Calculating total value of Numeric values assigned to string tokens in SQL column - sql

This is kind of complicated, so bear with me.
I've got the basic concept figured out thanks to THIS QUESTION
SELECT LENGTH(col) - LENGTH(REPLACE(col, 'Y', ''))
Very clever solution.
Problem is, I'm trying to count the number of instances of a string token, then take that counter and multiply it by a modifier that represents the string's numeric value. Oh, and I've got a list of 50-ish tokens, each with a different value.
So, take the string "{5}{X}{W}{b/r}{2/u}{pg}"
Looking up the list of tokens and their numeric value, we get this:
{5} 5
{X} 0
{W} 1
{b/r} 1
{2/u} 2
{pg} 1
.... ....
Therefore, the sum value of the string above is 5+0+1+1+2+1 = 10
Now, what I'm really looking for is to a way to do a Join and perform the aforementioned replace-token-get-length trick for each column of the TokenValue table.
Does that make sense?
Psuedo-SQL example:
SELECT StringColumn, TotalTokenValue
???
FROM TableWithString, TokenValueTable
Perhaps this would work better as a custom Function?
EDIT
I think I'm about halfway there, but it's kind of ugly.
SELECT StringColumn, LEN(StringColumn) AS TotalLen, Token,
{ fn LENGTH(Token) } AS TokenLength, TokenValue,
{ fn REPLACE(StringColumn, Token, '') AS Replaced,
{ fn LENGTH(Replaced) } AS RepLen,
{ TotalLen - RepLen / TokenLength} AS TokenCount },
{ TokenCount * TokenValue} CalculatedTokenValue
FROM StringTable CROSS JOIN
TokenTable
Then I need to wrap that in some kind of Group By and get SUM(CalculatedTokenValue)
I can picture it in my head, having trouble getting the SQL to work.

If you create a view like this one :
Create or replace view ColumnsTokens as
select StringColumn, Token, TokenValue,
(length(StringColumn) - length(replace(StringColumn, token, ''))) / length(Token) TokenCount
from StringTable
join TokenTable on replace(StringColumn, Token, '') <> StringColumn ;
that will act as a many-to-many relationship table between columns and tokens, I think you can easily write any query you need. For example,this will give you the total score :
select StringColumn, sum(TokenCount * TokenValue) TotalTokenScore
from ColumnsTokens
group by StringColumn ;
(You're only missing the StringColumns with no tokens)

Related

Add array of other records from the same table to each record

My project is a Latin language learning app. My DB has all the words I'm teaching, in the table 'words'. It has the lemma (the main form of the word), along with the definition and other information the user needs to learn.
I show one word at a time for them to guess/remember what it means. The correct word is shown along with some wrong words, like:
What does Romanus mean? Greek - /Roman/ - Phoenician - barbarian
What does domus mean? /house/ - horse - wall - senator
The wrong options are randomly drawn from the same table, and must be from the same part of speech (adjective, noun...) as the correct word; but I am only interested in their lemma. My return value looks like this (some properties omitted):
[
{ lemma: 'Romanus', definition: 'Roman', options: ['Greek', 'Phoenician', 'barbarian'] },
{ lemma: 'domus', definition: 'house', options: ['horse', 'wall', 'senator'] }
]
What I am looking for is a more efficient way of doing it than my current approach, which runs a new query for each word:
// All the necessary requires are here
class Word extends Model {
static async fetch() {
const words = await this.findAll({
limit: 10,
order: [Sequelize.literal('RANDOM()')],
attributes: ['lemma', 'definition'], // also a few other columns I need
});
const wordsWithOptions = await Promise.all(words.map(this.addOptions.bind(this)));
return wordsWithOptions;
}
static async addOptions(word) {
const options = await this.findAll({
order: [Sequelize.literal('RANDOM()')],
limit: 3,
attributes: ['lemma'],
where: {
partOfSpeech: word.dataValues.partOfSpeech,
lemma: { [Op.not]: word.dataValues.lemma },
},
});
return { ...word.dataValues, options: options.map((row) => row.dataValues.lemma) };
}
}
So, is there a way I can do this with raw SQL? How about Sequelize? One thing that still helps me is to give a name to what I'm trying to do, so that I can Google it.
EDIT: I have tried the following and at least got somewhere:
const words = await this.findAll({
limit: 10,
order: [Sequelize.literal('RANDOM()')],
attributes: {
include: [[sequelize.literal(`(
SELECT lemma FROM words AS options
WHERE "partOfSpeech" = "options"."partOfSpeech"
ORDER BY RANDOM() LIMIT 1
)`), 'options']],
},
});
Now, there are two problems with this. First, I only get one option, when I need three; but if the query has LIMIT 3, I get: SequelizeDatabaseError: more than one row returned by a subquery used as an expression.
The second error is that while the code above does return something, it always gives the same word as an option! I thought to remedy that with WHERE "partOfSpeech" = "options"."partOfSpeech", but then I get SequelizeDatabaseError: invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table "words".
