Is there something like
select max(val,0)
from table
I'm NOT looking to find the maximum value of the entire table
There has to be an easier way than this right?
select case when val > 0 then val else 0 end
from table
EDIT: I'm using Microsoft SQL Server
Functions GREATEST and LEAST are not SQL standard but are in many RDBMSs (e.g., Postgresql). So
SELECT GREATEST(val, 0) FROM mytable;
Not in SQL per se. But many database engines define a set of functions you can use in SQL statements. Unfortunately, they generally use different names and arguments list.
In MySQL, the function is GREATEST. In SQLite, it's MAX (it works differently with one parameter or more).
Make it a set based JOIN?
SELECT
max(val)
FROM
(
select val
from table
UNION ALL
select 0
) foo
This avoids a scalar udf suggested in the other question which may suit better
What you have in SQL is not even valid SQL. That's not how MAX works in SQL. In T-SQL the MAX aggregates over a range returning the maximum value. What you want is a simply the greater value of two.
Read this for more info:
Is there a Max function in SQL Server that takes two values like Math.Max in .NET?
Related
I have a doubt and question regarding alias in sql. If i want to use the alias in same query can i use it. For eg:
Consider Table name xyz with column a and b
select (a/b) as temp , temp/5 from xyz
Is this possible in some way ?
You are talking about giving an identifier to an expression in a query and then reusing that identifier in other parts of the query?
That is not possible in Microsoft SQL Server which nearly all of my SQL experience is limited to. But you can however do the following.
SELECT temp, temp / 5
FROM (
SELECT (a/b) AS temp
FROM xyz
) AS T1
Obviously that example isn't particularly useful, but if you were using the expression in several places it may be more useful. It can come in handy when the expressions are long and you want to group on them too because the GROUP BY clause requires you to re-state the expression.
In MSSQL you also have the option of creating computed columns which are specified in the table schema and not in the query.
You can use Oracle with statement too. There are similar statements available in other DBs too. Here is the one we use for Oracle.
with t
as (select a/b as temp
from xyz)
select temp, temp/5
from t
/
This has a performance advantage, particularly if you have a complex queries involving several nested queries, because the WITH statement is evaluated only once and used in subsequent statements.
Not possible in the same SELECT clause, assuming your SQL product is compliant with entry level Standard SQL-92.
Expressions (and their correlation names) in the SELECT clause come into existence 'all at once'; there is no left-to-right evaluation that you seem to hope for.
As per #Josh Einstein's answer here, you can use a derived table as a workaround (hopefully using a more meaningful name than 'temp' and providing one for the temp/5 expression -- have in mind the person who will inherit your code).
Note that code you posted would work on the MS Access Database Engine (and would assign a meaningless correlation name such as Expr1 to your second expression) but then again it is not a real SQL product.
Its possible I guess:
SELECT (A/B) as temp, (temp/5)
FROM xyz,
(SELECT numerator_field as A, Denominator_field as B FROM xyz),
(SELECT (numerator_field/denominator_field) as temp FROM xyz);
This is now available in Amazon Redshift
E.g.
select clicks / impressions as probability, round(100 * probability, 1) as percentage from raw_data;
Ref:
https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2018/08/amazon-redshift-announces-support-for-lateral-column-alias-reference/
You might find W3Schools "SQL Alias" to be of good help.
Here is an example from their tutorial:
SELECT po.OrderID, p.LastName, p.FirstName
FROM Persons AS p,
Product_Orders AS po
WHERE p.LastName='Hansen' AND p.FirstName='Ola'
Regarding using the Alias further in the query, depending on the database you are using it might be possible.
The question can be specific to SQL server.
When I write a query such as :
SELECT * FROM IndustryData WHERE Date='20131231'
AND ReportTypeID = CASE WHEN (fnQuarterDate('20131231')='20131231') THEN 1
WHEN (fnQuarterDate('20131231')!='20131231') THEN 4
END;
Does the Function Call fnQuarterDate (or any Subquery) within Case inside a Where clause is executed for EACH row of the table ?
How would it be better if I get the function's (or any subquery) value beforehand inside a variable like:
DECLARE #X INT
IF fnQuarterDate('20131231')='20131231'
SET #X=1
ELSE
SET #X=0
SELECT * FROM IndustryData WHERE Date='20131231'
AND ReportTypeID = CASE WHEN (#X = 1) THEN 1
WHEN (#X = 0) THEN 4
END;
I know that in MySQL if there is a subquery inside IN(..) within a WHERE clause, it is executed for each row, I just wanted to find out the same for SQL SERVER.
...
Just populated table with about 30K rows and found out the Time Difference:
Query1= 70ms ; Query 2= 6ms. I think that explains it but still don't know the actual facts behind it.
Also would there be any difference if instead of a UDF there was a simple subquery ?
