i am using Microsoft SQL Server 2008
i would like to save the result of a subquery to reuse it in a following subquery.
Is this possible?
What is best practice to do this? (I am very new to SQL)
My query looks like:
INSERT INTO [dbo].[TestTable]
(
[a]
,[b]
)
SELECT
(
SELECT TOP 1 MAT_WS_ID
FROM #TempTableX AS X_ALIAS
WHERE OUTERBASETABLE.LT_ALL_MATERIAL = X_ALIAS.MAT_RM_NAME
)
,(
SELECT TOP 1 MAT_WS_NAME
FROM #TempTableY AS Y_ALIAS
WHERE Y_ALIAS.MAT_WS_ID = MAT_WS_ID
--(
--SELECT TOP 1 MAT_WS_ID
--FROM #TempTableX AS X_ALIAS
--WHERE OUTERBASETABLE.LT_ALL_MATERIAL = X_ALIAS.MAT_RM_NAME
--)
)
FROM [dbo].[LASERTECHNO] AS OUTERBASETABLE
My question is:
Is this correct what i did.
I replaced the second SELECT Statement in the WHERE-Clause for [b] (which is commented out and exactly the same as for [a]), with the result of the first SELECT Statement of [a] (=MAT_WS_ID).
It seems to give the right results.
But i dont understand why!
I mean MAT_WS_ID is part of both temporary tables X_ALIAS and Y_ALIAS.
So in the SELECT statement for [b], in the scope of the [b]-select-query, MAT_WS_ID could only be known from the Y_ALIAS table. (Or am i wrong, i am more a C++, maybe the scope things in SQL and C++ are totally different)
I just wannt to know what is the best way in SQL Server to reuse an scalar select result.
Or should i just dont care and copy the select for every column and the sql server optimizes it by its own?
One approach would be outer apply:
SELECT mat.MAT_WS_ID
, (
SELECT TOP 1 MAT_WS_NAME
FROM #TempTableY AS Y_ALIAS
WHERE Y_ALIAS.MAT_WS_ID = mat.MAT_WS_ID
)
FROM [dbo].[LASERTECHNO] AS OUTERBASETABLE
OUTER APPLY
(
SELECT TOP 1 MAT_WS_ID
FROM #TempTableX AS X_ALIAS
WHERE OUTERBASETABLE.LT_ALL_MATERIAL = X_ALIAS.MAT_RM_NAME
) as mat
You could rank rows in #TempTableX and #TempTableY partitioning them by MAT_RM_NAME in the former and by MAT_WS_ID in the latter, then use normal joins with filtering by rownum = 1 in both tables (rownum being the column containing the ranking numbers in each of the two tables):
WITH x_ranked AS (
SELECT
*,
rownum = ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY MAT_RM_NAME ORDER BY (SELECT 1))
FROM #TempTableX
),
y_ranked AS (
SELECT
*,
rownum = ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY MAT_WS_ID ORDER BY (SELECT 1))
FROM #TempTableY
)
INSERT INTO dbo.TestTable (a, b)
SELECT
x.MAT_WS_ID,
y.MAT_WS_NAME
FROM dbo.LASERTECHNO t
LEFT JOIN x_ranked x ON t.LT_ALL_MATERIAL = x.MAT_RM_NAME AND x.rownum = 1
LEFT JOIN y_ranked y ON x.MAT_WS_ID = y.MAT_WS_ID AND y.rownum = 1
;
The ORDER BY (SELECT 1) bit is a trick to specify an indeterminate ordering, which, accordingly, would result in indeterminate rownum = 1 rows picked by the query. That is to more or less duplicate your TOP 1 without an explicit order, but I would recommend you to specify a more sensible ORDER BY clause to make the results more predictable.