So, how do I tell PostgreSQL "for each row in the result, add a column with an array of three lemmas, WHERE existingRow.partOfSpeech = wordToGoInTheArray.partOfSpeech?"
Revised
Well that seems like a different question and perhaps should be posted that way, but...
The main technique remains the same. JOIN instead of sub-select. The difference being generating the list of lemmas for then piping then into the initial query. In a single this can get nasty.
As single statement (actually this turned out not to be too bad):
select w.lemma, w.defination, string_to_array(string_agg(o.defination,','), ',') as options
from words w
join lateral
(select defination
from words o
where o.part_of_speech = w.part_of_speech
and o.lemma != w.lemma
order by random()
limit 3
) o on 1=1
where w.lemma in( select lemma
from words
order by random()
limit 4 --<<< replace with parameter
)
group by w.lemma, w.defination;
The other approach build a small SQL function to randomly select a specified number of lemmas. This selection is the piped into the (renamed) function previous fiddle.
create or replace
function exam_lemma_definition_options(lemma_array_in text[])
returns table (lemma text
,definition text
,option text[]
)
language sql strict
as $$
select w.lemma, w.definition, string_to_array(string_agg(o.definition,','), ',') as options
from words w
join lateral
(select definition
from words o
where o.part_of_speech = w.part_of_speech
and o.lemma != w.lemma
order by random()
limit 3
) o on 1=1
where w.lemma = any(lemma_array_in)
group by w.lemma, w.definition;
$$;
create or replace
function exam_lemmas(num_of_lemmas integer)
returns text[]
language sql
strict
as $$
select string_to_array(string_agg(lemma,','),',')
from (select lemma
from words
order by random()
limit num_of_lemmas
) ll
$$;
Using this approach your calling code reduces to a needs a single SQL statement:
select *
from exam_lemma_definition_options(exam_lemmas(4))
order by lemma;
This permits you to specify the numbers of lemmas to select (in this case 4) limited only by the number of rows in Words table. See revised fiddle.
Original
Instead of using a sub-select to get the option words just JOIN.
select w.lemma, w.definition, string_to_array(string_agg(o.definition,','), ',') as options
from words w
join lateral
(select definition
from words o
where o.part_of_speech = w.part_of_speech
and o.lemma != w.lemma
order by random()
limit 3
) o on 1=1
where w.lemma = any(array['Romanus', 'domus'])
group by w.lemma, w.definition;
See fiddle. Obviously this will not necessary produce the same options as your questions provides due to random() selection. But it will get matching parts of speech. I will leave translation to your source language to you; or you can use the function option and reduce your SQL to a simple "select *".

Postgres : Unable to pass the list of ids in IN clause in JDBC [duplicate]

What are the best workarounds for using a SQL IN clause with instances of java.sql.PreparedStatement, which is not supported for multiple values due to SQL injection attack security issues: One ? placeholder represents one value, rather than a list of values.
Consider the following SQL statement:
SELECT my_column FROM my_table where search_column IN (?)
Using preparedStatement.setString( 1, "'A', 'B', 'C'" ); is essentially a non-working attempt at a workaround of the reasons for using ? in the first place.
What workarounds are available?
An analysis of the various options available, and the pros and cons of each is available in Jeanne Boyarsky's Batching Select Statements in JDBC entry on JavaRanch Journal.
The suggested options are:
Prepare SELECT my_column FROM my_table WHERE search_column = ?, execute it for each value and UNION the results client-side. Requires only one prepared statement. Slow and painful.
Prepare SELECT my_column FROM my_table WHERE search_column IN (?,?,?) and execute it. Requires one prepared statement per size-of-IN-list. Fast and obvious.
Prepare SELECT my_column FROM my_table WHERE search_column = ? ; SELECT my_column FROM my_table WHERE search_column = ? ; ... and execute it. [Or use UNION ALL in place of those semicolons. --ed] Requires one prepared statement per size-of-IN-list. Stupidly slow, strictly worse than WHERE search_column IN (?,?,?), so I don't know why the blogger even suggested it.
Use a stored procedure to construct the result set.
Prepare N different size-of-IN-list queries; say, with 2, 10, and 50 values. To search for an IN-list with 6 different values, populate the size-10 query so that it looks like SELECT my_column FROM my_table WHERE search_column IN (1,2,3,4,5,6,6,6,6,6). Any decent server will optimize out the duplicate values before running the query.
None of these options are ideal.
The best option if you are using JDBC4 and a server that supports x = ANY(y), is to use PreparedStatement.setArray as described in Boris's anwser.
There doesn't seem to be any way to make setArray work with IN-lists, though.
Sometimes SQL statements are loaded at runtime (e.g., from a properties file) but require a variable number of parameters. In such cases, first define the query:
query=SELECT * FROM table t WHERE t.column IN (?)
Next, load the query. Then determine the number of parameters prior to running it. Once the parameter count is known, run:
sql = any( sql, count );
For example:
/**
* Converts a SQL statement containing exactly one IN clause to an IN clause
* using multiple comma-delimited parameters.
*
* #param sql The SQL statement string with one IN clause.
* #param params The number of parameters the SQL statement requires.
