I have a simple database with few tables (and some sample columns)
Employee (ID, Title, Content)
Project (ID, Title)
ProjectEmployee(ID ,EMPLOYEE_ID,PROJECT_ID)
Need to find employee's whose don't have any project using join query
I am able to do it using subquery
select * from employee
where id not in (select id from project_employee);
The LEFT JOIN with NOT NULL give you the expected results.
select e.*
from employee e
LEFT JOIN project_employee pe on pe.id = e.id
where pe.id is not null;
This would be best implemented using not exists, joining is not the correct solution if you do not need to return any columns from the joined table.
select *
from employee e
where not exists (select * from project_employee pe where pe.id = e.id)
I am facing an issue in terms of understanding the joins. Lets say for an example we have two tables employee and sales and now I have a query where we have sales of an employee using the id of the employee
select e.employeename
,s.city
,SUM(s.sales)
from employee e
left join (select sales,eid from sales) s on s.eid = e.id
group by 1,2
I'd like to understand why s.city wasn't showing up? and also would like to understand what is this concept called? Is it co related sub queries on Joins? Please help me down over here.
select
e.employeename
,s.city
,SUM(s.sales)
from employee e
left join (select sales,eid,city from sales) s on s.eid = e.id
group by 1,2
in the left join above you have to add city as well. The query Imagine select sales,eid,city from sales is a table itself and then from this table you are selecting city (your second column s.city) this will run error as your table doesn't have a city column yet.
It is much easier to use CTE (common table expressions than CTE's) You can also do the above question as
select
e.employeename
,s.city
,SUM(s.sales)
from employee e
left join sales as s
on e.id = s.id
group by 1,2
here I have added e.id = s.id instead of s.id = e.id it is better to reference the key of the main table first.
you could use CTE (although used when you have to do a lot of referencing but you can see how it works):
With staging as (
select
e.employeename
,s.city
,s.sales
from employee e
left join sales as s
on e.id = s.id
),
sales_stats as (
select
staging.employeename,
staging.city,
sum(staging.sales)
from staging
group by 1,2
#here you will select from staging again consider staging as a separate table so you will have to have all the columns in the staging that you want to use further. Also you will have to reference columns using staging.x
)
select * from sales_stats
-- here you could have combined the steps but I wanted to show you how cte works, Hope this works for you
I appreciate your help, I hope I'm able to provide adequate information.
I need to roll back owners associated with quite a few entries in our asset table (one owner got applied to a lot of systems). I have a history table with the information I need, and an employee table that gets wedged in there because for some reason the history table stores names rather than employee_id's.
Source data:
asset_table has asset_id, employee_id, asset_tag
employee_table has employee_id, name
history_table has asset_id, old_name, new_name
update asset_table
set employee_id = (select employee_id
from employee_table
where name like (select old_name
from history_table
where asset_table.asset_id=history_table.asset_id
and new_name like 'tobe replaced'))
However, the subquery turns up more than one result per line.
What am I missing to limit that subquery results?
MSSQL server 2012
I guess you need someone who was the last in history:
update at set
employee_id = e.employee_id
from asset_table at
cross apply
(
select top (1)
h.old_name
from history_table h
where at.asset_id = h.asset_id
and h.new_name = 'tobe replaced'
order by h.<date or id or something> desc
) h
inner join employee_table e
on e.name = h.old_name
TOP 1 will fix "more than one result" problem.
Note, LIKE without % works exactly the same way as =.
You can write update statement is as below by using JOIN instead of sub query, Provide table structure and data for more correct query:
update at set at.employee_id = et.employee_id
from asset_table at
inner join history_table ht on at.asset_id = ht.asset_id
and ht.new_name like '%tobe replaced%'
inner join employee_table et on et.name = ht.old_name
and et.employee_id = at.employee_id
I have created a filtering application in Access that references four simple tables:
Employee: Emp_ID, FirstName, LastName
Skill: Skill_ID, SkillName, SkillDescription, SkillGroup
Employee_Skill: Entry_ID, Emp_ID, Skill_ID, LevelofExperience, Dateupdated
SkillGroupName:SkillGroup_ID SkillGroupName`
Basically the idea of this database is to track employee skills and how the level of experience improves (or not!) over time. The problem I am facing is that I want the application to filter by the most recently updated combination of Skill and Employee. I have found the query that will allow for me to use the two columns as a distinct entity:
SELECT DISTINCT Emp_ID, Skill_ID FROM Employee_Skill
WHERE (SELECT MAX(DateUpdated)From Employee_Skill);
And it works perfectly on its own, but I don't know how to incorporate it either into my main query, which simply joins together the necessary columns for an easier end user experience. It does not visibly show Emp_ID or Skill_ID. It also doesn't in the VBA for the application. (-1 = Include all History; 0 = Only include most updated.)
