Result query doesnt has the entire result at first - sql

im using oracle 11g R2,the result of this query:
SELECT u.object_name,u.object_type,t.owner,DBMS_METADATA.GET_DDL(object_type, object_name)
FROM user_objects u
inner join all_tables t
on u.object_name = t.table_name;
Just show me the first 50 rows , it needs to scroll down the query result tab to get the other results and query looks like it is working when i scrolled.
How can i fix it??

For SQL Developer, you can change the fetch size here:
Tools->Preferences->Database->Advanced
The first option is "Sql Array Fetch Size (Max 500). The default is 50.

I'm not quite sure what the problem is or what a fix would look like.
The client application that you are using to run the query decides how many rows to fetch before displaying the data to you and whether to continue fetching data or to wait for you to request more rows. You don't say which client application you are using so it is hard to tell you whether or how to configure your particular client to behave differently. If you are using SQL Developer, there are settings that control how many rows to fetch so you can adjust the default from 50. Other GUIs likely have similar settings.
Alternately, you could use a client application like SQL*Plus whose default behavior is to fetch all the rows without trying to page through the results for a human.

Related

Custom Pagination in datatable

I have a web application in which I get data from my database and show in a datatable. I am facing an issue doing this as the data that I am fetching has too many rows(200 000). So when I query something like select * from table_name;
my application gets stuck.
Is there a way to handle this problem with JavaScript?
I tried pagination but I cannot figure how would i do that as datatable creates pagination for already rendered data?
Is there a way through which I can run my query through pagination at
the backend?
I have come across the same problem when working with mongodb and angularjs. I used server side paging. Since you have huge number of records, You can try using the same approach.
Assuming a case that you are displaying 25 records in one page.
Backend:
Get the total count of the records using COUNT query.
select * from table_name LIMIT 25 OFFSET
${req.query.pageNumber*25} to query limited records based on the page number;
Frontend:
Instead of using datatable, display the data in HTML table it self.
Define buttons for next page and previous page.
Define global variable in the controller/js file for pageNumber.
Increment pageNumber by 1 when next page button is clicked and
decrement that by 1 when prev button is pressed.
use result from COUNT query to put upper limit to pageNumber
variable.(if 200 records are there limit will be 200/25=8).
So basically select * from table_name LIMIT 25 OFFSET
${req.query.pageNumber*25} will limit the number of records to 25. when req.query.pageNumber=1, it will offset first 25records and sends next 25 records. similarly if req.query.pageNumber=2, it will offset first 2*25 records and sends 51-75 records.
There are two ways to handle.
First way - Handling paging in client side
Get all data from database and apply custom paging.
Second way - Handling paging in server side
Every time you want to call in database and get records according to pagesize.
You can use LIMIT and OFFSET constraints for pagination in MySQL. I understand that at a time 2 lacs data makes performance slower. But as you mention that you have to use JS for that. So make it clear that if you wants js as frontend then it is not going to help you. But as you mention that you have a web application, If that application is on Node(as server) then I can suggest you the way, which can help you a lot.
use 2 variables, named var_pageNo and var_limit. Now use the row query of mysql as
select * form <tbl_name> LIMIT var_limit OFFSET (var_pageNo * var_limit);
Do code according to this query. Replace the variable with your desire values. This will make your performance faster, and will fetch the data as per your specified limit.
hope this will helpful.

Pulling a 33,000-record recordset took LESS execution time than using Count() in the SQL. How is that possible?

Thanks in advance for putting up with me.
Pulling a 33,000-record recordset from the database took LESS execution time than using Count() in the SQL and just grabbing 20 rows.
How is that possible?
A bit more detail:
Before, we were grabbing the entire recordset yet only displaying 20 rows of it on a page at a time for pagination. That was cringeworthy and wasteful, so I redesigned the page to only grab 20 rows at a time and to simply use an index variable to grab the next page, and so on.
All well and good, but that lacked a record count, which our people needed.
So after the record query, I added (what I thought would be) a quick query just on the index of the table using the Count(index) function in Structured Query Language.
A side by side comparison of the original page and my new page indicates my new page takes roughly 10% longer to execute than the original! I was flabbergasted. I thought for sure it would be lightning fast, way faster than the original.
Any thoughts on why and what I might do to remedy that?
Is it because the script has to run two queries, regardless of the data retrieved?
Update:
Here is the SQL.
(Table names and field names are fictionalized in this post for security, but the structure is the same as the real page).
The main recordset select query contains:
SELECT
top 21 roster_id, roster_pplid, roster_pplemailid, roster_emailid, roster_firstname,
roster_lastname, roster_since, roster_pplsubscrid, roster_firstppldone, roster_pmtcurrent,
roster_emailverified, roster_active, roster_selfcanceled, roster_deactreason
FROM roster
WHERE
roster_siteid = 22
AND roster_isdeleted = false
order by roster_id desc
The record count query contains:
SELECT
COUNT(roster_id)
FROM
roster
WHERE
roster_siteid = 22
AND roster_isdeleted = false
The first query runs, then the second. The second always dynamically has the same matching WHERE filter.
I think I know why it is slower, I'm using GetRows to grab the recordset in the new page, was not using that in the old page. That seems to be the slowdown. But I have to use it, cannot step beyond the 21st record otherwise.
Nick.McDermaid : The SQL shown is selecting the TOP 21 rows, that is how it is grabbing just 20 rows (number 21 is just to populate the index for the "Next" page link).

