Okay, so I've got two tables. One table (table 1) contains a column Books_Owned_ID which stores a series of numbers in the form of 1,3,7. I have another table (table 2) which stores the Book names in one column and the book ID in another column.
What I want to do is create an SQL code which will take the numbers from Books_Owned_IDand display the names of those books in a new column. Like so:
|New Column |
Book 1 Name
Book 2 Name
Book 3 Name
I can't wrap my head around this, it's simple enough but all the threads I look on get really confusing.
Table1 contains the following columns:
|First_Name| Last_Name| Books_Owned_ID |
Table2 contains the following columns:
|Book_Name|Book_ID|
You need to do an inner join. This is a great example/reference for these
SELECT Book_Name FROM Table2
INNER JOIN Table1
ON Table1.Books_Owned_ID = Table2.Book_ID
EDIT SQL Fiddle
I will work on getting the column comma split working. It wont be a lot extra for this.
EDIT 2 See this answer to build a function to split your string. Then you can do this:
SELECT Book_Name FROM Table2
WHERE Book_ID IN(SELECT FN_ListToTable(',',Table1.Books_Owned_ID) FROM Table1 s)
The core of this centers around data normalisation... Each fact is stored only once (and so is "authoritative"). You should also get into the habit of only storing a single fact in any field.
So, imagine the following table layouts...
Books
Id, Name, Description
Users
Id, Username, EmailAddress, PasswordHash, etc....
BooksOwned
UserId, BookId
So if a single user owns multiple books, there will be multiple entries in the BooksOwned table...
UserId, BookID
1, 1
1, 2
1, 3
Indicates that User 1 owns books 1 through 3.
The reason to do it this way is that it makes it much easier to query in future. You also treat BookId as an Integer instead of a string containing a list - so you don't need to worry about string manipulation to do your query.
The following would return the name of all books owned by the user with Id = 1
SELECT Books.Name
FROM BooksOwned
INNER JOIN Books
ON BooksOwned.BookId = Books.Id
WHERE BooksOwned.UserId = 1
You need a function which takes a comma separated list and returns a table. This is slow and fundamentally a bad idea. Really all this does is convert this way of doing it to be like the data model I describe below. (see ProfessionalAmateur's answer for an example of this).
If you are just starting change your data model. Make a linking table. Like this:
Okay, so I've got two tables. One table (table 1) contains a column Books_Owned_ID which stores a series of numbers in the form of 1,3,7. I have another table (table 2) which stores the Book names in one column and the book ID in another column.
What I want to do is create an SQL code which will take the numbers from Books_Owned_IDand display the names of those books in a new column. Like so:
Person Table
|First_Name| Last_Name| Person_ID |
Book Table
|Book_Name|Book_ID|
PersonBook Table
|PersonID|BookID|
This table can have more than one row for each person.
Related
I have a table, the columns are:
Respondent_ID, classical, gospel, pop, kpop, country, folk, rock, metal ... (all genre of music)
there are 16 columns of different type of genre of music,
and data value is Never, Rarely, Sometimes or Very frequently
SELECT *
FROM genre_frequency
WHERE
I want to design a query which show results of all columns in the table what has the value 'Very Frequently', can anyone lend me a hand here? I'm still new to this, please help anyone...
Could put the same criteria under every genre field with OR operator - very messy. Or could use a VBA custom function.
Or could normalize data structure so you have fields: RespondentID, Genre, Frequency. A UNION query can rearrange data to this normalized structure (unpivot). There is a limit of 50 SELECT lines and there is no builder or wizard for UNION - must type or copy/paste in SQL View.
SELECT Respondent_ID, "classical" AS Genre, classical AS Frequency FROM genre_frequency
UNION SELECT Respondent_ID, "gospel", gospel FROM genre_frequency
... {continue for additional genre columns};
Now use that query like a table in subsequent queries. Just cannot edit data.
SELECT * FROM qryUNION WHERE Frequency="Very frequently";
UNION query can perform slowly with very large dataset. Probably would be best to redesign table. Could save this rearranged data to a table. If you want to utilize lookup tables for Genre and Frequency in order to save ID keys instead of full descriptive text, that can also be accommodated in redesign.
You should normalize your schema. This one has the problem that it requires you to alter the table whenever you want to add or remove a genre.
You must have at least three tables:
Table Respondent: Respondent_ID (PK), Name, etc.
