Let's say that we have a table named Data with Id and Weather columns. Other columns in that table are not important to this problem. The Weather column can be null.
I want to display all rows where Weather fits a condition, but if there is a null value in weather then display null value.
My SQL so far:
SELECT *
FROM Data d
WHERE (d.Weather LIKE '%'+COALESCE(NULLIF('',''),'sunny')+'%' OR d.Weather IS NULL)
My results are wrong, because that statement also shows values where Weather is null if condition is not correct (let's say that users mistyped wrong).
I found similar topic, but there I do not find appropriate answer.
SQL WHERE clause not returning rows when field has NULL value
Please help me out.
Your query is correct for the general task of treating NULLs as a match. If you wish to suppress NULLs when there are no other results, you can add an AND EXISTS ... condition to your query, like this:
SELECT *
FROM Data d
WHERE d.Weather LIKE '%'+COALESCE(NULLIF('',''),'sunny')+'%'
OR (d.Weather IS NULL AND EXISTS (SELECT * FROM Data dd WHERE dd.Weather LIKE '%'+COALESCE(NULLIF('',''),'sunny')+'%'))
The additional condition ensures that NULLs are treated as matches only if other matching records exist.
You can also use a common table expression to avoid duplicating the query, like this:
WITH cte (id, weather) AS
(
SELECT *
FROM Data d
WHERE d.Weather LIKE '%'+COALESCE(NULLIF('',''),'sunny')+'%'
)
SELECT * FROM cte
UNION ALL
SELECT * FROM Data WHERE weather is NULL AND EXISTS (SELECT * FROM cte)
statement show also values where Wether is null if condition is not correct (let say that users typed wrong sunny).
This suggests that the constant 'sunny' is coming from end-user's input. If that is the case, you need to parameterize your query to avoid SQL injection attacks.
Related
I am working on a query that will check the temp table if there is a record that do not exist on the main table. My query looks like this
SELECT * FROM [Telemarketing].[dbo].[PDCampaignBatch_temp]
WHERE [StartDateTime] NOT IN (SELECT [StartDateTime] FROM [Telemarketing].[dbo].PDCampaignBatch GROUP BY [StartDateTime])
but the problem is it does not display this row
even if that data does not exist in my main table. What seems to be the problem?
NOT IN has strange semantics. If any values in the subquery are NULL, then the query returns no rows at all. For this reason, I strongly recommend using NOT EXISTS instead:
SELECT t.*
FROM [Telemarketing].[dbo].[PDCampaignBatch_temp] t
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM [Telemarketing].[dbo].PDCampaignBatch cb
WHERE t.StartDateTime = cb.StartDateTime
);
If the set is evaluated by the SQL NOT IN condition contains any values that are null, then the outer query here will return an empty set, even if there are many [StartDateTime]s that match [StartDateTime]s in the PDCampaignBatch table.
To avoid such issue,
SELECT *
FROM [Telemarketing].[dbo].[PDCampaignBatch_temp]
WHERE [StartDateTime] NOT IN (
SELECT DISTINCT [StartDateTime]
FROM [Telemarketing].[dbo].PDCampaignBatch
WHERE [StartDateTime] IS NOT NULL
);
Let's say PDCampaignBatch_temp and PDCampaignBatch happen to have the same structure (same columns in the same order) and you're tasked with getting the set of all rows in PDCampaignBatch_temp that aren't in PDCampaignBatch. The most effective way to do that is to make use of the EXCEPT operator, which will deal with NULL in the expected way as well:
SELECT * FROM [Telemarketing].[dbo].[PDCampaignBatch_temp]
EXCEPT
SELECT * FROM [Telemarketing].[dbo].[PDCampaignBatch]
In production code that is not a one-off, don't use SELECT *, write out the column names instead.
Most likely your issue is with the datetime. You may be only displaying a certain degree of percision like the year/month/date. The data may be stored as year/month/date/hour/minute/second/milisecond. If so you have to match down the the most granluar measurement of the data. If one field is a date and the other is a date time they also will likely never match up. Thus you always get no responses.
I have to compare comma separated values with a column in the table and find out which values are not in database. [kind of master data validation]. Please have a look at the sample data below:
table data in database:
id name
1 abc
2 def
3 ghi
SQL part :
Here i am getting comma separated list like ('abc','def','ghi','xyz').
now xyz is invalid value, so i want to take that value and return it as output saying "invalid value".
It is possible if i split those value, take it in temp table, loop through each value and compare one by one.
but is there any other optimal way to do this ??
I'm sure if I got the question right, however, I would personally be trying to get to something like this:
SELECT
D.id,
CASE
WHEN B.Name IS NULL THEN D.name
ELSE "invalid value"
END
FROM
data AS D
INNER JOIN badNames B ON b.Name = d.Name
--as SQL is case insensitive, equal sign should work
There is one table with bad names or invalid values if You prefer. This can a temporary table as well - depending on usage (a black-listed words should be a table, ad hoc invalid values provided by a service should be temp table, etc.).
