I need to retrieve all default settings from the settings table but also grab the character setting if exists for x character.
But this query is only retrieving those settings where character is = 1, not the default settings if the user havent setted anyone.
SELECT `settings`.*, `character_settings`.`value`
FROM (`settings`)
LEFT JOIN `character_settings`
ON `character_settings`.`setting_id` = `settings`.`id`
WHERE `character_settings`.`character_id` = '1'
So i should need something like this:
array(
'0' => array('somekey' => 'keyname', 'value' => 'thevalue'),
'1' => array('somekey2' => 'keyname2'),
'2' => array('somekey3' => 'keyname3')
)
Where key 1 and 2 are the default values when key 0 contains the default value with the character value.
The where clause is filtering away rows where the left join doesn't succeed. Move it to the join:
SELECT `settings`.*, `character_settings`.`value`
FROM `settings`
LEFT JOIN
`character_settings`
ON `character_settings`.`setting_id` = `settings`.`id`
AND `character_settings`.`character_id` = '1'
When making OUTER JOINs (ANSI-89 or ANSI-92), filtration location matters because criteria specified in the ON clause is applied before the JOIN is made. Criteria against an OUTER JOINed table provided in the WHERE clause is applied after the JOIN is made. This can produce very different result sets. In comparison, it doesn't matter for INNER JOINs if the criteria is provided in the ON or WHERE clauses -- the result will be the same.
SELECT s.*,
cs.`value`
FROM SETTINGS s
LEFT JOIN CHARACTER_SETTINGS cs ON cs.setting_id = s.id
AND cs.character_id = 1
If I understand your question correctly you want records from the settings database if they don't have a join accross to the character_settings table or if that joined record has character_id = 1.
You should therefore do
SELECT `settings`.*, `character_settings`.`value`
FROM (`settings`)
LEFT OUTER JOIN `character_settings`
ON `character_settings`.`setting_id` = `settings`.`id`
WHERE `character_settings`.`character_id` = '1' OR
`character_settings`.character_id is NULL
You might find it easier to understand by using a simple subquery
SELECT `settings`.*, (
SELECT `value` FROM `character_settings`
WHERE `character_settings`.`setting_id` = `settings`.`id`
AND `character_settings`.`character_id` = '1') AS cv_value
FROM `settings`
The subquery is allowed to return null, so you don't have to worry about JOIN/WHERE in the main query.
Sometimes, this works faster in MySQL, but compare it against the LEFT JOIN form to see what works best for you.
SELECT s.*, c.value
FROM settings s
LEFT JOIN character_settings c ON c.setting_id = s.id AND c.character_id = '1'
For this problem, as for many others involving non-trivial left joins such as left-joining on inner-joined tables, I find it convenient and somewhat more readable to split the query with a with clause. In your example,
with settings_for_char as (
select setting_id, value from character_settings where character_id = 1
)
select
settings.*,
settings_for_char.value
from
settings
left join settings_for_char on settings_for_char.setting_id = settings.id;
The way I finally understand the top answer is realising (following the Order Of Execution of the SQL query ) that the WHERE clause is applied to the joined table thereby filtering out rows that do not satisfy the WHERE condition from the joined (or output) table. However, moving the WHERE condition to the ON clause applies it to the individual tables prior to joining. This enables the left join to retain rows from the left table even though some column entries of those rows (entries from the right tables) do not satisfy the WHERE condition.
The result is correct based on the SQL statement. Left join returns all values from the right table, and only matching values from the left table.
ID and NAME columns are from the right side table, so are returned.
Score is from the left table, and 30 is returned, as this value relates to Name "Flow". The other Names are NULL as they do not relate to Name "Flow".
The below would return the result you were expecting:
SELECT a.*, b.Score
FROM #Table1 a
LEFT JOIN #Table2 b
ON a.ID = b.T1_ID
WHERE 1=1
AND a.Name = 'Flow'
The SQL applies a filter on the right hand table.
Related
i have a table attribute_name in which a column c_type indicate what type of value we have like 1,2,3,4 so that base on that value i decide which table to join .
so i select that table first Join (case statment) On (case statment)
but i does not work.
