I have a table with below rows, which i need to join in a complex query
COL_1 COL_2 COL_3 COL_4 COL_5
----- ----- ----- ----- ----
1 A X Y
1 * * *
.............
.......
COL_2, COL_3 and COL_4 can have a specific value or '*' means ALL.
I need to select only one row, if a row found with all the specific values.
COL_2 ='A' and COL_3 = 'X' and COL_4 = 'Y' AND COL_1 = '1'
If such row not found, a row with below condition should be selected.
COL_2 ='*' and COL_3 = '*' and COL_4 = '*' AND COL_1 = '1'
If i Use 'OR' for the values, i get both the rows.
Please Help.
Depending on how complex your situation is, you can check the row's existence:
where col2='A' and col3='X' and col4='Y' and col1='1'
or
(
not exists (select 1 from tbl where col2='A' and col3='X' and col4='Y' and col1='1')
and col2='*' and col3='*' and col4='*' and col1='1'
)
If it's any more complex than this, this technique will get ugly fast.
Again, depending on how complex this is in real life, something like this may work:
select top 1 col2, col3, col4, col1 from
(
select 1 [priority], col2, col3, col4, col1
from tbl
where col2='A' and col3='X' and col4='Y' and col1='1'
union
select 2 [priority], col2, col3, col4, col1
from tbl
where col2='*' and col3='*' and col4='*' and col1='1'
) x
order by x.priority
This will retrieve both possible scenarios, but order them by a given priority (the best one is at the top), then pick the top 1 record.
This technique can be evolved so that you can do more complex things. For example, rather than a fixed priority value, you can calculate priority based on how many of the columns actually match vs. how many are stars - maybe start with something like:
select top 1 case when col2='A' then 100 when col2='*' then 1 else 0 end
+ case when col3='X' then 100 when col2='*' then 1 else 0 end
...etc... [priority]
from tbl
where col2 in ('A','*') and col3 in ('X','*') ...etc...
order by priority desc
This retrieves all records that match or have any combination of matches or asterisks, but prioritizes them based on how many real matches are found vs. asterisks (in this case a higher number is a better match).
Related
I have a weird grouping scenario and have some troubles finding out what would be the best way for grouping in SQL.
Imagine we have the following one table
CREATE TABLE Item
(
KeyId VARCHAR(1) NOT NULL,
Col1 INT NULL,
Col2 INT NULL,
Col3 INT NULL
)
GO
INSERT INTO Item (KeyId, Col1, Col2, Col3)
VALUES
('a',1,2,3),
('b',5,4,3),
('c',5,7,6),
('d',8,7,9),
('e',11,10,9),
('f',11,12,13),
('g',20,22,21),
('h',23,22,24)
I need to group records in this table so that if Col1 OR Col2 OR Col3 is the same for two records, then these two records should be in the same group, and there should be chaining.
In other words, with the data as above record 'a' (first record) has Col3 = 3 and record 'b' (second record) has also Col3 = 3, so these two should be in one group. But then record 'b' has the same Col1 as record 'c', so record 'c' should be in the same group as 'a' and 'b'. And then record 'd' has the same Col2 as in 'c', so this should also be in the same group. Similarly 'e' and 'f' has the same values in Col3 and Col1 respectively.
On the other hand records 'g' and 'h' will be in one group (because they have the same Col2 = 22), but this group will be different from the group for records 'a','b','c','d','e','f'.
The result of the query should be something like
KeyId GroupId
'a' 1
'b' 1
'c' 1
'd' 1
'e' 1
'f' 1
'g' 2
'h' 2
There is probably a way of doing this with some loops/cursors, but I started thinking about cleaner way and this seems quite difficult.
Here you go:
with g (rootid, previd, level, keyid, col1, col2, col3) as (
select keyid, '-', 1, keyid, col1, col2, col3 from item
union all
select g.rootid, g.keyid, g.level + 1, i.keyid, i.col1, i.col2, i.col3
from g
join item i on i.col1 = g.col1 or i.col2 = g.col2 or i.col3 = g.col3
where i.keyid > g.keyid
),
m (keyid, rootid) as (
select keyid, min(rootid) from g group by keyid
)
select * from m;
Result:
keyid rootid
----- ------
a a
b a
c a
d a
e a
f a
g g
h g
Note: Keep in mind that SQL Server has by default a limit of 100 iterations (number of rows per group) when processing recursive CTEs. In English: even though it's possible to do this as shown above, there are clear limitations to what SQL Server can process. If you reach this limit you'll get the message:
The maximum recursion 100 has been exhausted before statement completion.