Table Genre: Genre_ID (PK), Name
Table Respondent_Genre: Respondent_ID (PK, FK), Genre_ID (PK, FK), Frequency
This also easily allows you to alter the name of a genre or to add additional attributes to a genre like sub-genre or an annotation like (1930–present).
Optionally, you could also have a lookup table for Frequencies and then include the Frequency_ID in Respondent_Genre instead the Frequency as text.
Then you can write a query like this
SELECT r.Name, g.Name, rg.Frequency
FROM
(Respondent r
INNER JOIN Respondent_Genre rg
ON r.Respondent_ID = rg.Respondent_ID)
INNER JOIN Genre g
ON rg.Genre_ID = g.Genre_ID
WHERE
rg.Frequency = 'Very Frequently'
How to remove duplicate values a = b and b = a?
with a as(select w.id , w.doc, w.org
, d.name_s, d.name_f, d.name_p, d.spec
, o.name, o.extid
from crm_s_workplaces w
join crm_s_docs d on d.id=w.doc
join crm_s_orgs o on o.id=w.org
where d.active=1 and d.cst='NY' and w.active=1 and w.cst='NY' and o.active=1
and
o.cst='NY')
select a1.doc, a2.doc,
a1.org,a1.name_s,a1.name_f,a1.name_p,a2.name_s,a2.name_f,a2.name_p from a a1
join a a2 on
a1.name_s=a2.name_s and
substr(a1.name_f,1,1)=substr(a2.name_f,1,1) and
substr(a1.name_p,1,1)=substr(a2.name_p,1,1) and
a1.org=a2.org and
a1.spec<>a2.spec
order by a1.name_s `enter code here`
ER model diagram:
Repeat example:
Sometimes comes across a1.spec > a2.spec:
What you are calling "duplicates" are actually not duplicates in your database.
You basically have multiple doc records for what could be the same person or not. See that even their names do not always match. For instace,
doc_id 1131385 has NAME_F = "Gabr" while
doc_id 1447530 has NAME_F = "Gabor"
In your database these are two different entities, and you cannot match them using primary key. You can try to join on the first, middle and last names, but as you can see in the above example with Gabor/Gabr, even that would not work.
Can you change the schema of the db? If so you need to separate the docs in one table - 1 record per doctor. And have the specialization in a separate table with the folloing columns:
spec_id (int, PK)
doc_id (foreign key to Doc table)
specialization
that way, if you have 1 doctor with 3 specs, he/she will show up only once in doc table, and multiple times in spec table.
I just notice something else. You have spec field in table workplaces. why? If you meant to say that Doc Gabor works as admin in hospital 1 but as a Therapist in hospital 2, you can do that. However, you have to remove the spec field from the doc table and only use the spec in workplaces table.
I have two tables called resource and resource_owners.
The resource_owners table contains two columns called resource_id and owner_id.
resource_id | owner_id |
-------------+-----------
The resource table contains two relevant columns: parentresource_id and id.
parentresource_id | id |
-------------------+------
resource_owners.resource_id, resource.id and resource.parentresource_id are all join columns between the two tables. Now what I want to do is the following:
For every row in the resource table, take the value in id, match it with a corresponding resource_owners.resource_id, retrieve the corresponding resource_owners.owner_id value (call it $owner_value), then set resource_owners.owner_id to $owner_value where resource_owners.resource_id equals resource.parentresource_id.
In conversational terms, this is what I want to do: For each resource, I want to re-assign the parent-resource's owner_id to be the resource's owner_id.
I've tried to wrap my head around this problem and it looks like I'll need two different table joins (resource.id with resource_owners.resource_id and resource.parentresource_id with resource_owners.resource_id).
Can someone point me in the right direction? Is what I want even possible with a single query? I'm okay with a PostgreSQL script as well if that works better for my use case.
I'm not sure what database you are using but you should be able to accomplish using the logic below if I understood your question correctly:
UPDATE RESOURCE_OWNER SET
OWNER_ID = UP.OWNER_ID
FROM (SELECT rc.ID, TMP.OWNER_ID FROM (SELECT RSC.ID, ROWRS.OWNER_ID, ROWRS.RESOURCE_ID FROM RESOURCE RSC JOIN RESOURCE_OWNER ROWRS
ON RSC.ID = ROWRS.RESOURCE_ID) TMP JOIN RESOURCE rc on rc.PARENTRESOURCE_ID = TMP.RESOURCE_ID) UP WHERE RESOURCE_OWNER.RESOURCE_ID = UP.ID;
I have a few tables set up in Access as follows (forgive the slightly redundant example content):
Table 1:
- ID
- FirstName
- SecondName
Table 2:
- ID
- Details
- PersonID -> Table 1[ID]
Table 3:
- ID
- Group
- PersonDetails -> Table 2[ID]
Table 1 is the base table containing records and retrieving no other information. For example, it could store someone's first and second names, along with an autonumber ID.