SELECT attribute_names.*,attributes_trans_name.*,
(CASE
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=1
THEN attribute_values_text.c_fk_files_id
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=3
THEN attribute_values_longtext.c_fk_files_id
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=8
THEN attribute_values_file.c_fk_files_id
END) as file_id
From attributes_trans_name,
attribute_names JOIN
(CASE
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=1
THEN attribute_values_text
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=3
THEN attribute_values_longtext
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=8
THEN attribute_values_file
END)
ON
(CASE
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=1
THEN attribute_values_text.c_fk_attribute_names_id
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=3
THEN attribute_values_longtext.c_fk_attribute_names_id
WHEN attribute_names.c_type=8
THEN attribute_values_file.c_fk_attribute_names_id
END) = attribute_names.c_id
WHERE
attribute_names.c_id=attributes_trans_name.c_fk_attribute_names_id
With proper JOIN/LEFT JOIN context, you can do in single query. Left join means I want the record from the left side always, but OPTIONAL if there is a match on the right side. So, I have adjusted your query to reflect. I have also rewritten to use "alias" names for the file names so it is shorter for read and write than bulky long table names.
So, the main table is the attribute_names as that appears to be the basis of all the joins with the C_ID column into each of the others. Notice indentation helps me know / follow what is linked to what, and not just all tables listed in bulk.
Now, by having each of the left-joins in place, it will ALWAYS TRY to link to their respective other tables by the foreign key, but as you know your data, only one of them will really have the piece of information you need. So your CASE construct is simplified down. If = 1, then look at the ATV (alias) table and its column, otherwise AVLT alias if = 3 and finally AVF if = 8
SELECT
AN.*,
ATN.*,
CASE WHEN AN.c_type = 1
THEN ATV.c_fk_files_id
WHEN AN.c_type = 3
THEN AVLT.c_fk_files_id
WHEN AN.c_type = 8
THEN AVF.c_fk_files_id END as file_id
From
attribute_names AN
JOIN attributes_trans_name ATN
ON AN.c_id = ATN.c_fk_attribute_names_id
LEFT JOIN attribute_values_text AVT
ON AN.c_id = AVT.c_fk_attribute_names_id
LEFT JOIN attribute_values_longtext AVLT
ON AN.c_id = AVLT.c_fk_attribute_names_id
LEFT JOIN attribute_values_file AVF
ON AN.c_id = AVF.c_fk_attribute_names_id
New to SQL but I want to be able to optimize my query by bringing just the right amount of data. I am doing a left join on CS Rep Name and WE, which are two columns present in both tables. I find that if I don't bring in CS Rep Name and WE in the TECDR table, the query would error. Is there a workaround to this? Since it is a left join, I don't need redundant data.
SELECT *
FROM Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump AS TECD
LEFT JOIN (SELECT CS_Rep_Name,
Team_Leader,
Operations_Manager,
Tenure,
WE,
FileName
FROM Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump_Roster) AS TECDR
ON TECD.CS_Rep_Name = TECDR.CS_Rep_Name
AND TECD.WE = TECDR.WE
When you embed a SELECT inside a query in place of a table, the result of a select (projection) behave like a table visible only inside the query.
In your case, the join is the same as if there were a table called TECDR with the columns that you select. Hence, if you leave out some columns of Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump_Roster from your SELECT, these columns would not be available for joining or selection.
However, in your case this is unnecessary: all you need to do is joining to the underlying table, like this:
SELECT
TECD.*
, TECDR.Team_Leader
, TECDR.Operations_Manager
, TECDR.Tenure
, TECDR.FileName
FROM Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump AS TECD
LEFT JOIN Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump_Roster AS TECDR
ON TECD.CS_Rep_Name = TECDR.CS_Rep_Name AND TECD.WE = TECDR.WE
select
<place the columns you want here>
from
Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump as TECD
Left join Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump_Roster as TECDR
On TECD.CS_Rep_Name = TECDR.CS_Rep_Name and TECD.WE = TECDR.WE
Hope the following helps or else please share the query that errors:
select TECD.Column1, TECD.Column2, TECDR.Column1, TECDR.Column2
from Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump as TECD
Left join Tish_Email_CSAT_Dump_Roster as TECDR
On TECD.CS_Rep_Name = TECDR.CS_Rep_Name and TECD.WE = TECDR.WE
I have a table with 51 records . The table structure looks something like below :
ack_extract_id query_id cnst_giftran_key field1 value1
Now ack_extract_ids can be 8,9.
I want to check for giftran keys which are there for extract_id 9 and not there in 8.
What I tried was
SELECT *
FROM ddcoe_tbls.ack_flextable ack_flextable1
INNER JOIN ddcoe_tbls.ack_main_config config
ON ack_flextable1.ack_extract_id = config.ack_extract_id
LEFT JOIN ddcoe_tbls.ack_flextable ack_flextable2
ON ack_flextable1.cnst_giftran_key = ack_flextable2.cnst_giftran_key
WHERE ack_flextable2.cnst_giftran_key IS NULL
AND config.ack_extract_file_nm LIKE '%Dtl%'
AND ack_flextable2.ack_extract_id = 8
AND ack_flextable1.ack_extract_id = 9
But it is returning me 0 records. Ideally the left join where right is null should have returned the record for which the cnst_giftran_key is not present in the right hand side table, right ?
