I've a table like this which contains links :
key_a key_b
--------------
a b
b c
g h
a g
c a
f g
not really tidy & infinite recursion ...
key_a = parent
key_b = child
Require a query which will recompose and attribute a number for each hierarchical group (parent + direct children + indirect children) :
key_a key_b nb_group
--------------------------
a b 1
a g 1
b c 1
**c a** 1
f g 2
g h 2
**link responsible of infinite loop**
Because we have
A-B-C-A
-> Only want to show simply the link as shown.
Any idea ?
Thanks in advance
The problem is that you aren't really dealing with strict hierarchies; you're dealing with directed graphs, where some graphs have cycles. Notice that your nbgroup #1 doesn't have any canonical root-- it could be a, b, or c due to the cyclic reference from c-a.
The basic way of dealing with this is to think in terms of graph techniques, not recursion. In fact, an iterative approach (not using a CTE) is the only solution I can think of in SQL. The basic approach is explained here.
Here is a SQL Fiddle with a solution that addresses both the cycles and the shared-leaf case. Notice it uses iteration (with a failsafe to prevent runaway processes) and table variables to operate; I don't think there's any getting around this. Note also the changed sample data (a-g changed to a-h; explained below).
If you dig into the SQL you'll notice that I changed some key things from the solution given in the link. That solution was dealing with undirected edges, whereas your edges are directed (if you used undirected edges the entire sample set is a single component because of the a-g connection).
This gets to the heart of why I changed a-g to a-h in my sample data. Your specification of the problem is straightforward if only leaf nodes are shared; that's the specification I coded to. In this case, a-h and g-h can both get bundled off to their proper components with no problem, because we're concerned about reachability from parents (even given cycles).
However, when you have shared branches, it's not clear what you want to show. Consider the a-g link: given this, g-h could exist in either component (a-g-h or f-g-h). You put it in the second, but it could have been in the first instead, right? This ambiguity is why I didn't try to address it in this solution.
Edit: To be clear, in my solution above, if shared braches ARE encountered, it treats the whole set as a single component. Not what you described above, but it will have to be changed after the problem is clarified. Hopefully this gets you close.
You should use a recursive query. In the first part we select all records which are top level nodes (have no parents) and using ROW_NUMBER() assign them group ID numbers. Then in the recursive part we add to them children one by one and use parent's groups Id numbers.
with CTE as
(
select t1.parent,t1.child,
ROW_NUMBER() over (order by t1.parent) rn
from t t1 where
not exists (select 1 from t where child=t1.parent)
union all
select t.parent,t.child, CTE.rn
from t
join CTE on t.parent=CTE.Child
)
select * from CTE
order by RN,parent
SQLFiddle demo
Painful problem of graph walking using recursive CTEs. This is the problem of finding connected subgraphs in a graph. The challenge with using recursive CTEs is to prevent unwarranted recursion -- that is, infinite loops In SQL Server, that typically means storing them in a string.
The idea is to get a list of all pairs of nodes that are connected (and a node is connected with itself). Then, take the minimum from the list of connected nodes and use this as an id for the connected subgraph.
The other idea is to walk the graph in both directions from a node. This ensures that all possible nodes are visited. The following is query that accomplishes this:
with fullt as (
select keyA, keyB
from t
union
select keyB, keyA
from t
),
CTE as (
select t.keyA, t.keyB, t.keyB as last, 1 as level,
','+cast(keyA as varchar(max))+','+cast(keyB as varchar(max))+',' as path
from fullt t
union all
select cte.keyA, cte.keyB,
(case when t.keyA = cte.last then t.keyB else t.keyA
end) as last,
1 + level,
cte.path+t.keyB+','
from fullt t join
CTE
on t.keyA = CTE.last or
t.keyB = cte.keyA
where cte.path not like '%,'+t.keyB+',%'
) -- select * from cte where 'g' in (keyA, keyB)
select t.keyA, t.keyB,
dense_rank() over (order by min(cte.Last)) as grp,
min(cte.Last)
from t join
CTE
on (t.keyA = CTE.keyA and t.keyB = cte.keyB) or
(t.keyA = CTE.keyB and t.keyB = cte.keyA)
where cte.path like '%,'+t.keyA+',%' or
cte.path like '%,'+t.keyB+',%'
group by t.id, t.keyA, t.keyB
order by t.id;
The SQLFiddle is here.
you might want to check with COMMON TABLE EXPRESSIONS
here's the link
Related
Find the first common parent, if any, from many different children.