Table 2 contains records which, amongst other things, contain a field that links to Table 1 and stores the ID of one of the records held there. With the lookup wizard I can choose to utilise all fields from Table 1, store the ID of the Table 1 record in the Table 2 field and also display the first and second names in the combobox on the form to make choosing a record more intuitive.
In table 3, I need to store the ID of one of the records in Table 2. However, I would also like to again display in the form combobox the first and second names from the related record (in Table 1) whose ID is stored in Table 2. I can't choose to utilise, for example, the PersonDetails field from table 2 as this just puts ID numbers into the combobox - I'd need to do something equivalent of:
Table 2[ID]->[FirstName]
Is this possible to do with the lookup wizard in Access or would I have to look into queries or VBA?
Thanks.
Your query for your combo should look something like this:
SELECT cp.ID, cp.ReferenceName, c.Company, p.FeePerHour
FROM (ClientProfile AS cp LEFT JOIN Clients AS c ON cp.ClientID = c.ID)
LEFT JOIN Pricing AS p ON cp.PricePlanID = p.ID;
The main problem with your query is that you're missing the Parenthesis that are needed when you have multiple joins. If you had another join, you'd need a second set of parenthesis.
I took some liberty and used table aliases. It makes SQL concise and more readable.
If this query still doesn't work it might be because you're trying to join "child tables" to the "main table" without using your Foreign Key fields as the joining field. If this were my database the SQL would look something like this:
SELECT cp.ClientProfileID, cp.ReferenceName, c.Company, p.FeePerHour
FROM (ClientProfile AS cp LEFT JOIN Clients as C ON cp.ClientID = c.ClientID)
LEFT JOIN Pricing AS p ON cp.ClientProfileID = p.ClientProfileID;
Personally, I basically never use just plain ID as a field name. And when creating a foreign key I usually use the same field name as what the original table has. There are exceptions, especially in the case where you need to link back to the same table more than once. Consider the case where you are tracking real estate properties and you have a Buyer and a Seller that are both entities (but different from each other) in the same People table. You would then need to name them something like BuyerID and SellerID but ultimately they would link back to the PersonID in the Person table.
So Here's the table design I would go for. Notice I changed Group to PriceGroup. Watch out for reserved words when programming, not only in SQL but any language. If you name your field Group at some point you'll be trying to "Group on Group" which sounds and looks bad, if nothing else.
Client:
- ClientID
- FirstName
- SecondName
ClientProfile:
- ClientProfileID
- Details
- ClientID (Foreign Key to Client)
Pricing:
- PricingID
- PriceGroup
- ClientProfileID (Foreign Key to ClientProfile)
i have a table which store user name, hobby and city .hobby field contain different hobby joined using "," operator eg swimming, basket, cricket. I want to search user name who match at least one hobby according to my search criteria.
You should not have multiple attributes in one column. That's one of the number one rules of 3nf database design. Now you have to figure out ways to parse this data. This issue only gets worse and worse each and every day. Seperate the hobbies as multiple rows in your database.
I agree with #JonH that there shouldn't be more than one piece of information in a column. It stops the row being truly atomic.
But you are where you are, and you can use the LIKE clause to return rows that match a substring within a column.
Something like:
select hobbycolumn from hobbytable where hobbycolumn like '%swimming%'
for example
To do this properly you need to restructure your tables if possible. For what you are looking for a possible way would be to have 3 tables. I'm not sure who the city belongs to, so I put it with the user.
1 for user with the following cols:
id
name
city
A table for for hobbies:
id
name
And a user_hobbies join table that allows each user to have multiple hobbies, and each hobby to have multiple users:
id
user_id (foreign key)
hobby_id (foreign key)
Then searching for a user with a certain hobby is:
SELECT user.id, user.name FROM user
INNER JOIN 'user_hobbies' on user_hobbies.user_id=user.id
INNER JOIN 'hobbies' on hobbies.id = user_hobbies.hobby_id
WHERE hobbies.name LIKE "query";