What am I missing here ?
When you test columns from the left-joined table in the where clause (ack_flextable2.ack_extract_id in your case), you force that join to behave as if it were an inner join. Instead, move that test to be part of the join condition.
Then to find records where that value is missing, test for a NULL key in the where clause.
SELECT *
FROM ddcoe_tbls.ack_flextable ack_flextable1
INNER JOIN ddcoe_tbls.ack_main_config config
ON ack_flextable1.ack_extract_id = config.ack_extract_id
LEFT JOIN ddcoe_tbls.ack_flextable ack_flextable2
ON ack_flextable1.cnst_giftran_key = ack_flextable2.cnst_giftran_key
AND ack_flextable2.ack_extract_id = 8
WHERE ack_flextable2.cnst_giftran_key IS NULL
AND config.ack_extract_file_nm LIKE '%Dtl%'
AND ack_flextable1.ack_extract_id = 9
AND ack_flextable2.cnst_giftran_key IS NULL
THIS IS NO ANSWER, JUST AN EXPLANATION
From your comment to Joe Stefanelli's answer I gather that you don't fully understand the issue with WHERE and ON in an outer join. So let's look at an example.
We are looking for all supplier's last orders, i.e. the order records where there is no newer order for the supplier.
select *
from order
where not exists
(
select *
from order newer
where newer.supplier = order.supplier
and newer.orderdate > order.orderdate
);
This is straight-forward; the query matches what we just put in words: Find orders for which NOT EXISTS a newer order for the same supplier.
The same query with the anti-join pattern:
select order.*
from order
left join order newer on newer.supplier = order.supplier
and newer.orderdate > order.orderdate
where newer.id is null;
Here we join every order with all their newer orders, thus probably creating a huge intermediate result. With the left outer join we make sure we get a dummy record attached when there is no newer order for the supplier. Then at last we scan the intermediate result with the WHERE clause, keeping only records where the attached record has an ID null. Well, the ID is obviously the table's primary key and can never be null, so what we keep here is only the outer-joined results where the newer data is just a dummy record containing nulls. Thus we get exactly the orders for which no newer order exists.
Talking about a huge intermediate result: How can this be faster than the first query? Well, it shouldn't. The first query should actually either run equally fast or faster. A good DBMS will see through this and make the same execution plan for both queries. A rather young DBMS however may really execute the anti join quicker. That is because the developers put so much effort into join techniques, as these are needed in about every query, and didn't yet care about IN and EXISTS that much. In such a case one may run into performance issues with NOT IN or NOT EXISTS and use the anti-join pattern instead.
Now as to the WHERE / ON problem:
select order.*
from order
left join order newer on newer.orderdate > order.orderdate
where newer.supplier = order.supplier
and newer.id is null;
This looks almost the same as before, but some criteria has moved from ON to WHERE. This means the outer join gets different criteria. Here is what happens: for every order find all newer orders ‐ no matter which supplier! So it is all orders of the last order date that get an outer-join dummy record. But then in the WHERE clause we remove all pairs where the supplier doesn't match. Notice that the outer-joined records contain NULL for newer.supplier, so newer.supplier = order.supplier is never true for them; they get removed. But then, if we remove all outer-joined records we get exactly the same result as with a vanilla inner join. When we put outer join criteria in the WHERE clause we turn the outer join into an inner join. So the query can be re-written as
select order.*
from order
inner join order newer on newer.orderdate > order.orderdate
where newer.supplier = order.supplier
and newer.id is null;
And with tables in FROM and INNER JOIN it doesn't matter whether the criteria is in ON or WHERE; it's rather a matter of readability, because both criteria will equally get applied.
Now we see that newer.id is null can never be true. The final result will be empty ‐ which is exactly what happened with your query.
You can try with this query:
select * from ddcoe_tbls.ack_main_config
where cnst_giftran_key not in
(
select cnst_giftran_key from ddcoe_tbls.ack_main_config
where ack_extract_id = 8
)
and ack_extract_id = 9;
Despite going through every material I could possibly find on the internet, I haven't been able to solve this issue myself. I am new to MS Access and would really appreciate any pointers.