NOTE: The select above can be nested in a view, so the data remain as they were, yet you gain the correctness information. Otherwise I would create a cursor inside a function that would go through the select like the one above and alter the original data, if that is the goal...
It sounds like you just need a NOT EXISTS / LEFT JOIN, as in:
SELECT tmp.InvalidValue
FROM dbo.HopeThisIsNotAWhileBasedSplit(#CSVlist) tmp
WHERE NOT EXISTS (
SELECT *
FROM dbo.Table tbl
WHERE tbl.Field = tmp.InvalidValue
);
Of course, depending on the size of the CSV list coming in, the number of rows in the table you are checking, and the style of splitter you are using, it might be better to dump the CSV to a temp table first (as you mentioned doing in the question).
Try following query:
SELECT SplitedValues.name,
CASE WHEN YourTable.Id IS NULL THEN 'invalid value' ELSE NULL END AS Result
FROM SplitedValues
LEFT JOIN yourTable ON SplitedValues.name = YourTable.name
Suppose I have a table with following records
value text
company/about about Us
company company
company/contactus company contact
I have a very simple query in sql server as below. I am having problem with the 'or' condition. In below query, I am trying to find text for value 'company/about'. If it is not found, then only I want to run the other side of 'or'. The below query returns two records as below
value text
company/about about Us
company company
Query
select
*
from
tbl
where
value='company/about' or
value=substring('company/about',0,charindex('/','company/about'))
How can I modify the query so the result set looks like
value text
company/about about Us
A bit roundabout, but you can check for the existence of results from the first where clause:
select
*
from
tbl
where
value='company/about' or
(
not exists (select * from tbl where value='company/about')
and
value=substring('company/about',0,charindex('/','company/about'))
)
Since your second condition can be re-written as value = 'company' this would work (at least for the data and query you've presented):
select top(1) [value], [text]
from dbo.MyTable
where value in ('company/about', 'company')
order by len(value) desc
The TOP() ignores the second row if both are found, and the ORDER BY ensures that the first row is always the one with 'company/about', if it exists.
Debugging an app which queries SQL Server 05, can't change the query but need to optimise things.
Running all the selects seperately are quick <1sec, eg: select * from acscard, select id from employee... When joined together it takes 50 seconds.
Is it better to set uninteresting accesscardid fields to null or to '' when using EXISTS?
SELECT * FROM ACSCard
WHERE NOT EXISTS
( SELECT Id FROM Employee
WHERE Employee.AccessCardId = ACSCard.acs_card_number )
AND NOT EXISTS
( SELECT Id FROM Visit
WHERE Visit.AccessCardId = ACSCard.acs_card_number )
ORDER by acs_card_id
Do you have indexes on Employee.AccessCardId, Visit.AccessCardId, and ACSCard.acs_card_number?
The SELECT clause is not evaluated in an EXISTS clause. This:
WHERE EXISTS(SELECT 1/0
FROM EMPLOYEE)
...should raise an error for dividing by zero, but it won't. But you need to put something in the SELECT clause for it to be a valid query - it doesn't matter if it's NULL or a zero length string.
In SQL Server, NOT EXISTS (and NOT IN) are better than the LEFT JOIN/IS NULL approach if the columns being compared are not nullable (the values on either side can not be NULL). The columns compared should be indexed, if they aren't already.
Also what will be the scenarios where this query is used
select * from TableA where exists
(select null from TableB where TableB.Col1=TableA.Col1)
As the query is in an EXISTS then you can return anything. It is not even evaluated.
In fact, you can replace the null with (1/0) and it will not even produce a divide by zero error.
The NULL makes no sense. It's simply bad SQL.
The exists clause is supposed to use SELECT *.
People make up stories about the cost of SELECT *. They claim it does an "extra" metadata query. It doesn't. They claim it's a "macro expansion" and requires lots of extra parse time. It doesn't.
The EXISTS condition is considered "to be met" if the subquery returns at least one row.
The syntax for the EXISTS condition is:
SELECT columns
FROM tables
WHERE EXISTS ( subquery );
Please note that "Select Null from mytable" will return number of rows in mytable but all will contain only one column with null in the cell as the requirement of outer query is just to check whether any row fall in the given given condition like in your case it is "TableB.Col1=TableA.Col1"
you can change null to 1, 0 or any column name available in the table. 1/0 may not be a good idea :)
It's a tacky way of selecting all records in TableA, which have a matching record (Col1=Col1) in TableB. They might equally well have selected '1', or '*', for instance.
A more human-readable way of achieving the same would be
SELECT * FROM TableA WHERE Col1 IN ( SELECT Col1 IN TableB )
Please, please, all ....
EXISTS returns a BOOLEAN i.e. TRUE or FALSE. If the result set is non empty then return TRUE. Correlation of the sub-query is important as in the case above.
i.e Give me all the rows in A where AT LEAST one col1 exists in B.
It does not matter what is in the select list. Its just a matter of style.