Here's my requirement:
I have 2 tables, orders and orderContents. For each row in the orders table, there are a certain number of rows that contain description of the order. id column serves as foreign key.
What I want is to get all the details for each order (details from orderContents, including id column from orders table) table, but limit no. of results based on common column (foreign key, id)
Problem is that it limits orderContents rows, instead of limiting order rows.
How can I achieve desired effect?
EDIT: Updating tables and desired result set
Orders table:
OrderContents table:
Desired result on limiting number of records to 2:
I'm assuming you are trying to say that you want the results from both tables but only for the first X orders. If so, try this:
SELECT OC.*, O.* FROM OrderContents OC
INNER JOIN (SELECT *
FROM Orders
ORDER BY ID
LIMIT 2) O ON O.ID=OC.ID
Related
Good Evening Stackoverflow team/members
Oracle version: 11g Release 11.1.0.6.0 - 64bit Production
I have two Tables: ORDERS and ITEMS.
ORDERS looks like this
ORDERS
ITEMS looks like this
enter image description here
Table ORDERS has 1 or more Order_Number each assigned to at least one depot or more. the column Total_Value SHOULD store exactly the sum of the item values associated to an order number. the table ITEMS in fact stores via parcel_code items values for a specific order_number/s.
my db has a bug for orders that have more than one depot assigned to an order number (e.g. order number 1 and 4) do not store the actual total value correctly.
in my case I cannot figure out the UPDATE statement that would select order numbers that would take the sum from the table ITEMS and link it via parcel_code and update the column total_value in the table ORDERS.
the result of my update should give this back:
for table orders i should get back for
order number 1:
for both rows total value 1120
order number 4
for both rows total value: 350
order number 2 and 3 as they are single depot order remain the same:
50 and 20
pseudo-code :
update ORDERS
set total_value = (select sum(I.item_value) from ITEMS I, ORDERS O where O.parcel_code = I.parcel_code)
i would update also those orders which have on e depot assigned as they will exactly the same.
i was looking at MERGE statements or INNER select queries. the problem i am facing is that my update must be dynamic. this means not driven by values but by columns joins as i may have to create a process that update this every day.
can someone help me?
You need to join the items and orders tables together, then select the sum of all item_values where your order_number is equal to the row which you are updating (in table o1).
update
Orders o1
set o1.total_value = (
select sum(i.item_value) from Items i
join Orders o2 on o2.parcel_code = i.parcel_code
where o2.Order_number = o1.Order_number
)
I have two tables. Table 1 has about 750,000 rows and table 2 has 4 million rows. Table two has an extra ID field in which I am interested, so I want to write a query that will check if the 750,000 table 1 records exist in table 2. For all those rows in table 1 that exist in table 2, I want the respective ID based on same SSN. I tried the following query:
SELECT distinct b.UID, a.*
FROM [Analysis].[dbo].[Table1] A, [Proteus_8_2].dbo.Table2 B
where a.ssn = b.ssn
Instead of getting 750,000 rows in the output, I am getting 5.4 million records. Where am i going wrong?
Please help?
You're requesting all the rows in your select if b.UID is a unique field in column two.
Also if SSN is not unique in table one you can get the higher row count than the total row count for table 2.
You need to consider what you want from table 2 again.
EDIT
You can try this to return distinct combinations of ssn and uid when ssn is found in table 2 provided that ssn and uid have a cardinality of 1:1, i.e., every unique ssn has a single unique uid.
select distinct
a.ssn,b.[UID]
from [Analysis].[dbo].[Table1] a
cross apply
( select top 1 [uid] from [Proteus_8_2].[dbo].[Table2] where ssn = a.ssn ) b
where b.[UID] is not null
Try with LEFT JOIN
SELECT distinct b.UID, a.*
FROM [Analysis].[dbo].[Table1] A LEFT JOIN [Proteus_8_2].dbo.Table2 B
on a.ssn = b.ssn
Since the order detail table is in a one-many relationship to the order table, that is the expected result of any join. If you want something different, you need to define for us the business rule that will tell us how to select only one record from the Order detail table. You cannot effectively write SQL code without understanding the business rules that of what you are trying to achieve. You should never just willy nilly select one record out of the many, you need to understand which one you want.
I am having trouble with writing a SQL query in Access with foreign keys. There are two tables, 'Customers'(ID, Name, Surname) and 'Orders'(ID, Customer, Date, Volume). ID fields are primary, and Orders.Customer is a foreign key linked to Customers.ID, so a customer can have many orders or none.
My goal is to do a search on customers based on many criteria, one of which being if customers have at least an order which volume is superior to a certain quantity. I tried joins with SELECT DISTINCT but it still gives me duplicate results, plus I had to create an empty order for every customer without orders if the query didn't use the above condition.
