This is with respect to search of a text in a table
Table_Name:
Details
Columns:
Fname,Mname,Lname,NName
This table contains nearly one lakh records
We are using Oracle forms for some querying option
The user input one name the form searches the table for the name and based on the name either(Fname/Mname/Lname/NName) in which column its is present further actions are proceeeded.
The search is taking a long time since we have huge amount of data present in the table.
I tried with Functional indexes for the table but t did not work its also taking more time
Later i tried with something like this
concatenated all the names into one name and put it into a cursor.
Using the cursor output i tried with Instring but it is hanging
I also tried with searching for building a dynamic cursor but it did not work.
My database is Oracle
Can u help me to out to find an effective solution or please help me if i have missed something.
Thanks
First of all, 1 lakh (100,000) records is not in itself a large table.
The problem I can see is the query appears to be doing an OR against the Fname/Mname/Lname/NName columns.
This means the query will be doing at least one full-table scan to obtain the results.
You may wish to use debug to obtain the query it is firing against the database and attempt to tune this at the SQL prompt using auto trace.
You may need to clarify if the search is also doing something like a LIKE against these columns rather than an EQUALS. As a LIKE will impact the query further and affect indexes.
Certainly the use of INSTR will disable indexes on your searched column.
It is not clear if what your block is based on ie. table, view, query, procedure
You may want to try using the hint on the block properties of the form FIRST_ROWS.
Related
I have an Azure SQL database, and my records inside table Spiderfood_RITMData in that database includes 13 different fields. Lots of stuff. I have confirmed in SQL-SMS that the records have data in each field.
There are way more items in the database than PowerApps can see using LOOKUP (1600-9000 records or more). However, I know FOR A FACT that there is only ONE record that has any given value in the NUMBER column. It's not a primary key, but it is unique in the table.
In PowerApps, I am trying to pull that field so that I can eventually parse out the individual items.
So, the commands I'm trying are:
ClearCollect(MLE_test1, Filter('Spiderfood_RITMData', "RITM2170467" in Number));
ClearCollect(MLE_test2, Search('Spiderfood_RITMData',"RITM2170467", "Number"));
However, the Collection results for MLE_test1 and MLE_test2 both are empty EXCEPT for the value of NUMBER. Say what?!
I'm trying to use the examples posted on https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/powerapps/maker/canvas-apps/functions/function-filter-lookup but I am honestly getting baffled by this.
How should I be formatting this call such that I can pull the whole record?
Big picture explanation: I need to do a lot of data LOOKUPS into my table Spiderfood_RITMData table, but it has way more than 2000 rows, and PowerApps will not perform the Lookup correctly. So my presumably smart idea is to create a MUCH SMALLER "version" of Spiderfood_RITMData as a local collection, using a more delegateable function (such as FILTER or IN). If I filter by all records containing the values of NUMBER, then I go from, say a 10,000-record SQL table to a 10-record Collection. And I can do LOOKUPS against that collection for the rest of the function (uh, I think -- I'm still trying to experiment accordingly). Please let me know if this is crazy or not.
LookUp is just used to get one record, instead try this:
ClearCollect(MLE_test1, Filter('Spiderfood_RITMData', "RITM2170467" = Number));
This gets a collection with all the items where Number is = to "RITM2170467"
Collections are limited to only 2000 records in each collections.
I had same issue. Go to App settings. Under Upcoming Features make sure Explicit column selection is turned off. Hope this does it for you.
I'm still relatively new to SQL and Pentaho.
I've pulled a table with two different IDs and need to run a query for each specific instance.
For example,
SELECT *
FROM Table
WHERE RecordA = 'value in column A'
AND RecordB = 'value in column B'
I need the results back, either appended to new columns in the original table or part of their own text file output.
I was initially looking at using a formula for this inside of Pentaho, but couldn't quite figure it out. Since I have the query written I threw it into Excel and got the concatenated results (so a string of 350 or so queries that I need to run). I'm just not sure how to accomplish this - I tried the Execute SQL Script inside of Pentaho but it doesn't seem to do output?
Any direction would be useful. I've searched a little but have come up short so far, possibly because I am still pretty new to this platform.
You can accomplish this behavior in a lot of ways, with a "Database Lookup" step for example, but I usually do that in a quite easy way and here is a example for your tests, I hope it helps.
The idea here is to have two Table input steps, the first one will fetch the IDs we want to look at. For example you may use a SQL query similar to note on the left. The result will be a 1 column stream of rows.
Next we have a Table Input that reads the rows received and executes it's query for each row. I'll add a screenshot with the options that I selected.