Update:
I have been able to select the distinct combination of Employee and Skill through my main query by doing this:
SELECT
Employee.FirstName,
Employee.LastName,
Max(Employee_Skill.LevelOfExperience) AS LevelOfExperience,
Skill.SkillName,
Max(Employee_Skill.DateUpdated) AS DateUpdated,
Max(SkillGroup.SkillGroupName) AS SkillGroupName
FROM
SkillGroup INNER JOIN
(Skill INNER JOIN
(Employee INNER JOIN
Employee_Skill ON
Employee.Emp_ID = Employee_Skill.Emp_ID) ON
Skill.Skill_ID = Employee_Skill.Skill_ID) ON
SkillGroup.SkillGroup_ID = Skill.SkillGroup
WHERE
Employee.Active=True
GROUP BY
Employee.FirstName,
Employee.LastName,
Skill.SkillName
ORDER BY
Max(Employee_Skill.LevelOfExperience) DESC;
However, my forms and reports built on this query are stuck with only the option of seeing the most updated version. I am really hoping to have a dynamic form that removes the constraints as desired.
Not sure what you're doing with Max(Employee_Skill.LevelOfExperience) or Max(SkillGroup.SkillGroupName) but I think you need to stick with querying for the detail rows and then include another column marking the Max(Employee_Skill.DateUpdated) filter, like:
SELECT
Employee.FirstName,
Employee.LastName,
Employee_Skill.LevelOfExperience,
Skill.SkillName,
Employee_Skill.DateUpdated,
SkillGroup.SkillGroupName,
iif(max_dateUpdated=dateupdated,1,0) as is_max_DateUpdated
FROM
SkillGroup INNER JOIN
(Skill INNER JOIN
(Employee INNER JOIN
Employee_Skill ON
Employee.Emp_ID = Employee_Skill.Emp_ID) ON
Skill.Skill_ID = Employee_Skill.Skill_ID) ON
SkillGroup.SkillGroup_ID = Skill.SkillGroup inner join
(select
empID,
max(dateupdated) as max_dateUpdated
from
Employee_Skill
group by
empID) mx on
Employee.empID = mx.empID
WHERE
Employee.Active=True
I don't understand the need for self-joins. Can someone please explain them to me?
A simple example would be very helpful.
You can view self-join as two identical tables. But in normalization, you cannot create two copies of the table so you just simulate having two tables with self-join.
Suppose you have two tables:
Table emp1
Id Name Boss_id
1 ABC 3
2 DEF 1
3 XYZ 2
Table emp2
Id Name Boss_id
1 ABC 3
2 DEF 1
3 XYZ 2
Now, if you want to get the name of each employee with his or her boss' names:
select c1.Name , c2.Name As Boss
from emp1 c1
inner join emp2 c2 on c1.Boss_id = c2.Id
Which will output the following table:
Name Boss
ABC XYZ
DEF ABC
XYZ DEF
It's quite common when you have a table that references itself. Example: an employee table where every employee can have a manager, and you want to list all employees and the name of their manager.
SELECT e.name, m.name
FROM employees e LEFT OUTER JOIN employees m
ON e.manager = m.id
A self join is a join of a table with itself.
A common use case is when the table stores entities (records) which have a hierarchical relationship between them. For example a table containing person information (Name, DOB, Address...) and including a column where the ID of the Father (and/or of the mother) is included. Then with a small query like
SELECT Child.ID, Child.Name, Child.PhoneNumber, Father.Name, Father.PhoneNumber
FROM myTableOfPersons As Child
LEFT OUTER JOIN myTableOfPersons As Father ON Child.FatherId = Father.ID
WHERE Child.City = 'Chicago' -- Or some other condition or none
we can get info about both child and father (and mother, with a second self join etc. and even grand parents etc...) in the same query.
Let's say you have a table users, set up like so:
user ID
user name
user's manager's ID
In this situation, if you wanted to pull out both the user's information and the manager's information in one query, you might do this:
SELECT users.user_id, users.user_name, managers.user_id AS manager_id, managers.user_name AS manager_name INNER JOIN users AS manager ON users.manager_id=manager.user_id
Imagine a table called Employee as described below. All employees have a manager which is also an employee (maybe except for the CEO, whose manager_id would be null)
Table (Employee):
int id,
varchar name,
int manager_id
You could then use the following select to find all employees and their managers:
select e1.name, e2.name as ManagerName
from Employee e1, Employee e2 where
where e1.manager_id = e2.id
They are useful if your table is self-referential. For example, for a table of pages, each page may have a next and previous link. These would be the IDs of other pages in the same table. If at some point you want to get a triple of successive pages, you'd do two self-joins on the next and previous columns with the same table's id column.