Does anyone have an idea about that? Maybe some special instruction on foreign keys or 2 separate queries?
Based on the information you give, i only can give you hints on what I think you're doing/understanding wrong :
SELECT DISTINCT does select you a unique record, not a unique value, so if your statement selects all fields (*), distinct won't help you much there.
My guess is you had to create an empty order for each customer because you used INNER JOIN, try LEFT OUTER JOIN instead
For example :
SELECT DISTINCT Customers.*
FROM Customers
LEFT OUTER JOIN Orders
ON (Orders.Customer = Customers.id)
WHERE Volume > put_your_value
I have a table that has a composite key of 3 columns
st_id, sj_id, order
and want to delete a row based on a specific st_id and sj_id and by taking the max(order)
Could you please help?
As far as I know, you'll need to do this in two steps (this is from memory, so may not compile first time):
DELETE
FROM table
WHERE st_id = my_st_id
AND sj_id = my_sj_id
AND order IN (
SELECT MAX(order)
FROM table
WHERE st_id = my_st_id
AND sj_id = my_sj_id)
What this does is perform the inner (SELECT) query first, returning the maximum order. Those results then get passed to the outer query which does the delete.
I am using the following query to obtain some sales figures. The problem is that it is returning the wrong data.
I am joining together three tables tbl_orders tbl_orderitems tbl_payment. The tbl_orders table holds summary information, the tbl_orderitems holds the items ordered and the tbl_payment table holds payment information regarding the order. Multiple payments can be placed against each order.
I am trying to get the sum of the items sum(mon_orditems_pprice), and also the amount of items sold count(uid_orderitems).
When I run the following query against a specific order number, which I know has 1 order item. It returns a count of 2 and the sum of two items.
Item ProdTotal ProdCount
Westvale Climbing Frame 1198 2
This order has two payment records held in the tbl_payment table, which is causing the double count. If I remove the payment table join it reports the correct figures, or if I select an order which has a single payment it works as well. Am I missing something, I am tired!!??
SELECT
txt_orditems_pname,
SUM(mon_orditems_pprice) AS prodTotal,
COUNT(uid_orderitems) AS prodCount
FROM dbo.tbl_orders
INNER JOIN dbo.tbl_orderitems ON (dbo.tbl_orders.uid_orders = dbo.tbl_orderitems.uid_orditems_orderid)
INNER JOIN dbo.tbl_payment ON (dbo.tbl_orders.uid_orders = dbo.tbl_payment.uid_pay_orderid)
WHERE
uid_orditems_orderid = 61571
GROUP BY
dbo.tbl_orderitems.txt_orditems_pname
ORDER BY
dbo.tbl_orderitems.txt_orditems_pname
Any suggestions?
Thank you.
Drill down Table columns
dbo.tbl_payment.bit_pay_paid (1/0) Has this payment been paid, yes no
dbo.tbl_orders.bit_order_archive (1/0) Is this order archived, yes no
dbo.tbl_orders.uid_order_webid (integer) Web Shop's ID
dbo.tbl_orders.bit_order_preorder (1/0) Is this a pre-order, yes no
YEAR(dbo.tbl_orders.dte_order_stamp) (2012) Sales year
dbo.tbl_orders.txt_order_status (varchar) Is the order dispatched, awaiting delivery
dbo.tbl_orderitems.uid_orditems_pcatid (integer) Product category ID
It's a normal behavior, if you remove grouping clause you'll see that there really are 2 rows after joining and they both have 599 as a mon_orditems_pprice hence the SUM is correct. When there is a multiple match in any joined table the entire output row becomes multiple and the data that is being summed (or counted or aggregated in any other way) also gets summed multiple times. Try this:
SELECT txt_orditems_pname,
SUM(mon_orditems_pprice) AS prodTotal,
COUNT(uid_orderitems) AS prodCount
FROM dbo.tbl_orders
INNER JOIN dbo.tbl_orderitems ON (dbo.tbl_orders.uid_orders = dbo.tbl_orderitems.uid_orditems_orderid)
INNER JOIN
(
SELECT x.uid_pay_orderid
FROM dbo.tbl_payment x
GROUP BY x.uid_pay_orderid
) AS payments ON (dbo.tbl_orders.uid_orders = payments.uid_pay_orderid)
WHERE
uid_orditems_orderid = 61571
GROUP BY
dbo.tbl_orderitems.txt_orditems_pname
ORDER BY
dbo.tbl_orderitems.txt_orditems_pname
I don't know what data from tbl_payment you are using, are any of the columns from the SELECT list actually from tbl_payment? Why is tbl_payment being joined?