What it does is replace a placeholder '?' with the data that is received. If you need two columns use two '?' but remember that it will replace the first one with the first column and the second one with the second column
And you are good to go. Test it a couple of times and good luck.
And the config for the second table input.
Fist, let me say I know very little about SQL language and am trying to learn (albeit very slowly). I have created a database table with columns for
ECOREGION_ID
ECOREGION_NAME
SPECIES_NAME
CLASS
so that there is one row for each species name in each ecoregion. My end goal is to create a form in which I can enter in multiple species names and search for the ecoregions they share. For example, if I enter into the 4 different search boxes "Tiger", "Red Panda", "Sloth Bear", and "Rhino" it would bring up a list of all the Ecoregions in which these four species share. I am wondering a few things:
Is my data set up in the correct way in order to do this or is there a more efficient way to set i t up?
What statement should I use to create an sql statement to perform the search I want?
What is the technical term for what I am wanting to do? I have tried many different searches on different forums and can't seem to find what I am looking for, mostly because I probably don't know what to search, lol.
Thanks,
-Drew
You have ECORegion_ID and ECORegion_Name in the same table. I would suggest create a separate table to hold ECORegions. This table would have both an ID and Name. The search table would then only have the ECORegion_ID. This process is called normalization. It basically reduces redundant data in your database.
You are looking for a SELECT statement, which is used to pull data out of one or more tables. The statement has a WHERE option to restrict which rows you bring back and an IN expression as part of the WHERE to allow you to look for multiple keywords.
Search for Normalization to see why to put region name in a separate table. Look up SQL Select to get syntax for the select statement you should get off to a good start
I apologize if this is an easy one, but I can't find this on the web anywhere!
I have a list of tables and queries, and a full list of fields from each table and query.
I want to choose my fields in an Access form, and then, on another form, choose a query/table in one column (along with a field) and join it to a table/query in another column (along with the field.) My form for the joins would look like this:
Object1 Field1 Object2 Field2
and so on. I would want to be able to choose my fields through combo boxes, THEN make the SQL string dynamically. I can't use a where clause -- it has to be a join.
The problem is, the structure will change every time. Access gets funny about putting in parentheses. Also, if an object is chosen more than once, Access will want to join it (assuming I do it right) in a different manner than T-SQL.
Is there a way to write a query in T-SQL, and quickly convert to Access? Does anyone know the FROM clause algorithm Access uses to construct the FROM clause? I am stuck here, and I cannot find a solution to save my soul! Thank you in advance, David
Like a lot of developers who are comfortable with SQL syntax I get frustrated when working with Access's query editor. I'm talking about the raw SQL Syntax view, obviously.
One of its many annoying properties is that upon saving it will discard my layout / formatting. When reopening the query all I see is a bunch of unformatted SQL.
However, if my syntax is long and/or complex enough I've noticed that Access will retain my formatting and layout and, oh joy, the query remains clear and readable. I'm looking at an example right now with a page of SQL containing couple of UNIONs all nicely laid out from a few days ago.
At what point does Access flip over to allowing the user to retain his own formatting? Is it length? Complexity? And is there maybe even a trivial structural edit (if trivial structural isn't an oxymoron) I can make to all my queries which will force Access to leave my layout in place?
There are certain things that Access' query editor is not able to display in design mode.
Queries with UNION are the only thing that come to my mind right now, but there are probably more.
In my experience, Access always changes the layout as long as it's able to display the query in design mode.
As soon as you put something in the query that Access can not display in design mode (like UNION), Access leaves your layout and formatting as it is.
I couldn't figure out why Access kept changing my format in a union query (but not for every query or table included).
I simply created another SELECT query based upon the Union query and corrected everything in design view. It's a lot easier.
When I created the SELET query based upon the UNION query, I included tables or queries that I used as lookup tables and had formatted a field to select the second column from a record in a lookup field that the ubion query had anoyingly converted back to the first field in the selected record (usually the ID No of the record).
For example, I might lookup the account name in a record in the cash disbursements table that should display "Office Supplies Exp" but the Union Query converts at least one of the queries or tables I have combined in the union query to the Account Number, the first record in the lookup table, which was originally hidden in the lookup field.
Just to add to Christian's answer, I've done some more testing and find that UNION and DDL queries are left alone by Access.
If we add Pass through queries to that list, then that would match the queries deemed SQL Specific on the menu:
So, those would seem to be the three special cases.
Before saving just type the word union before the ;.
After opening Access next time, remove the word union and start working. When you want to save, first type union again.