I have been working as a data analyst for about 4 months now and the above is a very real question for me. The most recent way I've been taught to join is with the left join with the following example.
left join table1
on
table2.id = table1.id
left join table2
on
table3.table_id = table2.table_id
left join table4
on
table1.tablekey_id = table4.tablekey_id
Looking for the most efficient way to connect multiple tables to save time, if possible.
Thanks in Advance!
You could certainly use a shorter alias for the table names and table fields.
Example:
Table 1 = alias t1
tablekey_id = tkid
So then it would t1.tkid instead of having to type out table1.tablekey_id.
If it is only two tables of same columns and same datatypes, you can use union concept to join the tables.
You can also join tables like this:
Tables: TableA, TableB
SELECT
column1,
column2,
column3
FROM TableA, TableB
WHERE TableA.id = TableB.id;
I need to take the distinct values from Table 2 while joining with Table 1 in Hive. Because the table 2 has duplicate records.
Considering below join condition is it possible to take only distinct key_col from table 2? i dont want to use select distinct * from ...
select * from Table_1 a left join Table_2 b on a.key_col = b.key_col
Note: This is in Hive
Use Left semi join. This will give you all the record in table1 which exist in table2(duplicate record) without duplicates.
select a.* from Table_1 a left semi join Table_2 b on a.key_col = b.key_col
I have 3 tables of accounts that all contain the same fields. Table1 contains all accounts while Table2 and Table3 contain subsets of the accounts. I'm trying to select records in Table1 that do no exist in Table2 or Table3.
Let's say the table layout is like this and is the same for all 3 tables:
|AcctNum|Name|State|
I know how to do this if it was just Table1 and Table2, using a left join and Is Null, but the 3rd table is throwing me. Is this possible to do in one query? Can you combine left joins? I should point out I'm using Access 2010.
Yes you can combine left joins and with the odd syntax Access uses the query should look like this:
SELECT T1.AcctNum
FROM (Table1 AS T1 LEFT JOIN Table2 AS T2 ON T1.AcctNum = T2.AcctNum)
LEFT JOIN Table3 AS T3 ON T1.AcctNum = T3.AcctNum
WHERE (((T2.AcctNum) Is Null) AND ((T3.AcctNum) Is Null));
You can use Access to create a view called TableCombined that is a union of both Table2 and Table3.
At that point, you can use your left join and Is Null query and join TableCombined to Table1.
Hope this helps!
You can also do a NOT EXISTS statement which makes sense logically for what you are trying to achieve.
For example:
SELECT ACCTNUM
FROM TABLE1
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT TABLE2.ACCTNUM FROM TABLE2 INNER JOIN TABLE3 WHERE TABLE2.ACCTNUM IS NULL AND TABLE3.ACCTNUM IS NULL)
For example, there are two tables:
create table Table1 (id int, Name varchar (10))
create table Table2 (id int, Name varchar (10))
Table1 data as follows:
Id Name
-------------
1 A
2 B
Table2 data as follows:
Id Name
-------------
1 A
2 B
3 C
If I execute both below mentioned SQL statements, both outputs will be the same:
select *
from Table1
left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
select *
from Table2
right join Table1 on Table1.id = Table2.id
Please explain the difference between left and right join in the above SQL statements.
Select * from Table1 left join Table2 ...
and
Select * from Table2 right join Table1 ...
are indeed completely interchangeable. Try however Table2 left join Table1 (or its identical pair, Table1 right join Table2) to see a difference. This query should give you more rows, since Table2 contains a row with an id which is not present in Table1.
Table from which you are taking data is 'LEFT'.
Table you are joining is 'RIGHT'.
LEFT JOIN: Take all items from left table AND (only) matching items from right table.
RIGHT JOIN: Take all items from right table AND (only) matching items from left table.
So:
Select * from Table1 left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
gives:
Id Name
-------------
1 A
2 B
but:
Select * from Table1 right join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
gives:
Id Name
-------------
1 A
2 B
3 C
you were right joining table with less rows on table with more rows
AND
again, left joining table with less rows on table with more rows
Try:
If Table1.Rows.Count > Table2.Rows.Count Then
' Left Join
Else
' Right Join
End If
You seem to be asking, "If I can rewrite a RIGHT OUTER JOIN using LEFT OUTER JOIN syntax then why have a RIGHT OUTER JOIN syntax at all?" I think the answer to this question is, because the designers of the language didn't want to place such a restriction on users (and I think they would have been criticized if they did), which would force users to change the order of tables in the FROM clause in some circumstances when merely changing the join type.
select fields
from tableA --left
left join tableB --right
on tableA.key = tableB.key
The table in the from in this example tableA, is on the left side of relation.
tableA <- tableB
[left]------[right]
So if you want to take all rows from the left table (tableA), even if there are no matches in the right table (tableB), you'll use the "left join".