Here's my problem - I have three tables
Source1084 with columns - Department, Sub-Dept, Entity, Account, +few more
R12CAOmappingTable with columns - Account, R12_Account
Table4 with columns - R12_Account, Department, Sub-Dept, Entity, New Dept, LOB +few more
I have a total of 1084 records in Source and the result table must also contain 1084 records. I need to draw a table with all the columns from Source + R12_account from R12CAOmappingTable + all columns from Table4.
Here is the query I wrote. This yields the right columns but gives me more or less number of records with interchanging different join options.
SELECT rmt.r12_account,
srb.version,
srb.fy,
srb.joblevel,
srb.scenario,
srb.department,
srb.[sub-department],
srb.[job function],
srb.entity,
srb.employee,
table4.lob,
table4.product,
table4.newacct,
table4.newdept,
srb.[beg balance],
srb.jan,
srb.feb,
srb.mar,
srb.apr,
srb.may,
srb.jun,
srb.jul,
srb.aug,
srb.sep,
srb.oct,
srb.nov,
srb.dec,
rmt.r12_account
FROM (source1084 AS srb
LEFT JOIN r12caomappingtable AS rmt
ON srb.account = rmt.account)
LEFT JOIN table4
ON ( srb.department = table4.dept )
AND ( srb.[sub-department] = table4.subdept )
AND ( srb.entity = table4.entity )
WHERE ( ( ( srb.[sub-department] ) = table4.subdept )
AND ( ( srb.entity ) = table4.entity )
AND ( ( rmt.r12_account ) = table4.r12_account ) );
In this simple example, Table1 contains 3 rows with unique fld1 values. Table2 contains one row, and the fld1 value in that row matches one of those in Table1. Therefore this query returns 3 rows.
SELECT *
FROM
Table1 AS t1
LEFT JOIN Table2 AS t2
ON t1.fld1 = t2.fld1;
However if I add the WHERE clause as below, that version of the query returns only one row --- the row where the fld1 values match.
SELECT *
FROM
Table1 AS t1
LEFT JOIN Table2 AS t2
ON t1.fld1 = t2.fld1
WHERE t1.fld1 = t2.fld1;
In other words, that WHERE clause counteracts the LEFT JOIN because it excludes rows where t2.fld1 is Null. If that makes sense, notice that second query is functionally equivalent to this ...
SELECT *
FROM
Table1 AS t1
INNER JOIN Table2 AS t2
ON t1.fld1 = t2.fld1;
Your situation is similar. I suggest you first eliminate the WHERE clause and confirm this query returns at least your expected 1084 rows.
SELECT Count(*) AS CountOfRows
FROM (source1084 AS srb
LEFT JOIN r12caomappingtable AS rmt
ON srb.account = rmt.account)
LEFT JOIN table4
ON ( srb.department = table4.dept )
AND ( srb.[sub-department] = table4.subdept )
AND ( srb.entity = table4.entity );
After you get the query returning the correct number of rows, you can alter the SELECT list to return the columns you want. But the columns aren't really the issue until you can get the correct rows.
Without knowing your tables values it is hard to give a complete answer to your question. The issue that is causing you a problem based on how you described it. Is more then likely based on the type of joins you are using.
The best way I found to understand what type of joins you should be using would referencing a Venn diagram explaining the different type of joins that you can use.
Jeff Atwood also has a really good explanation of SQL joins on his site using the above method as well.
Best to just use the query builder. Drop in your main table. Choose the columns you want. Now for any of the other lookup values then simply drop in the other tables, draw the join line(s), double click and use a left join. You can do this for 2 or 30 columns that need to "grab" or lookup other values from other tables. The number of ORIGINAL rows in the base table returned should ALWAYS remain the same.
So just use the query builder and follow the above.
The problem with your posted SQL is you NESTED the joins inside (). Don't do that. (or let the query builder do this for you – they tend to be quite messy but will also work).
Just use this:
FROM source1084 AS srb
LEFT JOIN r12caomappingtable AS rmt
ON srb.account = rmt.account
LEFT JOIN table4
ON ( srb.department = table4.dept )
AND ( srb.[sub-department] = table4.subdept )
AND ( srb.entity = table4.entity )
As noted, I don't see why you are "repeating" the conditions again in the where clause.
I'm wondering if it's possible to accomplish this in MS Access 2007:
A client gave me several tables, and they asked me for some queries. One of them has to get a field value from a table, depending on the value of a field of each record. This means, depending on the region, it has to look at one table, a second, or a third one.
So, I was wondering if I could do something like this:
SELECT
table2.some_value
FROM
table1
INNER JOIN table2
ON CASE table1.SOME_VALUE THEN table3.id = table2.some_id ELSE
CASE table1.SOME_VALUE THEN table4.id = table2.some_id ELSE
table5.id = table2.some_id END END
Is it clear? IF not, just ask and I'll answer your doubts.