Example:
1
/ \
2 3
/ / \
7 8 9
/ \
10 11
Input: [10, 9]
Output: 3 (first common parent for this elements)
Table example:
+------------------+-----------+------+
|EmployeePositionId|Subdivision|Parent|
+------------------+-----------+------+
|4718 |485 |42 |
|4719 |5064 |485 |
|4720 |5065 |5064 |
|4721 |5065 |5064 |
|4722 |3000 |null |
+------------------+-----------+------+
If I try to search for EmployeePositionId [4719, 4720, 4721],
I would like to get the Subdivision 5064, because it is the closest common subdivision for both employees (5065 nested in 5064).
If I were looking for 4719, 4720, 4721, 4722, then I would like to get null, because these elements do not have a common parent.
Or the answer will help me how get the data so that later solve this in Python
This class of problems is hard for SQL.
It's even harder with your particular table. It's not properly normalized. There is no level indicator. And input IDs can be from mixed hierarchy levels.
Setup
You clarified in a later comment that every path is terminated with a row that has "Parent" IS NULL (root), even if sample data in the question suggest otherwise. That helps a bit.
I assume valid "EmployeePositionId" as input. And no loops in your tree or the CTE enters an endless loop.
If you don't have a level of hierarchy in the table, add it. It's a simple task. If you can't add it, create a VIEW or, preferably, a MATERIALIZED VIEW instead:
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW mv_tbl AS
WITH RECURSIVE cte AS (
SELECT *, 0 AS level
FROM tbl
WHERE "Parent" IS NULL
UNION ALL
SELECT t.*, c.level + 1
FROM cte c
JOIN tbl t ON t."Parent" = c."Subdivision"
)
TABLE cte;
These would be the perfect indices for the task:
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX mv_tbl_id_uni ON mv_tbl ("EmployeePositionId") INCLUDE ("Subdivision", "Parent", level);
CREATE INDEX mv_tbl_subdivision_idx ON mv_tbl ("Subdivision") INCLUDE ("Parent", level);
See:
Covering index for top read performance
Query
Pure SQL solution with recursive CTE, based on a table with level indicator (or the MV from above):
WITH RECURSIVE init AS (
SELECT "Subdivision", "Parent", level
FROM mv_tbl
WHERE "EmployeePositionId" IN (4719, 4720, 4721) -- input
)
, cte AS (
TABLE init
UNION
SELECT c."Parent", t."Parent", c.level - 1
FROM cte c
JOIN mv_tbl t ON t."Subdivision" = c."Parent" -- recursion terminated at "Parent" IS NULL
)
, agg AS (
SELECT level, min("Subdivision") AS "Subdivision", count(*) AS ct
FROM cte
GROUP BY level
)
SELECT "Subdivision"
FROM agg a
WHERE ct = 1 -- no other live branch
AND level < (SELECT max(level) FROM cte WHERE "Parent" IS NULL) IS NOT TRUE -- no earlier dead end
AND level <= (SELECT min(level) FROM init) -- include highest (least) level
ORDER BY level DESC -- pick earliest (greatest) qualifying level
LIMIT 1;
db<>fiddle here
Covers all possible input, works for any modern version of Postgres.
I added basic explanation in the code.
Related:
How to aggregate a table with tree-structure to a single nested JSON object?
How to turn a set of flat trees into a single tree with multiple leaves?
Legal, lower-case, unquoted identifiers make your life with Postgres easier. See:
Are PostgreSQL column names case-sensitive?
I can't seem to find the reason behind the infinite loop in this query, nor how to correct it.
Here is the context :
I have a table called mergesWith with this description :
mergesWith: information about neighboring seas. Note that in this relation, for every pair of
neighboring seas (A,B), only one tuple is given – thus, the relation is not symmetric.
sea1: a sea
sea2: a sea.