* #return The SQL statement with (?) replaced with multiple parameter
* placeholders.
*/
public static String any(String sql, final int params) {
// Create a comma-delimited list based on the number of parameters.
final StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(
String.join(", ", Collections.nCopies(possibleValue.size(), "?")));
// For more than 1 parameter, replace the single parameter with
// multiple parameter placeholders.
if (sb.length() > 1) {
sql = sql.replace("(?)", "(" + sb + ")");
}
// Return the modified comma-delimited list of parameters.
return sql;
}
For certain databases where passing an array via the JDBC 4 specification is unsupported, this method can facilitate transforming the slow = ? into the faster IN (?) clause condition, which can then be expanded by calling the any method.
Solution for PostgreSQL:
final PreparedStatement statement = connection.prepareStatement(
"SELECT my_column FROM my_table where search_column = ANY (?)"
);
final String[] values = getValues();
statement.setArray(1, connection.createArrayOf("text", values));
try (ResultSet rs = statement.executeQuery()) {
while(rs.next()) {
// do some...
}
}
or
final PreparedStatement statement = connection.prepareStatement(
"SELECT my_column FROM my_table " +
"where search_column IN (SELECT * FROM unnest(?))"
);
final String[] values = getValues();
statement.setArray(1, connection.createArrayOf("text", values));
try (ResultSet rs = statement.executeQuery()) {
while(rs.next()) {
// do some...
}
}
No simple way AFAIK.
If the target is to keep statement cache ratio high (i.e to not create a statement per every parameter count), you may do the following:
create a statement with a few (e.g. 10) parameters:
... WHERE A IN (?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?,?) ...
Bind all actuall parameters
setString(1,"foo");
setString(2,"bar");
Bind the rest as NULL
setNull(3,Types.VARCHAR)
...
setNull(10,Types.VARCHAR)
NULL never matches anything, so it gets optimized out by the SQL plan builder.
The logic is easy to automate when you pass a List into a DAO function:
while( i < param.size() ) {
ps.setString(i+1,param.get(i));
i++;
}
while( i < MAX_PARAMS ) {
ps.setNull(i+1,Types.VARCHAR);
i++;
}
You can use Collections.nCopies to generate a collection of placeholders and join them using String.join:
List<String> params = getParams();
String placeHolders = String.join(",", Collections.nCopies(params.size(), "?"));
String sql = "select * from your_table where some_column in (" + placeHolders + ")";
try ( Connection connection = getConnection();
PreparedStatement ps = connection.prepareStatement(sql)) {
int i = 1;
for (String param : params) {
ps.setString(i++, param);
}
/*
* Execute query/do stuff
*/
}
An unpleasant work-around, but certainly feasible is to use a nested query. Create a temporary table MYVALUES with a column in it. Insert your list of values into the MYVALUES table. Then execute
select my_column from my_table where search_column in ( SELECT value FROM MYVALUES )
Ugly, but a viable alternative if your list of values is very large.
This technique has the added advantage of potentially better query plans from the optimizer (check a page for multiple values, tablescan only once instead once per value, etc) may save on overhead if your database doesn't cache prepared statements. Your "INSERTS" would need to be done in batch and the MYVALUES table may need to be tweaked to have minimal locking or other high-overhead protections.
Limitations of the in() operator is the root of all evil.
It works for trivial cases, and you can extend it with "automatic generation of the prepared statement" however it is always having its limits.
if you're creating a statement with variable number of parameters, that will make an sql parse overhead at each call
on many platforms, the number of parameters of in() operator are limited
on all platforms, total SQL text size is limited, making impossible for sending down 2000 placeholders for the in params
sending down bind variables of 1000-10k is not possible, as the JDBC driver is having its limitations
The in() approach can be good enough for some cases, but not rocket proof :)
The rocket-proof solution is to pass the arbitrary number of parameters in a separate call (by passing a clob of params, for example), and then have a view (or any other way) to represent them in SQL and use in your where criteria.
A brute-force variant is here http://tkyte.blogspot.hu/2006/06/varying-in-lists.html
However if you can use PL/SQL, this mess can become pretty neat.
function getCustomers(in_customerIdList clob) return sys_refcursor is
begin
aux_in_list.parse(in_customerIdList);
open res for
select *
from customer c,
in_list v
where c.customer_id=v.token;
return res;
end;
Then you can pass arbitrary number of comma separated customer ids in the parameter, and:
will get no parse delay, as the SQL for select is stable
no pipelined functions complexity - it is just one query
the SQL is using a simple join, instead of an IN operator, which is quite fast
after all, it is a good rule of thumb of not hitting the database with any plain select or DML, since it is Oracle, which offers lightyears of more than MySQL or similar simple database engines. PL/SQL allows you to hide the storage model from your application domain model in an effective way.
The trick here is:
we need a call which accepts the long string, and store somewhere where the db session can access to it (e.g. simple package variable, or dbms_session.set_context)
then we need a view which can parse this to rows
and then you have a view which contains the ids you're querying, so all you need is a simple join to the table queried.