Related
I have an oracle query as follows but when I make changes to pagination the results are different. what should i pass for my code
SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT b.*,
ROWNUM r__
FROM (
select a.KODE_KLAIM,
a.NO_SS,
a.LA,
a.NAMA_TK,
a.KODE_K,
(
select tk.TEM_LAHIR
from KN.VW_KN_TK tk
where tk.KODE_K = a.KODE_K and rownum=1
) TEM_LAHIR,
(
select TO_CHAR(tk.TLAHIR, 'DD/MM/RRRR')
from KN.VW_KTK tk
where tk.KODE_K = a.KODE_K
and rownum=1
) TLAHIR
from PN.KLAIM a
where nvl(a.STATUS_BATAL,'X') = 'T'
and A.NOMOR IS NOT NULL
and A.TIPE_KLAIM = 'JPN01'
)b
)
where 1 = 1
WHERE ROWNUM < ( ( ? * ? ) + 1 )
WHERE r__ >= ( ( ( ? - 1 ) * ? ) + 1 )
but i run this query i have result ORA-00900: invalid SQL statement
You have three WHERE clauses at the end (and no ORDER BY clause). To make it syntactically valid you could change the second and third WHERE clauses to AND.
However, you mention pagination so what you probably want is to use:
SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT b.*,
ROWNUM r__
FROM (
select ...
from ...
ORDER BY something
)b
WHERE ROWNUM < :page_size * :page_number + 1
)
WHERE r__ >= ( :page_number - 1 ) * :page_size + 1
Note: You can replace the named bind variables with anonymous bind variables if you want.
Or, if you are using Oracle 12 or later then you can use the OFFSET x ROWS FETCH FIRST y ROWS ONLY syntax:
select ...
from ...
ORDER BY something
OFFSET (:page_number - 1) * :page_size ROWS
FETCH FIRST :page_size ROWS ONLY;
Additionally, you have several correlated sub-queries such as:
select tk.TEM_LAHIR
from KN.VW_KN_TK tk
where tk.KODE_K = a.KODE_K and rownum=1
This will find the first matching row that the SQL engine happens to read from the datafile and is effectively finding a random row. If you want a specific row then you need an ORDER BY clause and you need to filter using ROWNUM AFTER the ORDER BY clause has been applied.
From Oracle 12, the correlated sub-query would be:
select tk.TEM_LAHIR
from KN.VW_KN_TK tk
where tk.KODE_K = a.KODE_K
ORDER BY something
FETCH FIRST ROW ONLY
I am trying to use COUNT(DISTINC column) OVER(PARTITION BY column) when I am using COUNT + window function(OVER).
I get an error like the one in the title and can't get it to work.
I have looked into how to deal with this error, but I have not found an example of how to deal with such a complex query as the one below.
I cannot find an example of how to deal with such a complex query as shown below, and I am not sure how to handle it.
The COUNT part of the problem exists on line 65.
How can such a complex query be resolved without slowing down?
WITH RECURSIVE "cte" AS((
SELECT
"videos_productvideocomment"."id",
"videos_productvideocomment"."user_id",
"videos_productvideocomment"."video_id",
"videos_productvideocomment"."parent_id",
"videos_productvideocomment"."text",
"videos_productvideocomment"."commented_at",
"videos_productvideocomment"."edited_at",
"videos_productvideocomment"."created_at",
"videos_productvideocomment"."updated_at",
"videos_productvideocomment"."id" AS "root_id"
FROM
"videos_productvideocomment"
WHERE
(
"videos_productvideocomment"."parent_id" IS NULL
AND "videos_productvideocomment"."video_id" = 'f264433c-c0af-49cc-8b40-84453da71b2d'
)
) UNION(
SELECT
"videos_productvideocomment"."id",
"videos_productvideocomment"."user_id",
"videos_productvideocomment"."video_id",
"videos_productvideocomment"."parent_id",
"videos_productvideocomment"."text",
"videos_productvideocomment"."commented_at",
"videos_productvideocomment"."edited_at",
"videos_productvideocomment"."created_at",
"videos_productvideocomment"."updated_at",
"cte"."root_id" AS "root_id"
FROM
"videos_productvideocomment"
INNER JOIN
"cte"
ON "videos_productvideocomment"."parent_id" = "cte"."id"
))
SELECT
*,
