Without using a while or forloop, is there a way to insert a record two or more times on a single insert?
Thanks
INSERT INTO TABLE2 ((VALUE,VALUE)
SELECT VALUE,VALUE FROM TABLE1 )) * 2
You would need to CROSS JOIN onto a table with 2 rows. The following would work in SQL Server.
INSERT INTO TABLE2 ((VALUE,VALUE)
SELECT VALUE,VALUE
FROM TABLE1, (SELECT 1 UNION ALL SELECT 2) T(C)
If you have an auxilliary numbers table you could also do
SELECT VALUE,VALUE
FROM TABLE1 JOIN Numbers ON N <=2
--first create a dummy table with 2 records
INSERT INTO TABLE2 ((VALUE,VALUE)
SELECT VALUE,VALUE FROM TABLE1, dummytable ))
This is not an elegant way, but could work easily.
If you have a table with an high enough number of records you can do the cross join with a TOP clause
INSERT INTO TABLE2
SELECT VALUE,VALUE FROM TABLE1
cross join (select top 2 TABLE_DUMMY) as DUMMY
This works for MQ SqlServer, to let it work in other DBMS you should change the TOP with the keyword needed by your DBMS
Related
I want to pass values from output of select query to another query. Basically both queries will be part of a stored procedure. e.g.
select Id, RelId
from tables
There will be multiple rows returned by above query and I want to pass them to the following query
select name
from table2
where Id = #Id and MgId = #RelId
Please suggest
You cannot pass multiple values in SQL.
But maybe you can just join your 2 tables, that would be far more efficient.
Not knowing your table schemes I suggest something like this. You might have to adapt this to your actual table schemas off course
select name
from table2 t2
inner join tables t on t2.Id = t.Id
and t2.MgId = t.RelId
EDIT
As Gordon mentioned in his answer, this approach can show double rows in your result.
If you don't want that than here are 2 ways of getting rid of the doubles
select distinct name
from ...
or by grouping by adding this at the end of the statement
group by name
Though this will work, avoiding the doubles like in Gordon's answer is better
I would suggest using exists:
select t2.name
from table2 t2
where exists (select 1
from tables t
where t2.Id = t.Id and t2.MgId = t.RelId
);
The difference between exists and join is that this will not generate duplicates, if there are multiple matches between the tables.
Or...
SELECT *
INTO #Table1
FROM ...
SELECT *
INTO #Table2
FROM ...
SELECT *
FROM #Table1 T1
JOIN #Table2 T2
DROP TABLE #Table1, #Table2
I have a table t1 in db1, and another table t2 in db2. I have the same columns in both tables.
How do I retrieve only those rows which are not in the other table?
select id_num
from [db1].[dbo].[Tbl1]
except
select id_num
from [db2].[dbo].[Tb01]
You can use LEFT JOIN or WHERE NOT IN functions.
Using WHERE NOT IN:
select
dbase1.id_num from [db1].[dbo].[Tbl1] as dbase1
where dbase1.id_num not in
(select dbase2.id_num from [db2].[dbo].[Tb01] as dbase2)
Using LEFT JOIN (recommended as this is much faster)
SELECT dbase1.id_num
FROM [db1].[dbo].[Tbl1] as dbase1
LEFT JOIN [db2].[dbo].[Tb01] as dbase2 ON dbase2.id_num COLLATE Latin1_General_CI_A = dbase1.id_num COLLATE Latin1_General_CI_A
WHERE dbase2.id_num IS NULL
Compare tables with DB2 other databases may have a select a - b statement or similar. Because at the time my database also didn't have a-b I use the following. Wrap the statement in a create table statement to dig into the results. No rows and the tables are identical. I've added in a column BEFORE|AFTER which makes the results easy to read.
SELECT 'AFTER', A.* FROM
(SELECT * FROM &AFTER
EXCEPT
SELECT * FROM &BEFORE) AS A
UNION
SELECT 'BEFORE', B.* FROM
(SELECT * FROM &BEFORE
EXCEPT
SELECT * FROM &AFTER) AS B
I am attempting a very basic difference function in postgresql. Table 1 and Table 2 have identical columns. Only difference is Table 1 has some surplus rows. I would like to select for surplus rows only:
SELECT *
FROM table1
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT * from table2);
The query above returns nothing when I know there are surplus rows.
I think you are looking for except:
select t1.*
from table1 t1
except
select t2.*
from table2 t2;
Note that the two tables must have the same number of columns, and the columns must all be of the same type. You can review the documentation here.
