Update query on temporary table in Linq - sql

Hey guys I am new in Linq and I am trying to convert stored procedures. But I am having a hard time writing update query in LINQ my query in SP is like
UPDATE #tempTable1
SET someColumn = 1
FROM #tempTable1 p, #tempTable2 t2, NonTempTable nt
WHERE t1.id = t2.id
AND t1.id = nt.id
AND nt.status = 'abcd';
I wrote following conversion of above query in LINQ
var Obj = (from t1 in temp1
join t2 in tmp2 on t1.id equals t2.id
join nt in NonTempTable on t2.id equals nt.id
where nt.status == "abcd"
select t1).First();
Obj.somecolumn = 1;
Obj.SubmitChanges();
But I am gettimg following error
Property or indexer 'AnonymousType#1.ProcedureID' cannot be assigned to -- it is read only
I just have database of my application and I am trying to convert stored procedures into LINQ using LINQPad
Can anyone tell me how to write above query to Linq? What more do I need to do this?

You have to create an entity from your tempTable1, tempTable2 and NonTempTable. Then you should be able to work with the data from these tables by means of Linq. See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/data/ff830362.aspx how to create models.
After you create it, you can update your records or proper record and save changes to database
var result = (from row in model.JoinedTable
where row.status == "abcd"
select row).First();
result.someColumn = "1";
model.SaveChanges();

Linq is for querying, not updating. In order to update data you need to choose a framework (or find out what the main project team is using) that is designed to do that - Entity Framework, LinqToSQL, or plain old ADO.NET (SQlCommand + SqlConnection, etc.).
There is no built-in mechanism within Linq to update data in memory, let alone propagate changes to a data source. Even with Entity Framework - you can use Linq to get the object(s) you want to update, but the actual updating does not use Linq at all, just property setters and methods like SaveChanges() which you have in your example.

Finally found a workaround for my above question which is following
var Obj = (from t1 in temp1
join t2 in tmp2 on t1.id equals t2.id
join nt in NonTempTable on t2.id equals nt.id
where nt.status == "abcd"
select t1).First();
var anatherObj = (from o in Obj
select new { o.nonUpdatedColumn1, o.nonUpdatedColumn2, o.nonUpdatedColumn3, o.someColumn = 1});
And got the updated temporary table in "anatherObj"

Related

Phalcon: How can i execute my Inner join statement with query builder

How can i execute this statement with "Query builder" in phalcon framework and fetch it result:
SELECT Table2.Id
FROM Table2 INNER Table1
WHERE Table1.Id = 1
AND Table2.Name = "Shahin"
AND Table1.Max > Table2.Count;
Tables
Answering a bit late, but let's hope it helps someone else. Phalcon provides an awesome Query builder functionality. You can read more here: https://docs.phalconphp.com/en/latest/api/Phalcon_Mvc_Model_Query_Builder.html
And here is sample join query:
$result = $this->modelsManager->createBuilder()
->columns(array('main.*', 'locations.*'))
->from(array('main' => 'Models\Objects'))
->leftJoin('Models\ObjectLocations', 'locations.foreign_key = main.id', 'locations')
->where('main.active = 1')
->getQuery()->execute();
This will return two objects if query is successful and you selected all the fields (*) from a table:
$result->main
$result->locations
Good thing is those objects allow you to use all model methods. For example
$result->locations->getDistanceBlabla()

SQL - Update table values from values in another table

I have a select statement that is showing me all the data from table original every time it does not match the values on table real_values.
So every time it does not match, instead of showing me which routes have the wrong values for capacity, I would like the query to update it with the correct values.
Here is a shorter version to use as an example:
http://sqlfiddle.com/#!4/6a904/1
Instead of being a select statement, how could I just update the values? I have tried some things I've seen online but nothing seems to work.
#DavidFaber's answer is how most people would do this. However, for this kind of query, I prefer to use merge over update:
MERGE INTO original o
USING real_values rv
ON (o.origin = rv.origin AND o.destination = rv.destination)
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE SET
o.capacity_wt = rv.capacity_wt, o.capacity_vol = rv.capacity_vol
WHERE o.capacity_wt != rv.capacity_wt
OR o.capacity_vol != rv.capacity_vol
(It was unclear to me from your question whether you want to update original or real_values, so I chose one. If I got this wrong, reversing it should be trivial.)
I find merge more readable and easier to use when you want to update multiple columns.
The usual form of such an update query in Oracle is the following:
UPDATE table1 t1
SET t1.value = ( SELECT t2.value FROM table2 t2
WHERE t2.key = t1.key )
WHERE EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM table2 t2
WHERE t2.key = t1.key );
I'm confused though. You've tagged this question oracle and sql-server but your fiddle link uses MySQL.
In SQL Server, you would do this
update original set capacity_wt=b.capacity_wt,capacity_vol=b.capacity_vol
from original a, real_values b
where a.origin = b.origin
and a.destination = b.destination
and (a.capacity_wt != b.capacity_wt
or b.capacity_vol != b.capacity_vol);

Why does Oracle SQL update query return "invalid identifier" on existing column?