The view looks like:
create or replace view in_list
as
select
trim( substr (txt,
instr (txt, ',', 1, level ) + 1,
instr (txt, ',', 1, level+1)
- instr (txt, ',', 1, level) -1 ) ) as token
from (select ','||aux_in_list.getpayload||',' txt from dual)
connect by level <= length(aux_in_list.getpayload)-length(replace(aux_in_list.getpayload,',',''))+1
where aux_in_list.getpayload refers to the original input string.
A possible approach would be to pass pl/sql arrays (supported by Oracle only), however you can't use those in pure SQL, therefore a conversion step is always needed. The conversion can not be done in SQL, so after all, passing a clob with all parameters in string and converting it witin a view is the most efficient solution.
Here's how I solved it in my own application. Ideally, you should use a StringBuilder instead of using + for Strings.
String inParenthesis = "(?";
for(int i = 1;i < myList.size();i++) {
inParenthesis += ", ?";
}
inParenthesis += ")";
try(PreparedStatement statement = SQLite.connection.prepareStatement(
String.format("UPDATE table SET value='WINNER' WHERE startTime=? AND name=? AND traderIdx=? AND someValue IN %s", inParenthesis))) {
int x = 1;
statement.setLong(x++, race.startTime);
statement.setString(x++, race.name);
statement.setInt(x++, traderIdx);
for(String str : race.betFair.winners) {
statement.setString(x++, str);
}
int effected = statement.executeUpdate();
}
Using a variable like x above instead of concrete numbers helps a lot if you decide to change the query at a later time.
I've never tried it, but would .setArray() do what you're looking for?
Update: Evidently not. setArray only seems to work with a java.sql.Array that comes from an ARRAY column that you've retrieved from a previous query, or a subquery with an ARRAY column.
My workaround is:
create or replace type split_tbl as table of varchar(32767);
/
create or replace function split
(
p_list varchar2,
p_del varchar2 := ','
) return split_tbl pipelined
is
l_idx pls_integer;
l_list varchar2(32767) := p_list;
l_value varchar2(32767);
begin
loop
l_idx := instr(l_list,p_del);
if l_idx > 0 then
pipe row(substr(l_list,1,l_idx-1));
l_list := substr(l_list,l_idx+length(p_del));
else
pipe row(l_list);
exit;
end if;
end loop;
return;
end split;
/
Now you can use one variable to obtain some values in a table:
select * from table(split('one,two,three'))
one
two
three
select * from TABLE1 where COL1 in (select * from table(split('value1,value2')))
value1 AAA
value2 BBB
So, the prepared statement could be:
"select * from TABLE where COL in (select * from table(split(?)))"
Regards,
Javier Ibanez
I suppose you could (using basic string manipulation) generate the query string in the PreparedStatement to have a number of ?'s matching the number of items in your list.
Of course if you're doing that you're just a step away from generating a giant chained OR in your query, but without having the right number of ? in the query string, I don't see how else you can work around this.
You could use setArray method as mentioned in this javadoc:
PreparedStatement statement = connection.prepareStatement("Select * from emp where field in (?)");
Array array = statement.getConnection().createArrayOf("VARCHAR", new Object[]{"E1", "E2","E3"});
statement.setArray(1, array);
ResultSet rs = statement.executeQuery();
Here's a complete solution in Java to create the prepared statement for you:
/*usage:
Util u = new Util(500); //500 items per bracket.
String sqlBefore = "select * from myTable where (";
List<Integer> values = new ArrayList<Integer>(Arrays.asList(1,2,4,5));
string sqlAfter = ") and foo = 'bar'";
PreparedStatement ps = u.prepareStatements(sqlBefore, values, sqlAfter, connection, "someId");
*/
import java.sql.Connection;
import java.sql.PreparedStatement;
import java.sql.SQLException;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
public class Util {
private int numValuesInClause;
public Util(int numValuesInClause) {
super();
this.numValuesInClause = numValuesInClause;
}
public int getNumValuesInClause() {
return numValuesInClause;
}
public void setNumValuesInClause(int numValuesInClause) {
this.numValuesInClause = numValuesInClause;
}
/** Split a given list into a list of lists for the given size of numValuesInClause*/
public List<List<Integer>> splitList(
List<Integer> values) {
List<List<Integer>> newList = new ArrayList<List<Integer>>();
while (values.size() > numValuesInClause) {
List<Integer> sublist = values.subList(0,numValuesInClause);
List<Integer> values2 = values.subList(numValuesInClause, values.size());
values = values2;
newList.add( sublist);
}
newList.add(values);
return newList;
}
/**
* Generates a series of split out in clause statements.