EXISTS(
SELECT
(1) AS "a"
FROM
"videos_productvideolikecomment" U0
WHERE
(
U0."comment_id" = t."id"
AND U0."user_id" = '3bd3bc86-0335-481e-9fd2-eb2fb1168f48'
)
LIMIT 1
) AS "liked"
FROM
(
SELECT DISTINCT
"cte"."id",
"cte"."created_at",
"cte"."updated_at",
"cte"."user_id",
"cte"."text",
"cte"."commented_at",
"cte"."edited_at",
"cte"."parent_id",
"cte"."video_id",
"cte"."root_id" AS "root_id",
COUNT(DISTINCT "cte"."root_id") OVER(PARTITION BY "cte"."root_id") AS "reply_count", <--- here
COUNT("videos_productvideolikecomment"."id") OVER(PARTITION BY "cte"."id") AS "liked_count"
FROM
"cte"
LEFT OUTER JOIN
"videos_productvideolikecomment"
ON (
"cte"."id" = "videos_productvideolikecomment"."comment_id"
)
) t
WHERE
t."id" = t."root_id"
ORDER BY
CASE
WHEN t."user_id" = '3bd3bc86-0335-481e-9fd2-eb2fb1168f48' THEN 0
ELSE 1
END ASC,
"liked_count" DESC
DISTINCT will look for duplicates and remove it, but in big data it will take a lot of time to process this query, you should process the middle of the record in the programming part I think it will be fast than. Thank
I have noticed strange behaviour in some SQL code used for address matching at the company I work for & have created some test SQL to illustrate the issue.
; WITH Temp (Id, Diff) AS (
SELECT 9218, 0
UNION
SELECT 9219, 0
UNION
SELECT 9220, 0
)
SELECT TOP 1 * FROM Temp ORDER BY Diff DESC
Returns 9218 but
; WITH Temp (Id, Name) AS (
SELECT 9218, 'Sonnedal'
UNION
SELECT 9219, 'Lammermoor'
UNION
SELECT 9220, 'Honeydew'
)
SELECT TOP 1 *, DIFFERENCE(Name, '') FROM Temp ORDER BY DIFFERENCE(Name, '') DESC
returns 9219 even though the Difference() is 0 for all records as you can see here:
; WITH Temp (Id, Name) AS (
SELECT 9218, 'Sonnedal'
UNION
SELECT 9219, 'Lammermoor'
UNION
SELECT 9220, 'Honeydew'
)
SELECT *, DIFFERENCE(Name, '') FROM Temp ORDER BY DIFFERENCE(Name, '') DESC
which returns
9218 Sonnedal 0
9219 Lammermoor 0
9220 Honeydew 0
Does anyone know why this happens? I am writing C# to replace existing SQL & need to return the same results so I can test that my code produces the same results. But I can't see why the actual SQL used returns 9219 rather than 9218 & it doesn't seem to make sense. It seems it's down to the Difference() function but it returns 0 for all the record in question.
When you call:
SELECT TOP 1 *, DIFFERENCE(Name, '')
FROM Temp l
ORDER BY DIFFERENCE(Name, '') DESC
All three records have a DIFFERENCE value of zero, and hence SQL Server is free to choose from any of the three records for ordering. That is to say, there is no guarantee which order you will get. The same is true for your second query. Actually, it is possible that the ordering for the same query could even change over time. In practice, if you expect a certain ordering, you should provide exact logic for it, e.g.
SELECT TOP 1 *
FROM Temp
ORDER BY Id;
Lets say I have many sql statements like this one:
select *
from [A]
where a in (
select a
from [B]
where b = 'c'
)
order by d;
Since my database is huge, I just need to determine how many rows this query will fetch. Of course I can really fetch all rows and count it but my intention is to avoid fetching since that would be a big overhead.
I have tried to extend query as follows:
select count (*)
from (
select *
from [A]
where a in (
select a
from [B]
where b = 'c'
)
order by d
) as table;
That works fine for some tables but for some (like this one in example) SQL server throws this:
The ORDER BY clause is invalid in views, inline functions, derived tables, subqueries, and common table expressions, unless TOP or FOR XML is also specified.
Consider that I'm not allowed to change any original query, I can just extend it...
Any idea?
Thanks.
EDIT: I'm pretty sure there is some solution related to ##ROWCOUNT field, but not sure how to use it...
