the following structure: ProdID and Description.
My question is how do I create a store procedure that has a parameter which passes in the culture to use for the sub-table and then use that to join the tables? The sub-table needs to change based on the parameter. How can that be done? I am using SQL Server 2008.
First off, are you sure you really want to implement different tables for each culture? It would make more sense to modify your Product table to remove the description, and then add a ProductDescription table with a ProdID, culture, and description field. This way you don't have to toy around with dynamic SQL (which is what you'll have to use) to select the correct table based on the culture parameter.
...specific table for each language would have the following structure: ProdID and Description.
...which is why you're having to look at a really involved setup to get your information out of the database.
A better approach would be to use a single table, and use a code for the language. You don't want to be defining a column per attribute you want translated either, so you'd be looking at implementing something like:
LANGUAGES table
LANGUAGE_ID, pk
LANGUAGE_DESCRIPTION
Example data:
LANGUAGE_ID | LANGUAGE_DESCRIPTION
------------------------------------
1 | ENGLISH
2 | FRENCH
TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTES table
TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_ID, pk
TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_DESC
Example data:
TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_ID | TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_DESC
------------------------------------
1 | PROD_ID
2 | PROD_DESC
LOCALIZATIONS table
LANGUAGE_ID, pk
TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_ID, pk
TRANSLATED_VALUE
Example data:
LANGUAGE_ID | TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_ID | TRANSLATED_VALUE
----------------------------------------------------------
1 | 1 | Product ID
2 | 1 | Produit ID
You'll want a table associating the TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_ID with a given item - Product is the example you've given so:
ATTRIBUTES table
ATTRIBUTE_ID, pk
ATTRIBUTE_TYPE_CODE, fk
TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_ID, fk
Example data:
ATTRIBUTE_ID | ATTRIBUTE_TYPE_CODE | TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_ID
----------------------------------------------------------------
1 | PRODUCT | 1
If you want to relate on a per product basis:
ATTRIBUTES table
ATTRIBUTE_ID, pk
PRODUCT_ID, fk
TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTE_ID, fk
Now can you use two parameters - the language (English) & what the item is (Product):
SELECT t.translated_attribute_desc,
t.translated_value
FROM LOCALIZATIONS t
JOIN TRANSLATED_ATTRIBUTES ta ON ta.translated_attribute_id = t.translated_attribute_id
JOIN ATTRIBUTES a ON a.translated_attribute_id = ta.translated_attribute_id
JOIN ATTRIBUTE_TYPE_CODES atc ON atc.attribute_type_code = a.attribute_type_code
JOIN LANGUAGES lang ON lang.language_id = t.language_id
WHERE lang.language_description = 'ENGLISH' --alternate: lang.language_id = 1
AND atc.attribute_type_code = 'PRODUCT'
You can pivot the data as necessary.
The outline of the tables in question are as follows:
I have a table, lets call it join, that has two columns, both foreign keys to other tables. Let's call the two columns userid and buildingid so join looks like
+--------------+
| join |
|--------------|
|userid |
|buildingid |
+--------------+
I basically need to insert a bunch of rows into this table. Each user will be assigned to multiple buildings by having multiple entries in this table. So user 13 might be assigned to buildings 1, 2, and 3 by the following
13 1
13 2
13 3
I'm trying to figure out how to do this in a query if the building numbers are constant, that is, I'm assigning a group of people to the same buildings. Basically, (this is wrong) I want to do
insert into join (userid, buildingid) values ((select userid from users), 1)
Does that make sense? I've also tried using
select 1
The error I'm running into is that the subquery returns more than one result. I also attempted to create a join, basically with a static select query that was also unsuccessful.
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Chris
Almost! When you want to insert to values of a query, don't try to put them in the values clause. insert can take a select as an argument for the values!
insert into join (userid, buildingid)
select userid, 1 from users
Also, in the spirit of learning more, you can create a table that doesn't exist by using the following syntax:
select userid, 1 as buildingid
into join
from users
That only works if the table doesn't exist, though, but it's a quick and dirty way to create table copies!