* #param sqlBefore ""select * from dual where ("
* #param values [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
* #param "sqlAfter ) and id = 5"
* #return "select * from dual where (id in (1,2,3) or id in (4,5,6) or id in (7,8,9) or id in (10)"
*/
public String genInClauseSql(String sqlBefore, List<Integer> values,
String sqlAfter, String identifier)
{
List<List<Integer>> newLists = splitList(values);
String stmt = sqlBefore;
/* now generate the in clause for each list */
int j = 0; /* keep track of list:newLists index */
for (List<Integer> list : newLists) {
stmt = stmt + identifier +" in (";
StringBuilder innerBuilder = new StringBuilder();
for (int i = 0; i < list.size(); i++) {
innerBuilder.append("?,");
}
String inClause = innerBuilder.deleteCharAt(
innerBuilder.length() - 1).toString();
stmt = stmt + inClause;
stmt = stmt + ")";
if (++j < newLists.size()) {
stmt = stmt + " OR ";
}
}
stmt = stmt + sqlAfter;
return stmt;
}
/**
* Method to convert your SQL and a list of ID into a safe prepared
* statements
*
* #throws SQLException
*/
public PreparedStatement prepareStatements(String sqlBefore,
ArrayList<Integer> values, String sqlAfter, Connection c, String identifier)
throws SQLException {
/* First split our potentially big list into lots of lists */
String stmt = genInClauseSql(sqlBefore, values, sqlAfter, identifier);
PreparedStatement ps = c.prepareStatement(stmt);
int i = 1;
for (int val : values)
{
ps.setInt(i++, val);
}
return ps;
}
}
Spring allows passing java.util.Lists to NamedParameterJdbcTemplate , which automates the generation of (?, ?, ?, ..., ?), as appropriate for the number of arguments.
For Oracle, this blog posting discusses the use of oracle.sql.ARRAY (Connection.createArrayOf doesn't work with Oracle). For this you have to modify your SQL statement:
SELECT my_column FROM my_table where search_column IN (select COLUMN_VALUE from table(?))
The oracle table function transforms the passed array into a table like value usable in the IN statement.
try using the instr function?
select my_column from my_table where instr(?, ','||search_column||',') > 0
then
ps.setString(1, ",A,B,C,");
Admittedly this is a bit of a dirty hack, but it does reduce the opportunities for sql injection. Works in oracle anyway.
Sormula supports SQL IN operator by allowing you to supply a java.util.Collection object as a parameter. It creates a prepared statement with a ? for each of the elements the collection. See Example 4 (SQL in example is a comment to clarify what is created but is not used by Sormula).
Generate the query string in the PreparedStatement to have a number of ?'s matching the number of items in your list. Here's an example:
public void myQuery(List<String> items, int other) {
...
String q4in = generateQsForIn(items.size());
String sql = "select * from stuff where foo in ( " + q4in + " ) and bar = ?";
PreparedStatement ps = connection.prepareStatement(sql);
int i = 1;
for (String item : items) {
ps.setString(i++, item);
}
ps.setInt(i++, other);
ResultSet rs = ps.executeQuery();
...
}
private String generateQsForIn(int numQs) {
String items = "";
for (int i = 0; i < numQs; i++) {
if (i != 0) items += ", ";
items += "?";
}
return items;
}
instead of using
SELECT my_column FROM my_table where search_column IN (?)
use the Sql Statement as
select id, name from users where id in (?, ?, ?)
and
preparedStatement.setString( 1, 'A');
preparedStatement.setString( 2,'B');
preparedStatement.setString( 3, 'C');
or use a stored procedure this would be the best solution, since the sql statements will be compiled and stored in DataBase server
I came across a number of limitations related to prepared statement:
The prepared statements are cached only inside the same session (Postgres), so it will really work only with connection pooling
A lot of different prepared statements as proposed by #BalusC may cause the cache to overfill and previously cached statements will be dropped
The query has to be optimized and use indices. Sounds obvious, however e.g. the ANY(ARRAY...) statement proposed by #Boris in one of the top answers cannot use indices and query will be slow despite caching
The prepared statement caches the query plan as well and the actual values of any parameters specified in the statement are unavailable.
Among the proposed solutions I would choose the one that doesn't decrease the query performance and makes the less number of queries. This will be the #4 (batching few queries) from the #Don link or specifying NULL values for unneeded '?' marks as proposed by #Vladimir Dyuzhev
SetArray is the best solution but its not available for many older drivers. The following workaround can be used in java8
String baseQuery ="SELECT my_column FROM my_table where search_column IN (%s)"
String markersString = inputArray.stream().map(e -> "?").collect(joining(","));
String sqlQuery = String.format(baseSQL, markersString);
//Now create Prepared Statement and use loop to Set entries
int index=1;
for (String input : inputArray) {
preparedStatement.setString(index++, input);
}
This solution is better than other ugly while loop solutions where the query string is built by manual iterations
I just worked out a PostgreSQL-specific option for this. It's a bit of a hack, and comes with its own pros and cons and limitations, but it seems to work and isn't limited to a specific development language, platform, or PG driver.
The trick of course is to find a way to pass an arbitrary length collection of values as a single parameter, and have the db recognize it as multiple values. The solution I have working is to construct a delimited string from the values in the collection, pass that string as a single parameter, and use string_to_array() with the requisite casting for PostgreSQL to properly make use of it.