Just remove the order by in the subquery. It doesn't affect the number of rows:
select count(*)
from (select *
from [A]
where a in (select a from [B] where b = 'c')
) as table;
Actually, this is better written as:
select count(*)
from [A]
where a in (select a from [B] where b = 'c')
That is, just replace the select * with select count(*).
Finally, if you have to keep the queries the same, then use top 100 percent:
select count(*)
from (select top 100 percent *
from [A]
where a in (select a from [B] where b = 'c')
order by d
) as table;
This does require changing the original queries, but in a way that does not affect what they output and does allow them to be used as ctes/subqueries.
You are allowed to use order by in subqueries when you also use top.
EDIT:
If you are using dynamic SQL, you might have to do something like:
#sql = 'select count(*) from (' +
(case when #sql not like 'SELECT TOP %'
then stuff(#sql, 1, 7, 'SELECT top 100 percent')
else #sql
end) +
+ ')';
The logic could be a bit more complicated if your SQL is not well formatted.
I have 2 two tables questionpool and question where question is a many to one of question pool. I have created a query using a sub select query which returns the correct random results but I need to return more than one column from the question table.
The intent of the query is to return a random test from the 'question' table for each 'QuizID' from the 'Question Pool' table.
SELECT QuestionPool.QuestionPoolID,
(
SELECT TOP (1) Question.QuestionPoolID
FROM Question
WHERE Question.GroupID = QuestionPool.QuestionPoolID
ORDER BY NEWID()
)
FROM QuestionPool
WHERE QuestionPool.QuizID = '5'
OUTER APPLY is suited to this:
Select *
FROM QuestionPool
OUTER APPLY
(
SELECT TOP 1 *
FROM Question
WHERE Question.GroupID = QuestionPool.QuestionPoolID
ORDER BY NEWID()
) x
WHERE QuestionPool.QuizID = '5'
Another example of OUTER APPLY use http://www.ienablemuch.com/2012/04/outer-apply-walkthrough.html
Live test: http://www.sqlfiddle.com/#!3/d8afc/1
create table m(i int, o varchar(10));
insert into m values
(1,'alpha'),(2,'beta'),(3,'delta');
create table x(i int, j varchar, k varchar(10));
insert into x values
(1,'a','hello'),
(1,'b','howdy'),
(2,'x','great'),
(2,'y','super'),
(3,'i','uber'),
(3,'j','neat'),
(3,'a','nice');
select m.*, '' as sep, r.*
from m
outer apply
(
select top 1 *
from x
where i = m.i
order by newid()
) r
Not familiar with SQL server, but I hope this would do:
Select QuestionPool.QuestionPoolID, v.QuestionPoolID, v.xxx -- etc
FROM QuestionPool
JOIN
(
SELECT TOP (1) *
FROM Question
WHERE Question.GroupID = QuestionPool.QuestionPoolID
ORDER BY NEWID()
) AS v ON v.QuestionPoolID = QuestionPool.QuestionPoolID
WHERE QuestionPool.QuizID = '5'
Your query appears to be bringing back an arbitrary Question.QuestionPoolId for each QuestionPool.QuestionPoolId subject to the QuizId filter.
I think the following query does this:
select qp.QuestionPoolId, max(q.QuestionPoolId) as any_QuestionPoolId
from Question q join
qp.QuestionPoolId qp
on q.GroupId = qp.QuestionPoolId
WHERE QuestionPool.QuizID = '5'
group by qp.QuestionPoolId
This returns a particular question.
The following query would allow you to get more fields:
select qp.QuestionPoolId, q.*
from (select q.*, row_number() over (partition by GroupId order by (select NULL)) as randrownum
from Question q
) join
(select qp.QuestionPoolId, max(QuetionPool qp
on q.GroupId = qp.QuestionPoolId
WHERE QuestionPool.QuizID = '5' and
randrownum = 1
This uses the row_number() to arbitrarily enumerate the rows. The "Select NULL" provides the random ordering (alternatively, you could use "order by GroupId".
Common Table Expressions (CTEs) are rather handy for this type of thing...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms175972(v=sql.90).aspx