How can I set all values in OrderNumber column from 1 to n(when they are ordered by primary key) where n is entries count in table?
EDIT:
Let's assume we have 3 entries with ID's 4,7 and 15 ... I want to set their OrderValues 1,2 and 3.
I'm using SQL Server 2008.
;WITH x AS (SELECT ID, OrderValues,
rn = ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY ID)
FROM dbo.tablename
)
UPDATE x SET OrderValues = rn;
However, why on earth do you want to do this, when you can derive this information using the ROW_NUMBER() function at query time? Storing the values means that they are guaranteed to be out of date and out of sync the moment you insert/update/delete a single row in the table. So unless you plan to run this update after every DML operation (e.g. using a trigger), which isn't very logical to me, you're likely much better off getting these row_number values when you run the query vs. storing them in the table.
Related
My situation is that a SQL statement which is not predictable, is given to the program and I need to do pagination on top of it. The final SQL statement would be similar to the following one:
SELECT * FROM (*Given SQL Statement*) b
OFFSET 0 ROWS FETCH NEXT 50 ROWS ONLY;
The problem here is that the *Given SQL Statement* is unpredictable. It may or may not contain order by clause. I am not able to change the query result of this SQL Statement and I need to do pagination on it.
I searched for solution on the Internet, but all of them suggested to use an arbitrary column, like primary key, in order by clause. But it will change the original order.
The short answer is that it can't be done, or at least can't be done properly.
The problem is that SQL Server (or any RDBMS) does not and can not guarantee the order of the records returned from a query without an order by clause.
This means that you can't use paging on such queries.
Further more, if you use an order by clause on a column that appears multiple times in your resultset, the order of the result set is still not guaranteed inside groups of values in said column - quick example:
;WITH cte (a, b)
AS
(
SELECT 1, 'a'
UNION ALL
SELECT 1, 'b'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'a'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'b'
)
SELECT *
FROM cte
ORDER BY a
Both result sets are valid, and you can't know in advance what will you get:
a b
-----
1 b
1 a
2 b
2 a
a b
-----
1 a
1 b
2 a
2 b
(and of course, you might get other sorts)
The problem here is that the *Given SQL Statement" is unpredictable. It may or may not contain order by clause.
your inner query(unpredictable sql statement) should not contain order by,even if it contains,order is not guaranteed.
To get guaranteed order,you have to order by some column.for the results to be deterministic,the ordered column/columns should be unique
Please note: what I'm about to suggest is probably horribly inefficient and should really only be used to help you go back to the project leader and tell them that pagination of an unordered query should not be done. Having said that...
From your comments you say you are able to change the SQL statement before it is executed.
You could write the results of the original query to a temporary table, adding row count field to be used for subsequent pagination ordering.
Therefore any original ordering is preserved and you can now paginate.
But of course the reason for needing pagination in the first place is to avoid sending large amounts of data to the client application. Although this does prevent that, you will still be copying data to a temp table which, depending on the row size and count, could be very slow.
You also have the problem that the page size is coming from the client as part of the SQL statement. Parsing the statement to pick that out could be tricky.
As other notified using anyway without using a sorted query will not be safe, But as you know about it and search about it, I can suggest using a query like this (But not recommended as a good way)
;with cte as (
select *,
row_number() over (order by (select 0)) rn
from (
-- Your query
) t
)
select *
from cte
where rn between (#pageNumber-1)*#pageSize+1 and #pageNumber*#pageSize
[SQL Fiddle Demo]
I finally found a simple way to do it without any order by on a specific column:
declare #start AS INTEGER = 1, #count AS INTEGER = 5;
select * from (SELECT *,ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY (SELECT 1)) AS fakeCounter
FROM (select * from mytable) AS t) AS t2 order by fakeCounter OFFSET #start ROWS
FETCH NEXT #count ROWS ONLY
where select * from mytable can be any query
I have a table with n number of records
How can i retrieve the nth record and (n-1)th record from my table in SQL without using derived table ?
I have tried using ROWID as
select * from table where rowid in (select max(rowid) from table);
It is giving the nth record but i want the (n-1)th record also .
And is there any other method other than using max,derived table and pseudo columns
Thanks
You cannot depend on rowid to get you to the last row in the table. You need an auto-incrementing id or creation time to have the proper ordering.
You can use, for instance:
select *
from (select t.*, row_number() over (order by <id> desc) as seqnum
from t
) t
where seqnum <= 2
Although allowed in the syntax, the order by clause in a subquery is ignored (for instance http://docs.oracle.com/javadb/10.8.2.2/ref/rrefsqlj13658.html).
Just to be clear, rowids have nothing to do with the ordering of rows in a table. The Oracle documentation is quite clear that they specify a physical access path for the data (http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/server.111/b28318/datatype.htm#i6732). It is true that in an empty database, inserting records into a newtable will probably create a monotonically increasing sequence of row ids. But you cannot depend on this. The only guarantees with rowids are that they are unique within a table and are the fastest way to access a particular row.