So if you want to search for "foo", "blah", and "abc", you might concatenate them together into a single string as: 'foo,blah,abc'. Here's the straight SQL:
select column from table
where search_column = any (string_to_array('foo,blah,abc', ',')::text[]);
You would obviously change the explicit cast to whatever you wanted your resulting value array to be -- int, text, uuid, etc. And because the function is taking a single string value (or two I suppose, if you want to customize the delimiter as well), you can pass it as a parameter in a prepared statement:
select column from table
where search_column = any (string_to_array($1, ',')::text[]);
This is even flexible enough to support things like LIKE comparisons:
select column from table
where search_column like any (string_to_array('foo%,blah%,abc%', ',')::text[]);
Again, no question it's a hack, but it works and allows you to still use pre-compiled prepared statements that take *ahem* discrete parameters, with the accompanying security and (maybe) performance benefits. Is it advisable and actually performant? Naturally, it depends, as you've got string parsing and possibly casting going on before your query even runs. If you're expecting to send three, five, a few dozen values, sure, it's probably fine. A few thousand? Yeah, maybe not so much. YMMV, limitations and exclusions apply, no warranty express or implied.
But it works.
No one else seems to have suggested using an off-the-shelf query builder yet, like jOOQ or QueryDSL or even Criteria Query that manage dynamic IN lists out of the box, possibly including the management of all edge cases that may arise, such as:
Running into Oracle's maximum of 1000 elements per IN list (irrespective of the number of bind values)
Running into any driver's maximum number of bind values, which I've documented in this answer
Running into cursor cache contention problems because too many distinct SQL strings are "hard parsed" and execution plans cannot be cached anymore (jOOQ and since recently also Hibernate work around this by offering IN list padding)
(Disclaimer: I work for the company behind jOOQ)
Just for completeness: So long as the set of values is not too large, you could also simply string-construct a statement like
... WHERE tab.col = ? OR tab.col = ? OR tab.col = ?
which you could then pass to prepare(), and then use setXXX() in a loop to set all the values. This looks yucky, but many "big" commercial systems routinely do this kind of thing until they hit DB-specific limits, such as 32 KB (I think it is) for statements in Oracle.
Of course you need to ensure that the set will never be unreasonably large, or do error trapping in the event that it is.
Following Adam's idea. Make your prepared statement sort of select my_column from my_table where search_column in (#)
Create a String x and fill it with a number of "?,?,?" depending on your list of values
Then just change the # in the query for your new String x an populate
There are different alternative approaches that we can use for IN clause in PreparedStatement.
Using Single Queries - slowest performance and resource intensive
Using StoredProcedure - Fastest but database specific
Creating dynamic query for PreparedStatement - Good Performance but doesn't get benefit of caching and PreparedStatement is recompiled every time.
Use NULL in PreparedStatement queries - Optimal performance, works great when you know the limit of IN clause arguments. If there is no limit, then you can execute queries in batch.
Sample code snippet is;
int i = 1;
for(; i <=ids.length; i++){
ps.setInt(i, ids[i-1]);
}
//set null for remaining ones
for(; i<=PARAM_SIZE;i++){
ps.setNull(i, java.sql.Types.INTEGER);
}
You can check more details about these alternative approaches here.
For some situations regexp might help.
Here is an example I've checked on Oracle, and it works.
select * from my_table where REGEXP_LIKE (search_column, 'value1|value2')
But there is a number of drawbacks with it:
Any column it applied should be converted to varchar/char, at least implicitly.
Need to be careful with special characters.
It can slow down performance - in my case IN version uses index and range scan, and REGEXP version do full scan.
After examining various solutions in different forums and not finding a good solution, I feel the below hack I came up with, is the easiest to follow and code:
Example: Suppose you have multiple parameters to pass in the 'IN' clause. Just put a dummy String inside the 'IN' clause, say, "PARAM" do denote the list of parameters that will be coming in the place of this dummy String.
select * from TABLE_A where ATTR IN (PARAM);
You can collect all the parameters into a single String variable in your Java code. This can be done as follows:
String param1 = "X";
String param2 = "Y";
String param1 = param1.append(",").append(param2);
You can append all your parameters separated by commas into a single String variable, 'param1', in our case.
After collecting all the parameters into a single String you can just replace the dummy text in your query, i.e., "PARAM" in this case, with the parameter String, i.e., param1. Here is what you need to do:
String query = query.replaceFirst("PARAM",param1); where we have the value of query as
query = "select * from TABLE_A where ATTR IN (PARAM)";
You can now execute your query using the executeQuery() method. Just make sure that you don't have the word "PARAM" in your query anywhere. You can use a combination of special characters and alphabets instead of the word "PARAM" in order to make sure that there is no possibility of such a word coming in the query. Hope you got the solution.
Note: Though this is not a prepared query, it does the work that I wanted my code to do.
Just for completeness and because I did not see anyone else suggest it:
Before implementing any of the complicated suggestions above consider if SQL injection is indeed a problem in your scenario.
In many cases the value provided to IN (...) is a list of ids that have been generated in a way that you can be sure that no injection is possible... (e.g. the results of a previous select some_id from some_table where some_condition.)