If this happens consider adding the clause option (maxrecursion 32767).
I have a table like this one
ID Col1 Col2 Col3
-- ---- ---- ----
1 7 NULL 12
2 2 46 NULL
3 NULL NULL NULL
4 245 1 792
I wanted a query that yields the following result
ID Col1 Col2 Col3 MIN
-- ---- ---- ---- ---
1 7 NULL 12 7
2 2 46 NULL 2
3 NULL NULL NULL NULL
4 245 1 792 1
I mean, I wanted a column containing the minimum values out of Col1, Col2, and Col 3 for each row ignoring NULL values. In a previous question (What's the best way to select the minimum value from multiple columns?) there is an answer for non NULL values. I need a query as efficient as possible for a huge table.
Select Id,
Case When Col1 < Col2 And Col1 < Col3 Then Col1
When Col2 < Col1 And Col2 < Col3 Then Col2
Else Col3
End As MIN
From YourTableNameHere
Assuming you can define some "max" value (I'll use 9999 here) that your real values will never exceed:
Select Id,
Case When Col1 < COALESCE(Col2, 9999)
And Col1 < COALESCE(Col3, 9999) Then Col1
When Col2 < COALESCE(Col1, 9999)
And Col2 < COALESCE(Col3, 9999) Then Col2
Else Col3
End As MIN
From YourTableNameHere;
You didn't specify which version of Teradata you're using. If you're using version 14+ then you can use least.
Unfortunately least will return null if any of its arguments are null. From the docs:
LEAST supports 1-10 numeric values.
If numeric_value is the data type of the first argument, the return
data type is numeric. The remaining arguments in the input list must
be the same or compatible types. If either input parameter is NULL,
NULL is returned.
But you can get around that by using coalesce as Joe did in his answer.
select id,
least(coalesce(col1,9999),coalesce(col2,9999),coalesce(col3,9999))
from mytable
This might work:
Select id, Col1, Col2, Col3, least(Col1, Col2, Col3) as MIN From YourTableNameHere
in this way you don't need to check for nulls, just use min and a subquery
select tbl.id,tbl.col1,tbl.col2,tbl.col3,
(select min(t.col)
from (
select col1 as col from tbl_name t where t.id=tbl.id
union all
select col2 as col from tbl_name t where t.id=tbl.id
union all
select col3 as col from tbl_name t where t.id=tbl.id
)t)
from tbl_name tbl
Output:
1 7 NULL 12 7
2 2 46 NULL 2
3 NULL NULL NULL NULL
4 245 1 792 1
Just modify your query with coalesce():
Select Id,
(Case When Col1 <= coalesce(Col2, col3, col1) And
Col1 <= coalesce(Col3, col2, col1)
Then Col1
When Col2 <= coalesce(Col1, col3, col2) And
Col2 <= coalesce(Col3, col1, col2)
Then Col2
Else Col3
End) As MIN
From YourTableNameHere;
This doesn't require inventing a "magic" number or over-complicating the logic.
I found this solution to be more efficient than using multiple case statement clauses, which can get extremely lengthy when evaluating data from several columns across one row.
Also, I can't take credit for this solution as I found it on some website a year or so ago. Today I needed a refresh on this logic, and I couldn't find it anywhere. I found my old code and decided to share it in this forum now.
Creating your test table:
create table #testTable(ID int, Col1 int, Col2 int, Col3 int)
Insert into #testTable values(1,7,null,12)
Insert into #testTable values(2,2,46,null)
Insert into #testTable values(3,null,null,null)
Insert into #testTable values(4,245,1,792)
Finding min value in row data:
Select ID, Col1, Col2, Col3 ,(SELECT Min(v) FROM ( VALUES (Col1), (Col2), (Col3) ) AS value(v)) [MIN] from #testTable order by ID
I want in SQL : if a field is equal to a specific value, I want this record if not I want the record with this field equal to null.
I can try to that:
SELECT TOP 1 COL1, COL2, COL3
FROM TABLE1 WHERE (COL2 = MY_SPECIFIC_VALUE OR COL2 IS NULL) AND COL3 = '42'
AND COL1 = 3
But, what is the result returned? The smallest id? Or it is not specified?