I think the solution may in theory help you increase the performance, but it also depends on what the scalar function actually does. I think that in this case (my guess is formatting the date to last day in the quarter) would really be negligible.
You may want to read this page with suggested workarounds:
http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/273443/the-scalar-expression-function-would-speed-performance-while-keeping-the-benefits-of-functions#
Because SQL Server must execute each function on every row, using any function incurs a cursor like performance penalty.
And in Workarounds, there is a comment that
I had the same problem when I used scalar UDF in join column, the
performance was horrible. After I replaced the UDF with temp table
that contains the results of UDF and used it in join clause, the
performance was order of magnitudes better. MS team should fix UDF's
to be more reliable.
So it appears that yes, this may increase the performance.
Your solution is correct, but I would recommend considering an improvement of the SQL to use ELSE instead, it looks cleaner to me:
AND ReportTypeID = CASE WHEN (#X = 1) THEN 1
ELSE 4
END;
It depends. See User-Defined Functions:
The number of times that a function specified in a query is actually executed can vary between execution plans built by the optimizer. An example is a function invoked by a subquery in a WHERE clause. The number of times the subquery and its function is executed can vary with different access paths chosen by the optimizer.
This approach uses in-line MySQL variables... The query alias of "sqlvars" will prepare the #dateBasis first with the date in question, then a second variable #qtrReportType based on the function call done ONCE for the entire query. Then, by cross-join (via no where clause between the tables since the sqlvars is considered a single row anyhow), will use those values to get data from your IndustryData table.
select
ID.*
from
( select
#dateBasis := '20131231',
#qtrReportType := case when fnQuarterDate(#dateBasis) = #dateBasis
then 1 else 4 end ) sqlvars,
IndustryData ID
where
ID.Date = #dateBasis
AND ID.ReportTypeID = #qtrReportType
Assuming I have the following aggregate functions:
AGG1
AGG2
AGG3
AGG4
Is it possible to write valid SQL (in a db agnostic way) like this:
SELECT [COL1, COL2 ....], AGG1(param1), AGG2(param2) FROM [SOME TABLES]
WHERE [SOME CRITERIA]
HAVING AGG3(param2) >-1 and AGG4(param4) < 123
GROUP BY COL1, COL2, ... COLN
ORDER BY COL1, COLN ASC
LIMIT 10
Where COL1 ... COLN are columns in the tables being queried, and param1 ... paramX are parameters passed to the AGG funcs.
Note: AGG1 and AGG2 are returned in the results as columns (but do not appear in the HAVING CLAUSE, and AGG3 and AGG4 appear in the HAVING CLAUSE but are not returned in the result set.
Ideally, I want a DB agnostic answer to the solution, but if I have to be tied to a db, I am using PostgreSQL (v9.x).
Edit
Just a matter of clarification: I am not opposed to using GROUP BY in the query. My SQL is not very good, so the example SQL above may have been slightly misleading. I have edited the pseudo sql statement above to hopefully make my intent more clear.
The main thing I wanted to find out was whether a select query that used AGG functions could:
Have agg functions values in the returned column without them being specified in a HAVING clause.
Have agg functions specified in a HAVING clause, but are not returned in the result set.
From the answers I have received so far, it would seem the answer to both questions is YES. The only think I have to do to correct my SQL is to add a GROUP BY clause to make sure that the returned rows are unique.
PostgreSQL major version include the first digit after the dot, thus "PostgreSQL (v9.x)" is not specific enough. As #kekekela said, there is no (cheap) completely db agnostic way. Even between PostgreSQL 9.0 and 9.1 there is an important syntactical difference.
If you had only the grouped values AGG1(param1), AGG2(param2) you would get away without providing an explicit GROUP BY clause. Since you mix grouped and non-grouped columns you have to provide a GROUP BY clause with all non-grouped columns that appear in the SELECT. That's true for any version of PostgreSQL. Read about GROUP BY and HAVING it in the manual.
Starting with version 9.1, however, once you list a primary key in the GROUP BY you can skip additional columns for this table and still use them in the SELECT list. The release notes for version 9.1 tell us:
Allow non-GROUP BY columns in the query target list when the primary
key is specified in the GROUP BY clause (Peter Eisentraut)
Concerning parameters
Do you intend to feed a constant value to an aggregate function? What's the point? The docs tell us
An aggregate function computes a single result from multiple input rows.
Or do you want those parameters to be column names? That kind of dynamic SQL works as long as the statement is generated before committing to the database. Does not work for prepared statements or simple sql or plpgsql functions. You have to use EXECUTE in a plpgsql function for that purpose.
As safeguard against SQLi use the USING $1, $2 syntax for values and quote_ident() for your column or table names.