Without the ability for a table to reference itself, we'd have to create as many tables for hierarchy levels as the number of layers in the hierarchy. But since that functionality is available, you join the table to itself and sql treats it as two separate tables, so everything is stored nicely in one place.
Apart from the answers mentioned above (which are very well explained), I would like to add one example so that the use of Self Join can be easily shown.
Suppose you have a table named CUSTOMERS which has the following attributes:
CustomerID, CustomerName, ContactName, City, Country.
Now you want to list all those who are from the "same city" .
You will have to think of a replica of this table so that we can join them on the basis of CITY. The query below will clearly show what it means:
SELECT A.CustomerName AS CustomerName1, B.CustomerName AS CustomerName2,
A.City
FROM Customers A, Customers B
WHERE A.CustomerID <> B.CustomerID
AND A.City = B.City
ORDER BY A.City;
There are many correct answers here, but there is a variation that is equally correct. You can place your join conditions in the join statement instead of the WHERE clause.
SELECT e1.emp_id AS 'Emp_ID'
, e1.emp_name AS 'Emp_Name'
, e2.emp_id AS 'Manager_ID'
, e2.emp_name AS 'Manager_Name'
FROM Employee e1 RIGHT JOIN Employee e2 ON e1.emp_id = e2.emp_id
Keep in mind sometimes you want e1.manager_id > e2.id
The advantage to knowing both scenarios is sometimes you have a ton of WHERE or JOIN conditions and you want to place your self join conditions in the other clause to keep your code readable.
No one addressed what happens when an Employee does not have a manager. Huh? They are not included in the result set. What if you want to include employees that do not have managers but you don't want incorrect combinations returned?
Try this puppy;
SELECT e1.emp_id AS 'Emp_ID'
, e1.emp_name AS 'Emp_Name'
, e2.emp_id AS 'Manager_ID'
, e2.emp_name AS 'Manager_Name'
FROM Employee e1 LEFT JOIN Employee e2
ON e1.emp_id = e2.emp_id
AND e1.emp_name = e2.emp_name
AND e1.every_other_matching_column = e2.every_other_matching_column
Self-join is useful when you have to evaluate the data of the table with itself. Which means it'll correlate the rows from the same table.
Syntax: SELECT * FROM TABLE t1, TABLE t2 WHERE t1.columnName = t2.columnName
For example, we want to find the names of the employees whose Initial Designation equals to current designation. We can solve this using self join in following way.
SELECT NAME FROM Employee e1, Employee e2 WHERE e1.intialDesignationId = e2.currentDesignationId
One use case is checking for duplicate records in a database.
SELECT A.Id FROM My_Bookings A, My_Bookings B
WHERE A.Name = B.Name
AND A.Date = B.Date
AND A.Id != B.Id
SELF JOIN:
Joining a table by itself is called as Self Join.
We can perform operations on a single table.
When we use self join we should create alias names on a table otherwise we cannot implement self join.
When we create alias name on a table internally system is preparing virtual table on each alias name of a table.
We can create any number of alias names on a table but each alias name should be different.
Basic Rules of self join:
CASE-I: Comparing a single column values by itself with in the table
CASE-II: Comparing two different columns values to each other with in the table.
Example:
SELECT * from TEST;
ENAME
RICHARD
JOHN
MATHEW
BENNY
LOC
HYDRABAD
MUMBAI
HYDRABAD
CHENNAI
SELECT T1. ENAME, T1. LOC FROM TEST.T1, TEST T2 WHERE T1.LOC=T2.LOC AND T2.ENAME='RICHARD';
It's the database equivalent of a linked list/tree, where a row contains a reference in some capacity to another row.
Here is the exaplanation of self join in layman terms. Self join is not a different type of join. If you have understood other types of joins (Inner, Outer, and Cross Joins), then self join should be straight forward. In INNER, OUTER and CROSS JOINS, you join 2 or more different tables. However, in self join you join the same table with itslef. Here, we don't have 2 different tables, but treat the same table as a different table using table aliases. If this is still not clear, I would recomend to watch the following youtube videos.
Self Join with an example