Assuming that this is the real question:
If a field is equal to a specific value, I want this record if not I want the record with this field equal to null.
You can do this as:
SELECT TOP 1 COL1, COL2, COL3
FROM TABLE1
WHERE (COL2 = MY_SPECIFIC_VALUE or COL2 IS NULL) AND
COL3 = '42' AND COL1 = 3
ORDER BY (CASE WHEN COL2 = MY_SPECIFIC_VALUE THEN 1 ELSE 2 END);
You might not understood what I want to ask from the title but ,here is the explanation.
I have a data in Oracle database table. What I wanted to do is insert a new data to the table. This new data is based on the existing data but I have to change the value of one columns. So if I have 10 rows in the database after the insertion i will have 20 rows but the new 10 rows contain the same data except on of the columns is changed.
E.g table before insertion a new data
Col1 Col2 Col3
a b AA
1 2 33
table after insertion a new data
Col1 Col2 Col3
a b **BB**
1 2 **44**
Provided that you can encode what the new value should be; yes.
INSERT INTO
myTable (
Col1,
Col2,
Col3
)
SELECT
Col1,
Col2, -- This is a specific example based on your comment.
Col3 + 6 -- This just adds 6 to the existing value, but any SQL
FROM -- could actually go here, such as a CASE statement...
myTable
So, the question becomes; Do you have rules that you can implement in SQL for calculating the new value for Col3?
The rules could be something basic like...
CASE WHEN Col3 = 'AA' THEN '**BB**'
WHEN Col3 = '33' THEN '**44**'
ELSE 'Unknown'
END,
Or you could have all the new values in another table and look them up using a join...
INSERT INTO
myTable (
Col1,
Col2,
Col3
)
SELECT
OldTable.Col1,
OldTable.Col2,
COALESCE(NewTable.Col3, 'Unknown')
FROM
myTable AS OldTable
LEFT JOIN
lookup AS NewTable
ON OldTable.Col1 = NewTable.Col1
AND OldTable.Col2 = NewTable.Col2
Or a whole bunch of other options.
It will depend on how you determine how to change the data. How do you know, for example, that AA should become BB or that 33 should become 44?
Something like this will work for the two cases you posted. You can adapt it to whatever rule you want by changing the CASE statement to compute the new value differently.
INSERT INTO table_name( col1, col2, col3 )
SELECT col1,
col2,
(CASE WHEN col3 = 'AA'
THEN 'BB'
WHEN col3 = '33'
THEN '44'
ELSE null
END)
FROM table_name;
Let's say I had two columns in a database, col1 and col2. Column 2 is the time, Column 1 something. In my query, I want to do the following:
I want to SELECT * from my table and group the results by col1. However, I only want those entries where for the grouped col1 there is no value of col2 higher than a certain value. Meaning that, I only want those col1-s for which col2 does not exceed a certain value.
If, for instance, I had three rows, as follows:
ROW1: col1 = val1, col2 = 3
ROW2: col1 = val1, col2 = 5
ROW3: col1 = val2, col2 = 3
ROW4: col1 = val2, col2 = 4
And I do not want the time for any of them to exceed 4, then, as a result, I would only want ROW3 or ROW4, which, does not matter, for col1 is the same and is grouped. But in rows 1 and 2, that are grouped by col1's value "val1", in one of them col2 DOES exceed 4, therefore, I do not want any of them.
SELECT col1 FROM table GROUP BY col1 HAVING MAX(col2) <= 4
Because you want only the common value (col1) from the group, you can use GROUP BY. When you do a GROUP BY (aggregate) query, you can use the HAVING clause to apply a filter to the aggregated data set.
I am not use I got the point (my english is not good).
I think sub-query is the best choice.
Note: this example should work with mySql ...
SELECT *
FROM table
WHERE col1 IN
(SELECT col1 FROM table WHERE col2 < 5 GROUP BY col1)
ORDER BY col1
CREATE TABLE x (
t TIME NOT NULL,
v INT NOT NULL );
INSERT INTO x VALUES
('13:14:00', 24),
('13:14:00', 27),
('13:14:00', 29),
('17:12:00', 14),
('17:12:00', 20),
('17:12:00', 24);
SELECT t, MAX(v) AS mv FROM x
GROUP BY t
HAVING mv <= 25;
Or do I misunderstand the question?