I want to know every sea accessible from the Mediterranean Sea by navigating. I have opted for a recursive query using "with" :
With
acces(p,d) as (
select sea1 as p, sea2 as d
from MERGESWITH
UNION ALL
select a.p, case when mw.sea1=a.d
then mw.sea2
else mw.sea1
end as d
from acces a, MERGESWITH mw
where a.d=mw.sea1 or a.d=mw.sea2)
select d
from acces
where p= 'Mediterranean Sea';
I think the cause is either the case when or the a.d=mw.sea1 or a.d=mw.sea2 that is not restrictive enough, but I can't seem to pinpoint why.
I get this error message :
32044. 00000 - "cycle detected while executing recursive WITH query"
*Cause: A recursive WITH clause query produced a cycle and was stopped
in order to avoid an infinite loop.
*Action: Rewrite the recursive WITH query to stop the recursion or use
the CYCLE clause.
The cycles are caused by the structure of your query, not by cycles in the data. You ask for the reason for cycling. That should be obvious: at the first iteration, one row of output has d = 'Aegean Sea'. At the second iteration, you will find a row with d = 'Mediterranean Sea', right? Can you now see how this will result in cycles?
Recursive queries have a cycle clause used exactly for this kind of problem. For some reason, even many users who learned the recursive with clause well, and use it all the time, seem unaware of the cycle clause (as well as the unrelated, but equally useful, search clause - used for ordering the output).
In your code, you need to make two changes. Add the cycle clause, and also in the outer query filter for non-cycle rows only. In the cycle clause, you can decide what to call the "cycle" column, and what values to give it. To make this look as similar to connect by queries as possible, I like to call the new column IS_CYCLE and to give it the values 0 (for no cycle) and 1 (for cycle). In the outer query below, add is_cycle to the select list to see what it adds to the recursive query.
Notice the position of the cycle clause: it comes right after the recursive with clause (in particular, after the closing parenthesis at the end of the recursive factored subquery).
with
acces(p,d) as (
select sea1 as p, sea2 as d
from MERGESWITH
UNION ALL
select a.p, case when mw.sea1=a.d
then mw.sea2
else mw.sea1
end as d
from acces a, MERGESWITH mw
where a.d=mw.sea1 or a.d=mw.sea2)
cycle d set is_cycle to 1 default 0 -- add this line
select d
from acces
where p= 'Mediterranean Sea'
and is_cycle = 0 -- and this line
;
Clearly, this would be data-dependent due to cycles in the data. I typically include a lev value when developing recursive CTEs. This makes it simpler to debug them.
So, try something like this:
with acces(p, d, lev) as (
select sea1 as p, sea2 as d, 1 as lev
from MERGESWITH
union all
select a.p,
(case when mw.sea1 = a.d then mw.sea2 else mw.sea1 end) as d,
lev + 1
from acces a join
MERGESWITH mw
on a.d in (mw.sea1, mw.sea2)
where lev < 5)
select d
from acces
where p = 'Mediterranean Sea';
If you find the reason but can't fix the code, ask a new question with sample data and desired results. A DB fiddle of some sort is also helpful.
I would like to solve a problem consisting of 2 recursions.
In one of the 2 recursions I find out the answer to one question which is "What is the leaf member of a specific input (template)?" This is already solved.
In a second recursion I would like to run this query for a number of other inputs (templates).
1st part of the problem:
I have a tree and would like to find the leaf of it. This part of the recursion can be solved using this query:
with recursive full_tree as (
select id, "previousVersionId", 1 as level
from template
where
template."id" = '5084520a-bb07-49e8-b111-3ea8182dc99f'
union all
select c.id, c."previousVersionId", p.level + 1
from template c
inner join full_tree p on c."previousVersionId" = p.id
)
select * from full_tree
order by level desc
limit 1
The query output is one record including the leaf id I'm interested in. This is fine.
2nd part of the query:
Here's the problem. I would like to run the first query n times.
Currently I can run the query only if it's just one id ('5084520a-bb07-49e8-b111-3ea8182dc99f' in the example). But what If I have a list of 100 such ids.
My ultimate goal is to get one id response (the leaf id) to each of the 100 template ids in the list.
In theory, a query that allows me to run above query for each of my e.g. 100 template ids would solve my problem.
I have a big table (1M rows) with the following columns:
source, dest, distance.