The only way to aggregate over columns without using GROUP BY is to use windowing functions. You left out details of your problem, but the following might be what you are looking for:
SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT [COL1, COL2 ....],
AGG1(param1) over (partition by some_grouping_column) as agg1,
AGG2(param2) over (partition by some_grouping_column) as agg2,
row_number() over () as rn
FROM [SOME TABLES]
WHERE [SOME CRITERIA]
ORDER BY COL1
) t
WHERE AGG3 >-1
AND AGG4 < 123
AND rn <= 10
ORDER BY col1
This is standard ANSI SQL and works on most database including PostgreSQL (since 8.4).
Note that you do not need to use the same grouping column for both aggregates in the partition by clause.
If you want to stick with ANSI SQL then you should use the row_number() function to limit the result. If you run this only on PostgreSQL (or other DBMS that support LIMIT in some way) move the LIMIT cause into the derived table (the inner query)
That should work from a high level perspective, except you'd need COL1, COL2 etc in a GROUP BY statement or else they won't be valid in the SELECT list. Having AGG1, etc in the SELECT list and not in the HAVING is not a problem.
As far as db agnostic, you're going to have to tweak syntax no matter what you do (the LIMIT for example is going to be different in PostgreSQL, SQL SERVER and Oracle that I know off the top of my head), but you could build logic to construct the statements properly for each provided your high-level representation is solid.
Before I begin by putting a lot SQL statements to help solve my issue I might be able to get the answer by asking a simple question. I use SQL Server 2005 on a daily basis and use the "WITH" clause to perform sub-queries. I am unfortunately in a situation now where I have to use SQL Compact which does not allow the use of the "WITH" clause to perform sub queries. What is the substitute of the "WITH" clause in SQL Compact. On average I am using 10 sub queries at a time.
As long as none of your CTE's (Common Table Expression - the formal name for the feature you are using) are recursive, remember that in the simplest form,
;WITH Q1 As
(
SELECT columns FROM Table1
)
SELECT columns FROM Q1
Can be roughly translated to:
SELECT columns FROM (SELECT columns FROM Table1) Q1
Note the 'Q1' on the end there. You have to give the subquery a name. The name you choose often doesn't matter, and so simple names are common here -- even just single letters. With 10 subqueries to string together, you might need to choose something more meaningful.
Create a temp table with the result of each with clause; use the temp tables instead of the with clause.
I have a doubt and question regarding alias in sql. If i want to use the alias in same query can i use it. For eg:
Consider Table name xyz with column a and b
select (a/b) as temp , temp/5 from xyz
Is this possible in some way ?
You are talking about giving an identifier to an expression in a query and then reusing that identifier in other parts of the query?
That is not possible in Microsoft SQL Server which nearly all of my SQL experience is limited to. But you can however do the following.
SELECT temp, temp / 5
FROM (
SELECT (a/b) AS temp
FROM xyz
) AS T1
Obviously that example isn't particularly useful, but if you were using the expression in several places it may be more useful. It can come in handy when the expressions are long and you want to group on them too because the GROUP BY clause requires you to re-state the expression.
In MSSQL you also have the option of creating computed columns which are specified in the table schema and not in the query.
You can use Oracle with statement too. There are similar statements available in other DBs too. Here is the one we use for Oracle.
with t
as (select a/b as temp
from xyz)
select temp, temp/5
from t
/
This has a performance advantage, particularly if you have a complex queries involving several nested queries, because the WITH statement is evaluated only once and used in subsequent statements.
Not possible in the same SELECT clause, assuming your SQL product is compliant with entry level Standard SQL-92.
Expressions (and their correlation names) in the SELECT clause come into existence 'all at once'; there is no left-to-right evaluation that you seem to hope for.
As per #Josh Einstein's answer here, you can use a derived table as a workaround (hopefully using a more meaningful name than 'temp' and providing one for the temp/5 expression -- have in mind the person who will inherit your code).
Note that code you posted would work on the MS Access Database Engine (and would assign a meaningless correlation name such as Expr1 to your second expression) but then again it is not a real SQL product.
Its possible I guess:
SELECT (A/B) as temp, (temp/5)
FROM xyz,
(SELECT numerator_field as A, Denominator_field as B FROM xyz),
(SELECT (numerator_field/denominator_field) as temp FROM xyz);
This is now available in Amazon Redshift
E.g.
select clicks / impressions as probability, round(100 * probability, 1) as percentage from raw_data;
Ref:
https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2018/08/amazon-redshift-announces-support-for-lateral-column-alias-reference/
You might find W3Schools "SQL Alias" to be of good help.
Here is an example from their tutorial:
SELECT po.OrderID, p.LastName, p.FirstName
FROM Persons AS p,
Product_Orders AS po
WHERE p.LastName='Hansen' AND p.FirstName='Ola'
Regarding using the Alias further in the query, depending on the database you are using it might be possible.