SQL query / SQL Reporting Services

Been rattling my brain for a while and I could not get pass how to do the SQL query that will show the relationship/connections between my two tables.
I'm working on an IT equipment inventory program. I have two tables;
SELECT serial_number, model, ship_dat, status FROM items_list
SELECT item_serial, connected-to_serial FROM connections
All items like desktops, laptops, monitors, etc are on the items_list table. To track down the relationship/connections of the items, I created the connections table. IE, Monitor with serial_number=Screen#1 is connected to a Desktop with serial_number=Serial#1. It works ok with my Window Form application because I
used a datagridview control to list all devices simple SQL query.
However, when trying to show the relationship/connection on SQL Reports I've ran out of ideas how to do it. I'm aiming to get the report look like below or something along the lines. I just need to show the connections between the items.
Thank you
You should be able to do this with a table in SSRS if that is what you are using. The query you would need to drive the table of all related items would be:
SELECT item_serial, connected-to_serial, mainItem.*, connectedItem.*
FROM connections
INNER JOIN items_list mainItem ON connections.item_serial = items_list.serial_number
INNER JOIN items_list connectedItem ON connections.connected-to_serial = connectedItem.serial_number
You can of course tailor the SELECT statement to your needs, mainItem.* and connectedItem.* will not give you the most descriptive column names. Using column aliases (found under column_alias here) you can give a more descriptive name to each column.
From here you should be able to use a table and create a row group on the main item (either name or serial number) to get the type of look you are looking to achieve here. I believe the Report Wizard actually has most of the functionality you are looking for and should handle the bulk of this. You may have to move some of the cells around to get the look you are going for though.

SQL select certain number of rows

Hello I need a SQL query statement that gets me rows 'start' to 'finish'.
For example:
A website with many items where page 1 selects only items 1-10, page 2 has 11-20 and so on.
I know how to do this with Microsoft SQL Server and MySQL but I need an implementation that is platform independent. :/
I have an Increment line for IDs but deleting in-between will mess the result when I select via
WHERE ID > number AND ID < othernumber
of course
Is this possible without fetching the whole database to a ResultSet?
I think your safest bet would be to use the BETWEEN operator. I believe it works across Oracle/MySQL/MSSQL.
WHERE ID BETWEEN number AND othernumber
Concerning your comment " I was just think for the case when first 100 IDs are gone I'll have to check further until there is something to fetch", you might wanna consider NOT actually ever deleting stuff from your database but to add a flag like "active" or something like that to your tables so you can avoid situations like the one you're now trying to avoid. The alternative is where you are now, having to find the max and min rows in a filter

MongoDB infinite scroll sorted results

I am having a problem trying to achieve the following:
I'd like to have a page with 'infinite' scrolling functionality and all the results fetched to be sorted by certain attributes. The way the code currently works is, it places the query, sorts the results, and displays them. The problem is, that once the user reaches the bottom of the page and new query is placed, the results from this query are sorted, but in its own context. That is, if you have a total of 100 results, and the first query display only 50, then they are sorted. But the next query (for the next 50) sorts the results only based on these 50 results, not based on the 100 (total results).
So, do I have to fetch all the results at once, sort them, and then apply some pagination logic to them or there's a way for MongoDB to actually have infinite scrolling (AJAX requests) with sorting applying to the results?
There's a few ways to do this with MongoDB. You can use the .skip() and .limit() commands (documented here: http://www.mongodb.org/display/DOCS/Advanced+Queries#AdvancedQueries-CursorMethods) to apply pagination to the query.
Alternatively, you could add a clause to your query like: {sorted_field : {$gt : <value from last record>}}. In other words, filter out matches of the query whose sorted value is less than that of the last resulting item from the current page of results. For example, if page 1 of results returns documents A through D, then to retrieve the next page 2 you repeat the same query with the additional filter x > D.
Let me preface this by saying that I have no experience with MongoDB (though I am aware that it is a NoSQL database).
This question, however, is somewhat of a general database one (you'd probably get more responses tagging it as such). I've implemented such a feature using Cassandra (another, albiet quite different NoSQL database), however the same principles apply.
Use the sorted-by attribute of the last retrieved record, and conduct a range search based on it in the database. So, assuming your database consists of the following set of letters:
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
..and you were retrieving 2 letters at a time, you'd retrieve A, B first. When more records are needed, you'd use B to conduct a range search on the set of letters in the database. In plain English this would be something like:
Get the letters that appear after B, limit the results to 2
From a brief look at the MongoDB tutorial, it looks like you have conditional operators to help you implement this.