And if you want to take all rows from the right table (tableB), even if there are no matches in the left table (tableA), you will use the right join.
Thus, the following query is equivalent to that used above.
select fields
from tableB
right join tableA on tableB.key = tableA.key
Your two statements are equivalent.
Most people only use LEFT JOIN since it seems more intuitive, and it's universal syntax - I don't think all RDBMS support RIGHT JOIN.
I feel we may require AND condition in where clause of last figure of Outer Excluding JOIN so that we get the desired result of A Union B Minus A Interaction B.
I feel query needs to be updated to
SELECT <select_list>
FROM Table_A A
FULL OUTER JOIN Table_B B
ON A.Key = B.Key
WHERE A.Key IS NULL AND B.Key IS NULL
If we use OR , then we will get all the results of A Union B
select *
from Table1
left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
In the first query Left join compares left-sided table table1 to right-sided table table2.
In Which all the properties of table1 will be shown, whereas in table2 only those properties will be shown in which condition get true.
select *
from Table2
right join Table1 on Table1.id = Table2.id
In the first query Right join compares right-sided table table1 to left-sided table table2.
In Which all the properties of table1 will be shown, whereas in table2 only those properties will be shown in which condition get true.
Both queries will give the same result because the order of table declaration in query are different like you are declaring table1 and table2 in left and right respectively in first left join query, and also declaring table1 and table2 in right and left respectively in second right join query.
This is the reason why you are getting the same result in both queries. So if you want different result then execute this two queries respectively,
select *
from Table1
left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
select *
from Table1
right join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
Select * from Table1 t1 Left Join Table2 t2 on t1.id=t2.id
By definition: Left Join selects all columns mentioned with the "select" keyword from Table 1 and the columns from Table 2 which matches the criteria after the "on" keyword.
Similarly,By definition: Right Join selects all columns mentioned with the "select" keyword from Table 2 and the columns from Table 1 which matches the criteria after the "on" keyword.
Referring to your question, id's in both the tables are compared with all the columns needed to be thrown in the output. So, ids 1 and 2 are common in the both the tables and as a result in the result you will have four columns with id and name columns from first and second tables in order.
*select *
from Table1
left join Table2 on Table1.id = Table2.id
The above expression,it takes all the records (rows) from table 1 and columns, with matching id's from table 1 and table 2, from table 2.
select *
from Table2
right join Table1 on Table1.id = Table2.id**
Similarly from the above expression,it takes all the records (rows) from table 1 and columns, with matching id's from table 1 and table 2, from table 2. (remember, this is a right join so all the columns from table2 and not from table1 will be considered).
I am a little confused as to how to approach this SQL query.
I have two tables (equal number of records), and I would like to return a column with which is the division between the two.
In other words, here is my not-working-correctly query:
SELECT( (SELECT v FROM Table1) / (SELECT DotProduct FROM Table2) );
How would I do this? All I want it a column where each row equals the same row in Table1 divided by the same row in Table2. The resulting table should have the same number of rows, but I am getting something with a lot more rows than the original two tables.
I am at a complete loss. Any advice?
It sounds like you have some kind of key between the two tables. You need an Inner Join:
select t1.v / t2.DotProduct
from Table1 as t1
inner join Table2 as t2
on t1.ForeignKey = t2.PrimaryKey
Should work. Just make sure you watch out for division by zero errors.
You didn't specify the full table structure so I will assume a common ID column to link rows in the tables.
SELECT table1.v/table2.DotProduct
FROM Table1 INNER JOIN Table2
ON (Table1.ID=Table2.ID)
You need to do a JOIN on the tables and divide the columns you want.
SELECT (Table1.v / Table2.DotProduct) FROM Table1 JOIN Table2 ON something
You need to substitue something to tell SQL how to match up the rows:
Something like: Table1.id = Table2.id
In case your fileds are both integers you need to do this to avoid integer math:
select t1.v / (t2.DotProduct*1.00)
from Table1 as t1
inner join Table2 as t2
on t1.ForeignKey = t2.PrimaryKey
If you have multiple values in table2 relating to values in table1 you need to specify which to use -here I chose the largest one.
select t1.v / (max(t2.DotProduct)*1.00)
from Table1 as t1
inner join Table2 as t2
on t1.ForeignKey = t2.PrimaryKey
Group By t1.v