I have to admit that I cannot find good documentation on Oracle handling or not handling order by's in subqueries in its most recent versions. ANSI SQL does not require compliant databases to support order by in subqueries. Oracle syntax allows it, and it seems to work in some cases, at least. My best guess is that it would probably work on a single processor, single threaded instance of Oracle, or if the data access is through an index. Once parallelism is introduced, the results would probably not be ordered. Since I started using Oracle (in the mid-1990s), I have been under the impression that order bys in subqueries are generally ignored. My advice would be to not depend on the functionality, until Oracle clearly states that it is supported.
select * from (select * from my_table order by rowid) where rownum <= 2
and for rows between N and M:
select * from (
select * from (
select * from my_table order by rowid
) where rownum <= M
) where rownum >= N
Try this
select top 2 * from table order by rowid desc
Assuming rowid as column in your table:
SELECT * FROM table ORDER BY rowid DESC LIMIT 2
I have a table that has a unique non-clustered index and 4 of the columns are listed in this index. I want to update a large number of rows in the table. If I do so, they will no longer be distinct, therefore the update fails because of the index.
I am wanting to disable the index and then delete the oldest duplicate rows. Here's my query so far:
SELECT t.itemid, t.fieldid, t.version, updated
FROM dbo.VersionedFields w
inner JOIN
(
SELECT itemid, fieldid, version, COUNT(*) AS QTY
FROM dbo.VersionedFields
GROUP BY itemid, fieldid, version
HAVING COUNT(*) > 1
) t
on w.itemid = t.itemid and w.fieldid = t.fieldid and w.version = t.version
The select inside the inner join returns the right number of records that we want to delete, but groups them so there is actually twice the amount.
After the join it shows all the records but all I want to delete is the oldest ones?
How can this be done?
If you say SQL (Structured Query Language), but really mean SQL Server (the Microsoft relatinonal database system) by it, and if you're using SQL Server 2005 or newer, you can use a CTE (Common Table Expression) for this purpose.
With this CTE, you can partition your data by some criteria - i.e. your ItemId (or a combination of columns) - and have SQL Server number all your rows starting at 1 for each of those partitions, ordered by some other criteria - i.e. probably version (or some other column).
So try something like this:
;WITH PartitionedData AS
(
SELECT
itemid, fieldid, version,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY ItemId ORDER BY version DESC) AS 'RowNum'
FROM dbo.VersionedFields
)
DELETE FROM PartitionedData
WHERE RowNum > 1
Basically, you're partitioning your data by some criteria and numbering each partition, starting at 1 for each new partition, ordered by some other criteria (e.g. Date or Version).
So for each "partition" of data, the "newest" entry has RowNum = 1, and any others that belongs into the same partition (by means of having the same partitino values) will have sequentially numbered values from 2 up to however many rows there are in that partition.
If you want to keep only the newest entry - delete anything with a RowNum larger than 1 and you're done!
In SQL Server 2005 and above:
WITH q AS
(
SELECT *,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY itemid, fieldid, version ORDER BY updated DESC) AS rn
FROM versionedFields
)
DELETE
FROM q
WHERE rn > 1
Try something like:
DELETE FROM dbo.VersionedFields w WHERE w.version < (SELECT MAX(version) FROM dbo.VersionedFields)
Ofcourse, you'd want to limit the MAX(version) to only the versions of the field you're wanting to delete.
You probably need to look at this Stack Overflow answer (delete earlier of duplicate rows).
Essentially the technique uses grouping (or optionally, windowing) to find the minimum id value of a group in order to delete it. It may be more accurate to delete rows where the value <> max(row identifier).
So:
Drop unique index
Load data
Delete data using the grouping mechanism (ideally in a transaction, so that you can rollback if there is a mistake), then commit
Recreate the index.
Note that recreating an index on a big table can take a long time.
I am trying to update a table in my database with another row from another table. I have two parameters one being the ID and another being the row number (as you can select which row you want from the GUI)
this part of the code works fine, this returns one column of a single row.
(SELECT txtPageContent
FROM (select *, Row_Number() OVER (ORDER BY ArchiveDate asc) as rowid
from ARC_Content Where ContentID = #ContentID) as test
Where rowid = #rowID)
its just when i try to add the update/set it won't work. I am probably missing something
UPDATE TBL_Content
Set TBL_Content.txtPageContent = (select txtPageContent
FROM (select *, Row_Number() OVER (ORDER BY ArchiveDate asc) as rowid
from ARC_Content Where ContentID = #ContentID) as test
Where rowid = #rowID)
Thanks for the help! (i have tried top 1 with no avail)
I see a few issues with your update. First, I don't see any joining or selection criteria for the table that you're updating. That means that every row in the table will be updated with this new value. Is that really what you want?
Second, the row number between what is on the GUI and what you get back in the database may not match. Even if you reproduce the query used to create your list in the GUI (which is dangerous anyway, since it involves keeping the update and the select code always in sync), it's possible that someone could insert or delete or update a row between the time that you fill your list box and send that row number to the server for the update. It's MUCH better to use PKs (probably IDs in your case) to determine which row to use for updating.