Each row defines a link (from A to B).
I need to find the distances between a pair using anoter node.
An example:
If want to find the distance between A and B,
If I find a node x and have:
x -> A
x -> B
I can add these distances and have the distance beetween A and B.
My question:
How can I find all the nodes (such as x) and get their distances to (A and B)?
My purpose is to select the min value of distance.
P.s: A and B are just one connection (I need to do it for 100K connections).
Thanks !
As Andomar said, you'll need the Dijkstra's algorithm, here's a link to that algorithm in T-SQL: T-SQL Dijkstra's Algorithm
Assuming you want to get the path from A-B with many intermediate steps it is impossible to do it in plain SQL for an indefinite number of steps. Simply put, it lacks the expressive power, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expressive_power#Expressive_power_in_database_theory . As Andomar said, load the data into a process and us Djikstra's algorithm.
This sounds like the traveling salesman problem.
From a SQL syntax standpoint: connect by prior would build the tree your after using the start with and limit the number of layers it can traverse; however, doing will not guarantee the minimum.
I may get downvoted for this, but I find this an interesting problem. I wish that this could be a more open discussion, as I think I could learn a lot from this.
It seems like it should be possible to achieve this by doing multiple select statements - something like SELECT id FROM mytable WHERE source="A" ORDER BY distance ASC LIMIT 1. Wrapping something like this in a while loop, and replacing "A" with an id variable, would do the trick, no?
For example (A is source, B is final destination):
DECLARE var_id as INT
WHILE var_id != 'B'
BEGIN
SELECT id INTO var_id FROM mytable WHERE source="A" ORDER BY distance ASC LIMIT 1
SELECT var_id
END
Wouldn't something like this work? (The code is sloppy, but the idea seems sound.) Comments are more than welcome.
Join the table to itself with destination joined to source. Add the distance from the two links. Insert that as a new link with left side source, right side destination and total distance if that isn't already in the table. If that is in the table but with a shorter total distance then update the existing row with the shorter distance.
Repeat this until you get no new links added to the table and no updates with a shorter distance. Your table now contains a link for every possible combination of source and destination with the minimum distance between them. It would be interesting to see how many repetitions this would take.
This will not track the intermediate path between source and destination but only provides the shortest distance.
IIUC this should do, but I'm not sure if this is really viable (performance-wise) due to the big amount of rows involved and to the CROSS JOIN
SELECT
t1.src AS A,
t1.dest AS x,
t2.dest AS B,
t1.distance + t2.distance AS total_distance
FROM
big_table AS t1
CROSS JOIN
big_table AS t2 ON t1.dst = t2.src
WHERE
A = 'insert source (A) here' AND
B = 'insert destination (B) here'
ORDER BY
total_distance ASC
LIMIT
1
The above snippet will work for the case in which you have two rows in the form A->x and x->B but not for other combinations (e.g. A->x and B->x). Extending it to cover all four combiantions should be trivial (e.g. create a view that duplicates each row and swaps src and dest).
I have parent child data in excel which gets loaded into a 3rd party system running MS SQL server. The data represents a directed (hopefully) acyclic graph. 3rd party means I don't have a completely free hand in the schema. The excel data is a concatenation of other files and the possibility exists that in the cross-references between the various files someone has caused a loop - i.e. X is a child of Y (X->Y) then elsewhere (Y->A->B-X). I can write vb, vba etc on the excel or on the SQL server db. The excel file is almost 30k rows so I'm worried about a combinatorial explosion as the data is set to grow. So some of the techniques like creating a table with all the paths might be pretty unwieldy. I'm thinking of simply writing a program that, for each root, does a tree traversal to each leaf and if the depth gets greater than some nominal value flags it.
Better suggestions or pointers to previous discussion welcomed.
You can use a recursive CTE to detect loops:
with prev as (
select RowId, 1 AS GenerationsRemoved
from YourTable
union all
select RowId, prev.GenerationsRemoved + 1
from prev
inner join YourTable on prev.RowId = ParentRowId
and prev.GenerationsRemoved < 55
)
select *
from prev
where GenerationsRemoved > 50
This does require you to specify a maximum recursion level: in this case the CTE runs to 55, and it selects as erroneous rows with more than 50 children.