If that is the case you might just concatenate this value and not use the services or the prepared statement for it or use them for other parameters of this query.
query="select f1,f2 from t1 where f3=? and f2 in (" + sListOfIds + ");";
PreparedStatement doesn't provide any good way to deal with SQL IN clause. Per http://www.javaranch.com/journal/200510/Journal200510.jsp#a2 "You can't substitute things that are meant to become part of the SQL statement. This is necessary because if the SQL itself can change, the driver can't precompile the statement. It also has the nice side effect of preventing SQL injection attacks." I ended up using following approach:
String query = "SELECT my_column FROM my_table where search_column IN ($searchColumns)";
query = query.replace("$searchColumns", "'A', 'B', 'C'");
Statement stmt = connection.createStatement();
boolean hasResults = stmt.execute(query);
do {
if (hasResults)
return stmt.getResultSet();
hasResults = stmt.getMoreResults();
} while (hasResults || stmt.getUpdateCount() != -1);
OK, so I couldn't remember exactly how (or where) I did this before so I came to stack overflow to quickly find the answer. I was surprised I couldn't.
So, how I got around the IN problem a long time ago was with a statement like this:
where myColumn in ( select regexp_substr(:myList,'[^,]+', 1, level) from dual connect by regexp_substr(:myList, '[^,]+', 1, level) is not null)
set the myList parameter as a comma delimited string: A,B,C,D...
Note: You have to set the parameter twice!
This is not the ideal practice, yet it's simple and works well for me most of the time.
where ? like concat( "%|", TABLE_ID , "|%" )
Then you pass through ? the IDs in this way: |1|,|2|,|3|,...|

Syntax error on WITH clause

I am working on a web app and there are some long winded stored procedures and just trying to figure something out, I have extracted this part of the stored proc, but cant get it to work. The guy who did this is creating alias after alias.. and I just want to get a section to work it out. Its complaining about the ending but all the curly brackets seem to match. Thanks in advance..
FInputs is another stored procedure.. the whole thing is referred to as BASE.. the result of this was being put in a temp table where its all referred to as U. I am trying to break it down into separate sections.
;WITH Base AS
(
SELECT
*
FROM F_Inputs(1,1,100021)
),
U AS
(
SELECT
ISNULL(q.CoverPK,r.CoverPK) AS CoverPK,
OneLine,
InputPK,
ISNULL(q.InputName,r.InputName) AS InputName,
InputOrdinal,
InputType,
ParentPK,
InputTriggerFK,
ISNULL(q.InputString,r.InputString) AS InputString,
PageNo,
r.RatePK,
RateName,
Rate,
Threshold,
ISNULL(q.Excess,r.Excess) AS Excess,
RateLabel,
RateTip,
Refer,
DivBy,
RateOrdinal,
RateBW,
ngRequired,
ISNULL(q.RateValue,r.RateValue) AS RateValue,
ngClass,
ngPattern,
UnitType,
TableChildren,
TableFirstColumn,
parentRatePK,
listRatePK,
NewParentBW,
NewChildBW,
ISNULL(q.SumInsured,0) AS SumInsured,
ISNULL(q.NoItems,0) AS NoItems,
DisplayBW,
ReturnBW,
StringBW,
r.lblSumInsured,
lblNumber,
SubRateHeading,
TrigSubHeadings,
ISNULL(q.RateTypeFK,r.RateTypeFK) AS RateTypeFK,
0 AS ListNo,
0 AS ListOrdinal,
InputSelectedPK,
InputVis,
CASE
WHEN ISNULL(NewChildBW,0) = 0
THEN 1
WHEN q.RatePK is NOT null
THEN 1
ELSE RateVis
END AS RateVis,
RateStatus,
DiscountFirstRate,
DiscountSubsequentRate,
CoverCalcFK,
TradeFilter,
ngDisabled,
RateGroup,
SectionNo
FROM BASE R
LEFT JOIN QuoteInputs Q
ON q.RatePK = r.RatePK
AND q.ListNo = 0
AND q.QuoteId = 100021 )
Well, I explained the issue in the comments section already. I'm doing it here again, so future readers find the answer more easily.
A WITH clause is part of a query. It creates a view on-the-fly, e.g.:
with toys as (select * from products where type = 'toys') select * from toys;
Without the query at the end, the statement is invalid (and would not make much sense anyhow; if one wanted a permanent view for later use, one would use CREATE VIEW instead).

Perl: for (min .. max) uses random order, but I want it in order 0,1,2,

As I am a total beginner to perl, oracle sql and everything else. I have to write a script to parse an excel file and write the values into an oracle sql database.
Everything is good so far. But it writes the rows in random order into the database.
for ($row_min .. $row_max) {...insert into db code $sheetValues[$_][col0] etc...}
I don't get it why the rows are inserted in a random order?
And obviously how can I get them in order? excel_row 0 => db_row 0 and so on...
The values in the array are in order! The number of rows is dynamic.
Thanks for your help, I hope you got all the information you need.