That said, I think that the following will work for you (untested):
;WITH cte AS (
SELECT
txtPageContent,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY ArchiveDate ASC) AS rowid
FROM
ARC_Content
WHERE
ContentID = #ContentID)
UPDATE
TC
SET
txtPageContent = cte.txtPageContent
FROM
TBL_Content TC
INNER JOIN cte ON
rowid = #rowID
What is the most efficient way to read the last row with SQL Server?
The table is indexed on a unique key -- the "bottom" key values represent the last row.
If you're using MS SQL, you can try:
SELECT TOP 1 * FROM table_Name ORDER BY unique_column DESC
select whatever,columns,you,want from mytable
where mykey=(select max(mykey) from mytable);
You'll need some sort of uniquely identifying column in your table, like an auto-filling primary key or a datetime column (preferably the primary key). Then you can do this:
SELECT * FROM table_name ORDER BY unique_column DESC LIMIT 1
The ORDER BY column tells it to rearange the results according to that column's data, and the DESC tells it to reverse the results (thus putting the last one first). After that, the LIMIT 1 tells it to only pass back one row.
If some of your id are in order, i am assuming there will be some order in your db
SELECT * FROM TABLE WHERE ID = (SELECT MAX(ID) FROM TABLE)
I think below query will work for SQL Server with maximum performance without any sortable column
SELECT * FROM table
WHERE ID not in (SELECT TOP (SELECT COUNT(1)-1
FROM table)
ID
FROM table)
Hope you have understood it... :)
I tried using last in sql query in SQl server 2008 but it gives this err:
" 'last' is not a recognized built-in function name."
So I ended up using :
select max(WorkflowStateStatusId) from WorkflowStateStatus
to get the Id of the last row.
One could also use
Declare #i int
set #i=1
select WorkflowStateStatusId from Workflow.WorkflowStateStatus
where WorkflowStateStatusId not in (select top (
(select count(*) from Workflow.WorkflowStateStatus) - #i ) WorkflowStateStatusId from .WorkflowStateStatus)
You can use last_value: SELECT LAST_VALUE(column) OVER (PARTITION BY column ORDER BY column)...
I test it at one of my databases and it worked as expected.
You can also check de documentation here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh231517.aspx
OFFSET and FETCH NEXT are a feature of SQL Server 2012 to achieve SQL paging while displaying results.
The OFFSET argument is used to decide the starting row to return rows from a result and FETCH argument is used to return a set of number of rows.
SELECT *
FROM table_name
ORDER BY unique_column desc
OFFSET 0 Row
FETCH NEXT 1 ROW ONLY
SELECT TOP 1 id from comission_fees ORDER BY id DESC
In order to retrieve the last row of a table for MS SQL database 2005, You can use the following query:
select top 1 column_name from table_name order by column_name desc;
Note: To get the first row of the table for MS SQL database 2005, You can use the following query:
select top 1 column_name from table_name;
If you don't have any ordered column, you can use the physical id of each lines:
SELECT top 1 sys.fn_PhysLocFormatter(%%physloc%%) AS [File:Page:Slot],
T.*
FROM MyTable As T
order by sys.fn_PhysLocFormatter(%%physloc%%) DESC
SELECT * from Employees where [Employee ID] = ALL (SELECT MAX([Employee ID]) from Employees)
This is how you get the last record and update a field in Access DB.
UPDATE compalints SET tkt = addzone &'-'& customer_code &'-'& sn where sn in (select max(sn) from compalints )
If you have a Replicated table, you can have an Identity=1000 in localDatabase and Identity=2000 in the clientDatabase, so if you catch the last ID you may find always the last from client, not the last from the current connected database.
So the best method which returns the last connected database is:
SELECT IDENT_CURRENT('tablename')
Well I'm not getting the "last value" in a table, I'm getting the Last value per financial instrument. It's not the same but I guess it is relevant for some that are looking to look up on "how it is done now". I also used RowNumber() and CTE's and before that to simply take 1 and order by [column] desc. however we nolonger need to...
I am using SQL server 2017, we are recording all ticks on all exchanges globally, we have ~12 billion ticks a day, we store each Bid, ask, and trade including the volumes and the attributes of a tick (bid, ask, trade) of any of the given exchanges.
We have 253 types of ticks data for any given contract (mostly statistics) in that table, the last traded price is tick type=4 so, when we need to get the "last" of Price we use :
select distinct T.contractId,
LAST_VALUE(t.Price)over(partition by t.ContractId order by created ROWS BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING)
from [dbo].[Tick] as T
where T.TickType=4
You can see the execution plan on my dev system it executes quite efficient, executes in 4 sec while the exchange import ETL is pumping data into the table, there will be some locking slowing me down... that's just how live systems work.
It is very simple
select top 10 * from TableName order by 1 desc
SELECT * FROM TABLE WHERE ID = (SELECT MAX(ID) FROM TABLE)
I am pretty sure that it is:
SELECT last(column_name) FROM table
Becaause I use something similar:
SELECT last(id) FROM Status