If you wish to use NOT EXISTS you're missing the joining of your table's keys in the inner where clause. Try:
SELECT *
FROM table1 t1
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT * from table2 t2 WHERE t2.id = t1.id);
Could someone optimitize the performance of below General SQL Query:
select fn.column1
from dbo.function1(input1) as fn
where (not exists (select 1 from table1 t1
where fn.column1 = t1.column1)
and not exists (select 1 from table2 t2
where fn.column1 = t2.column1))
For the above query, consider the approximate row count given below.
select fn.column1 from dbo.function1(input1) as fn -- returns 64000 records in 2 seconds.
table 1 (Column1) record-- returns 3000 records -- 1 second
table 2 (Column1) record-- returns 2000 records -- 1 second
So, if I run each select statement, it pulls and displays record in 1 or 2 seconds. But, if I run the full query, it takes more than a minute to display 64000 - (3000 + 2000) = 59000 records.
I tried the using EXCEPT like this:
select fn.column1
from dbo.function1(input1)
except
(select column1 from dbo.table1 union select column1 from dbo.table2)
Nothing improves my performance. Same it takes a minute to display 59000 records. This is with the same case for "NOT IN" Scenario.
Also I noticed that if we use UNION, instead of EXCEPT in the above query, it returns 59K records in 2 seconds.
UPDATED:
The function (a bit complex) contains the below pseudocode
select column1, column2,...column6
from dbo.table1
inner join dbo.table2
inner join ....
inner join dbo.table6
inner join dbo.innerfunction1
where <Condition 1>
UNION ALL
select column1, column2,...column6
from dbo.table1
inner join dbo.table2
inner join ...
inner join dbo.table4
inner join dbo.innerfunction2
where (condition 2)
Assume that two inner functions has single table select statement
My question is: if I select the column from the function, it displays 64K records in 1 sec. But, if the whole query executed, it takes more than a minute.
[Please Note: This query need to be used in function]
Could any one help me to improve this?
Kindly let me know if you need more details or clarifications.
Regards,
Viswa V.
Its a bit hard to optimize without data to play with. A fiddle would be good. Nonetheless here is an approach that may work.
Create a temp table, index it then do the EXCEPT as follows:
SELECT
fn.column1
INTO
#temp
FROM
dbo.function1(input1) AS fn
CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX [temp_index] ON #temp
(
column1 ASC
)
SELECT
column1
FROM
#temp AS t
EXCEPT
(
SELECT
column1
FROM
dbo.table1
UNION
SELECT
column1
FROM
dbo.table2
)
I would be interested in the result.
If I run the two statements in batch will they return one table to two to my sqlcommand object with the data merged. What I am trying to do is optimize a search by searching twice, the first time on one set of data and then a second on another. They have the same fields and I’d like to have all the records from both tables show and be added to each other. I need this so that I can sort the data between both sets of data but short of writing a stored procedure I can’t think of a way of doing this.
Eg. Table 1 has columns A and B, Table 2 has these same columns but different data source. I then wan to merge them so that if a only exists in one column it is added to the result set and if both exist it eh tables the column B will be summed between the two.
Please note that this is not the same as a full outer join operation as that does not merge the data.
[EDIT]
Here's what the code looks like:
Select * From
(Select ID,COUNT(*) AS Count From [Table1]) as T1
full outer join
(Select ID,COUNT(*) AS Count From [Table2]) as T2
on t1.ID = T2.ID
Perhaps you're looking for UNION?
IE:
SELECT A, B FROM Table1
UNION
SELECT A, B FROM Table2
Possibly:
select table1.a, table1.b
from table1
where table1.a not in (select a from table2)
union all
select table1.a, table1.b+table2.b as b
from table1
inner join table2 on table1.a = table2.a
edit: perhaps you would benefit from unioning the tables before counting. e.g.
select id, count() as count from
(select id from table1
union all
select id from table2)
I'm not sure if I understand completely but you seem to be asking about a UNION
SELECT A,B
FROM tableX
UNION ALL
SELECT A,B
FROM tableY
To do it, you would go:
SELECT * INTO TABLE3 FROM TABLE1
UNION
SELECT * FROM TABLE2
Provided both tables have the same columns
I think what you are looking for is this, but I am not sure I am understanding your language correctly.
select id, sum(count) as count
from (
select id, count() as count
from table1
union all
select id, count() as count
from table2
) a
group by id