Edit:
&parseWrite;
sub parseWrite {
my #sheetValues;
my $worksheet = $workbook->worksheet(0);
my ($row_min, $row_max) = $worksheet->row_range();
print "| Zeile $row_min bis $row_max |";
my ($col_min, $col_max) = $worksheet->col_range();
print " Spalte $col_min bis $col_max |<br>";
for my $row ($row_min .. $row_max) {
for my $col ($col_min .. $col_max) {
my $cell = $worksheet->get_cell ($row,$col);
next unless $cell;
$sheetValues[$row][$col] = $cell->value();
print $sheetValues[$row][$col] .
"(".$row."," .$col.")"."<br>";
}
}
for ($row_min .. $row_max) {
my $sql="INSERT INTO t_excel (
a,b,c,d,e
) VALUES (
'$sheetValues[$_][0 ]',
'$sheetValues[$_][1 ]',
'$sheetValues[$_][2 ]',
'$sheetValues[$_][3 ]',
'$sheetValues[$_][4 ]',
'$sheetValues[$_][5 ]'
)";
$dbh->do($sql);
}
}
With in order I mean that my PL/SQL Developer 8.0.3 (given by my company)
shows with SELECT * FROM t_excel;
pic
But shell = (2,0), maggie = (0,0) and 13 = (1,0) in the array.
The rows are being inserted in the order you expect. I believe the mistaken assumption here is that SELECT will return rows in the same order they're inserted. This is not true. While implementations may make it seem like it does, SELECT has no default order. You're thinking a table is basically like a big list, INSERT is adding to the end of it, and SELECT just iterates through it. That's not a bad approximation, but it can lead you to make bad assumptions. The reality is that you can say little for sure about how a table is stored.
SQL is a declarative language which means you tell the computer what you want. This is different from a most other language types where you tell the computer what to do. SELECT * FROM sometable says "give me all the rows and all their columns in the table". Since you didn't give an order, the database can return them in whatever order it likes. Contrast with the procedural meaning which would be "iterate through all the rows in the table" as if the table was some sort of list.
Most languages encourage you to take advantage of how data is stored. Declarative languages prevent you from knowing how data is stored.
If you want your SELECT to be ordered, you have to give it an ORDER BY.

How can I produce a join on a substring and an integer in Entity Framework?

Using Entity Framework, I'm trying to join two tables like this.
...
join f in ent.FTypes on Int32.Parse(c.CourseID[0].ToString()) equals f.FTypeID
...
The first character of the string CourseID is a digit, and FTypeID is an int.
This doesn't seem to work though. The exception message I get is:
LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'Int32 Parse(System.String)' method, and this method cannot be translated into a store expression."} System.Exception {System.NotSupportedException}
What I want to replicate is the SQL string equivalent (which works fine):
join FType f on SUBSTRING(c.CourseID, 1, 1) = f.FTypeID
Does anyone have the solution to have to do this in LINQ to Entities?
This is a rather nasty join, but I did some testing in Entity Framework with similar data and arrived at something you can test on yours.
It uses string.Substring to grab the first character from your string operand, and then uses a combination of the EF-only method SqlFunctions.StringConvert (these methods are found in System.Data.Objects.SqlClient) with a cast to double1 and finally a string.Trim2 for your integer operand.
I have tested this and confirmed that all functions are supported at least in EF 4. Several other methods proposed or featured in the question do not work, because Entity Framework does not know how to tranlsate them to the appropriate SQL equivalent.
join f in ent.FTypes
on c.CourseID.Substring(0, 1)
equals SqlFunctions.StringConvert((double)f.FTypeID).Trim()
It produces a SQL join that looks like the following:
INNER JOIN [dbo].[FTypes] AS [Extent2]
ON ((SUBSTRING([Extent1].[CourseID], 0 + 1, 1)) = (LTRIM(RTRIM(STR( CAST( [Extent2].[FTypeID] AS float))))))
OR ((SUBSTRING([Extent1].[CourseID], 0 + 1, 1) IS NULL) AND (LTRIM(RTRIM(STR( CAST( [Extent2].[FTypeID] AS float)))) IS NULL))
So based on that, you might want to do some additional filtering as necessary.
Give it a shot and see if that helps solve the problem.
1 The cast to double is necessary because SqlFunctions.StringConvert does not have an overload for integer and there is no other single best match, so I force one.
2 The resultant string needs to be trimmed because the string conversion generates some excess padding.
I'm not sure this worked 8 years ago, but modern EF6 implementation allows you to add anonymous types, so you can add the conversion to your initial select statements, and then you can just compare that new properties directly in the join.
from c in ent.Courses
select new { typeId = c.CourseId.Substring(0, 1), c }
join f in ent.FTypes.Select(t => new { stringId =
t.FTypeId.ToString(), t }
on c.typeId equals f.stringId into ...
NOTE: The join-statement does not appear to support ToString() but the select-statements do.
You could also move the CouresId.Substring into the join statement, but that may run less efficiently there.
Results in SQL like this:
INNER JOIN [ent].[FTypes] AS [Extent2] ON
(LTRIM(RTRIM(SUBSTRING([Extent1].[nvarchar(max)], 3 + 1, 1)))) =
CAST([Extent2].[Id] AS nvarchar(max))