I have an update query for an Oracle SQL db. Upon execution the query returns ORA-00904: "t1"."sv_id": invalid identifier
So, why do I get an "invalid identifier" error message although the column exists?
Here is the complete query (replaced actual table and column names by dummies in np++)
UPDATE table_1 t1 SET (type) =
CASE
WHEN
((SELECT COUNT(dateCheck.id) FROM table_2 dateCheck
WHERE dateCheck.s_id = t1.s_id AND dateCheck.sv_id = t1.sv_id) = 0)
THEN
(SELECT sv.type FROM table_3 sv WHERE sv.id = t1.sv_id)
ELSE
(SELECT type FROM
(SELECT d.type as type FROM table_2 d
WHERE d.s_id = t1.s_id AND d.sv_id = t1.sv_id
ORDER BY d.creationTimestamp ASC)
WHERE ROWNUM = 1)
END
Now I don't understand why that error occurs.
Here is what I already know:
The Queries in the CASE statement work when executed separately, provided they are wrapped into a query that provides table_1 t1 for sure.
t1.s_id seems to work since oracle doesn't complain about that. When i change it to a column that really doesn't exist, oracle starts complaining about that non existent column before returning something about t1.sv_id. So somehow the alias might work, although I'm not sure about it.
I'm 100% sure that the column t1.sv_id exists and no typo was made. Executed a query on t1 directly and doublechecked everything in notepad by marking all occurences.
An (completely unrelated) update query like the following works as well (note the alias t1 is used in the select query). Don't assume table_1/2 to be the same as in the update query above, just reused the names. This should just illustrate that I successfully used an alias in an update query before.
update table_1 t1 set (t2_id) = (select id from table_2 t2 where t1.id = t2.t1_id)
UPDATE
Thx a lot for pointing me to the "you don't have access to alises in deeper suquery layers" issue. That got me on track again pretty fast.
So here is the query I ended up with. This seems to work fine. Eliminates the acces to t1 in the deeper layers and selects the oldest row, so that the same result should be returned from the query I expected from the original query in the ELSE part.
UPDATE table_1 t1 SET (type) =
CASE
WHEN
((SELECT COUNT(dateCheck.id) FROM table_2 dateCheck
WHERE dateCheck.s_id = t1.s_id AND dateCheck.sv_id = t1.sv_id) = 0)
THEN
(SELECT sv.type FROM table_3 sv WHERE sv.id = t1.sv_id)
ELSE
(SELECT d.type as type FROM table_2 d
WHERE d.s_id = t1.s_id
AND d.sv_id = t1.sv_id
AND d.creation = (SELECT MIN(id.creation) FROM table_2 id
WHERE d.s_id = id.s_id AND d.sv_id = id.sv_id))
END
You can't reference a table alias in a subquery of a subquery; the alias doesn't apply (or doesn't exist, or isn't in scope, depending on how you prefer to look at it). With the code you posted the error is reported against line 11 character 24, which is:
(SELECT type FROM
(SELECT d.type as type FROM table_2 d
WHERE d.s_id = t1.s_id AND d.sv_id = t1.sv_id
^^^^^^^^
If you change the t1.s_id reference on the same line to something invalid then the error doesn't change and is still reported as ORA-00904: "T1"."SV_ID": invalid identifier. But if you change the same reference on line 5 instead to something like
((SELECT COUNT(dateCheck.id) FROM table_2 dateCheck
WHERE dateCheck.s_id = t1.s_idXXX AND dateCheck.sv_id = t1.sv_id) = 0)
... then the error changes to ORA-00904: "T1"."S_IDXXX": invalid identifier. This is down to how the statement is being parsed. In your original version the subquery in the WHEN clause is value, and you only break it by changing that identifier. The subquery in the ELSE is also OK. But the nested subquery in the ELSE has the problem, and changing the t1.s_id in that doesn't make any difference because the parser reads that part of the statement backwards (I don't know, or can't remember, why!).
So you have to eliminate the nested subquery. A general approach would be to make the whole CASE an inline view which you can then join using s_id and sv_id, but that's complicated as there may be no matching table_2 record (based on your count); and there may be no s_id value to match against as that isn't being checked in table_3.
It isn't clear if there will always be a table_3 record even then there is a table_2 record, or if they're mutually exclusive. If I've understood what the CASE is doing then I think you can use an outer join between those two tables and compare the combined data with the row you're updating, but because of that ambiguity it needs to be a full outer join. I think.
Here's a stab at using that construct with a MERGE instead of an update.
MERGE INTO table_1 t1
USING (
SELECT t2.s_id,
coalesce(t2.sv_id, t3.id) as sv_id,
coalesce(t2.type, t3.type) as type,
row_number() over (partition by t2.s_id, t2.sv_id
order by t2.creationtimestamp) as rn
FROM table_2 t2
FULL OUTER JOIN table_3 t3
ON t3.id = t2.sv_id
) tmp
ON ((tmp.s_id is null OR tmp.s_id = t1.s_id) AND tmp.sv_id = t1.sv_id AND tmp.rn = 1)
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET t1.type = tmp.type;
If there will always be a table_3 record then you could use that as the driver and have a left outer join to table_2 instead, but hard to tell which might be appropriate. So this is really just a starting point.
SQL Fiddle with some made-up data that I believe would have hit both branches of your case. More realistic data would expose the flaws and misunderstandings, and suggest a more robust (or just more correct) approach...
Your query and your analysis seems sound to me. I have no solution but a few things you can try to maybe trigger something that explains this odd behavior:
Quote the column (just in case it happens to be a SQL keyword).
Use table_1.sv_id - this works as long as the whole query contains this table only once.
Make sure that the alias t1 exists only once
Run the query with a query tool like SQuirrel SQL - the tool can examine the exact position where Oracle reports the problem. Maybe it's in a different place of the query than you think
Check () and make sure they are around the parts where they should be.
Swap the order of expressions around =