EDIT:
I think I was not clear enough. I have a several joins in my query, but I have this last one, in which its ON statement will be different, depending on the data. For example:
I have a record in a table that has a State field, with three possibilities: CA, TX, FL.
If the value is CA, the ON statement of that JOIN should be CA_Standard_table.field = myTable.field.
If it's TX, the ON statement of that JOIN should be TX_Standard_table.field = myTable.field
And the same logic goes for FL.
How can I accomplish that?
EDIT 2:
Here is the query code, the last JOIN is the one that matters for this. The three possibilities of tables to join with in the ON statement are:
EU_Accepted_Standards
CA_Accepted_Standards
NZ_Accepted_Standards
It will decide for one of them, depending of which of the following fields are checked:
CAStandard: it should take CA_Accepted_Standards.
EUSelStandard:it should take EU_Accepted_Standards.
NZ_Accepted_Standards: it should take NZ_Accepted_Standards
Query
SELECT
Projects.COMPAS_ID,
Projects.[Opportunity Name],
IIf([VolCap]=True,1) AS [Volume Cap],
IIf([DelGuarantee]=True,1) AS [Delivery Guarantee],
Projects.Tech_Level_Name,
Counterparty.CPExpertise,
Counterparty.CPFinStrength,
Geographic_Location.Country_RiskLevel,
Project_Stage_Risk.ProStaRiskLevel,
Counterparty.CPExperience,
Projects.Country_Name,
IIf([EU ETS]=True,1) AS EU,
IIf([CA ETS]=True,1) AS CA,
IIf([NZ ETS]=True,1) AS NZ,
IIf([Australia ETS]=True,1) AS Australia,
IIf([CAProjectType] is not null, CA_Accepted_Projects.CAPTRiskLevel,
IIf([EUSelProjType] is not null, EU_ETS_Standards.EUPTRiskLevel,
IIf([NZSelProjType] is not null, NZ_Accepted_Projects.NZPTRiskLevel))) as [Risk Level],
IIf([CAStandard] is not null, CA_Accepted_Standards.CAStanRiskLevel,
IIf([EUSelStandard] is not null, EU_Accepted_Standards.EUStanRiskLevel,
IIf([NZSelStandard] is not null, NZ_Accepted_Standards.NZStanRiskLevel))) as [Standard Risk]
FROM
Project_Stage_Risk
INNER JOIN (((((((((Counterparty
INNER JOIN Projects
ON Counterparty.CPID = Projects.[Counter Party])
INNER JOIN Geographic_Location
ON Projects.Country_Name = Geographic_Location.Country_Name)
left JOIN CA_Accepted_Projects
ON Projects.CAProjectType = CA_Accepted_Projects.CA_ProjectTypes)
left JOIN NZ_Accepted_Projects
ON Projects.NZSelProjType = NZ_Accepted_Projects.NZ_StandardID)
left JOIN EU_ETS_Standards
ON Projects.EUSelProjType = EU_ETS_Standards.EU_StandardID)
left JOIN CA_Accepted_Standards
ON Projects.CAStandard = CA_Accepted_Standards.ID)
left JOIN NZ_Accepted_Standards
ON Projects.NZSelStandard = NZ_Accepted_Standards.ID)
left JOIN EU_Accepted_Standards
ON Projects.EUSelStandard = EU_Accepted_Standards.ID)
left join Emissions_Trading_Systems
ON Emissions_Trading_Systems.ETS = EU_Accepted_Standards.ETS)
ON Project_Stage_Risk.ProStaID = Projects.[Project Stage];
cross join the two sets in a view, put the condition in the select. make 2 views of this view. Join the 2 views together.
You could create a UNION query that unions together the three tables you want to conditionally join to, including a "Some_Value" column that will contain the item on which you want to join. Essentially, for each table you include in the UNION, set the value of the "Some_Value" column to a value you can use in a where clause to differentiate things. Then create an overall query that joins (in your example, table2) to the union query and use a WHERE clause to limit the records to the ones you need. I have done similar things myself on projects in the past with great success.
Thanks for the answers. I know it was not well explained though, but in the end, I could solve this problem by writing a subquery.
Join all five tables together, and use that CASE expression inside the SELECT clause to choose the appropriate field from all tables.
SELECT
CASE table1.some_value
WHEN 'a' THEN table2.some_value
WHEN 'b' THEN table3.some_value
WHEN 'c' THEN table4.some_value
WHEN 'd' THEN table5.some_value
END