Entity Framework and CROSS/OUTER APPLY

I want to create some test cases for Entity Framework queries that surely generate SQL commands that contain CROSS APPLY or OUTER APPLY operators.
Could someone show typical scenarios where these kind of SQL queries appear?
In LINQ 2 SQL this always results in an APPLY:
from t1 in tab1
from t2 in tab2.Where(t2 => t2.SomeCol == t1.SomeCol).Take(1)
select new { t1, t2 }
In EF this will either fail, or also result in an APPLY (I don't know which one). This is a correlated join which requires an APPLY on the SQL side.
Something like this would generate an outer apply:
var ListLocation = from d in dc.Department
select new DepartmentViewModel()
{
LocationID = d.LocationID,
ManagerName = d.Managers.FirstOrDefault(p => p.ManagerId == id).Name
};
If it doesn't work you can always pass your own query if you're using EF:
var q2 = context.Departments.SqlQuery("Select ...");
Remember though that your provider has to be SQL Server 2005 and higher, EF does not support OUTER APPLY for Oracle

Update using Join(s) - Multi DB/Table

I have a scenario where I would like to update multiple fields in multiple Tables using just one instuction. I need a Syntax to perform such opperations on multiple Databases (Oracle and MSSQL).
At the moment I am stuck at the following statement from MSSQL:
update table1
set table1.value = 'foo'
from table1 t1 join table2 t2 on t1.id = t2.tab1_id
where t1.id = 1234
I would like to update a field in t2 aswell in the same statement.
Further I would like to perform the same Update(s) on Oracle.
EDIT:Seems like I can not update multiple Tables in just one statement. Is there a syntax that works for Oracle and MSSql when updating using a Join?
Regards
Seems like I can not update multiple
Tables in just one statement.
Is there a syntax that works for
Oracle and MSSql when updating using a
Join?
I assume when you re-posed the question you want syntax that will work on both Oracle and SQL Server even though it will inevitably affect only one table.
Entry level SQL-92 Standard code is supported by both platforms, therefore the following 'scalar subqueries' SQL-92 code should work:
UPDATE table1
SET my_value = (
SELECT t2.tab1_id
FROM table2 AS t2
WHERE t2.tab1_id = table1.id
)
WHERE id = 1234
AND EXISTS (
SELECT *
FROM table2 AS t2
WHERE t2.tab1_id = table1.id
);
Note that while using the correlation name t1 for Ttble1 is valid syntax according to the SQL-92 Standard this will materialize a table and the UPDATE will then target the materialized table 't1' and leave your base table 'table1` unaffected, which I assume is not the desired affect. While I'm fairly sure both Oracle and SQL Server are non-compliant is this regard and that in practise would work as expected, there's no harm in being ultra cautious and sticking to the SQL-92 syntax by fully qualifying the target table.
Folk tend not to like the 'repeated' code in the above subqueries (even though the optimizer should be smart enough to evaluate it only once).
More recent versions of Oracle and SQL Server support both support Standard SQL:2003 MERGE syntax, would may be able to use something close to this:
MERGE INTO table1
USING (
SELECT t2.tab1_id
FROM table2 AS t2
) AS source
ON id = source.tab1_id
AND id = 1234
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE
SET my_value = source.tab1_id;
I just noticed your example is even simpler than I first thought and merely requires a simple subquery that should run on most SQL products e.g.
UPDATE table1
SET my_value = 'foo'
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT *
FROM table2 AS t2
WHERE t2.tab1_id = table1.id
);
on Oracle, you can update only one table , but you could think of using a trigger .