SQL Server: Logical equivalent of ALL query - sql

I have a following query (simplified):
SELECT
Id
FROM
dbo.Entity
WHERE
1 = ALL (
SELECT
CASE
WHEN {Condition} THEN 1
ELSE 0
END
FROM
dbo.Related
INNER JOIN dbo.Entity AS TargetEntity ON
TargetEntity.Id = Related.TargetId
WHERE
Related.SourceId = Entity.Id
)
where {Condition} is a complex dynamic condition on TargetEntity.
In simple terms, this query should return entities for which all related entities match the required condition.
Unfortunately, that does not work quite well, since by SQL standard 1 = ALL evaluates to TRUE when ALL is applied to an empty set. I know I can add AND EXISTS, but that will require me to repeat the whole subquery, which, I am certain, will cause problems for performance.
How should I rewrite the query to achieve the result I need (SQL Server 2008)?
Thanks in advance.
Note: practically speaking, the whole query is highly dynamic, so the perfect solution would be to rewrite only 1 = ALL ( ... ), since changing top-level select can cause problems when additional conditions are added to top-level where.

Couldn't you use a min to achieve this?
EG:
SELECT
Id
FROM
dbo.Entity
WHERE
1 = (
SELECT
MIN(CASE
WHEN {Condition} THEN 1
ELSE 0
END)
FROM
dbo.Related
INNER JOIN dbo.Entity AS TargetEntity ON
TargetEntity.Id = Related.TargetId
WHERE
Related.SourceId = Entity.Id
)
The min should return null if there's no clauses, 1 if they're all 1 and 0 if there's any 0's, and comparing to 1 should only be true for 1.

It can be translated to pick Entities where no related entities with unmatched condition exist.
This can be accomplished by:
SELECT
Id
FROM
dbo.Entity
WHERE
NOT EXISTS (
//as far as I have an element which do not match the condition, skip this entity
SELECT TOP 1 1
FROM
dbo.Related
INNER JOIN dbo.Entity AS TargetEntity ON
TargetEntity.Id = Related.TargetId
WHERE
Related.SourceId = Entity.Id AND
CASE
WHEN {Condition} THEN 1
ELSE 0
END = 0
)
EDIT: depending on condition, you can write something like:
WHERE Related.SourceId = Entity.Id AND NOT {Condition} if it doesn't change too much the complexity of the query.

Instead of using all, change your query to compare the result of the subquery directly:
select Id
from dbo.Entity
where 1 = (
select
case
when ... then 1
else 0
end
from ...
where ...
)

Probably this will work: WHERE NOT 0 = ANY(...)

If I read the query correctly, it can be simplified to something like:
SELECT e.Id
FROM dbo.Entity e
INNER JOIN dbo.Related r ON r.SourceId = e.Id
INNER JOIN dbo.Entity te ON te.Id = r.TargetId
WHERE <extra where stuff>
GROUP BY e.Id
HAVING SUM(CASE WHEN {Condition} THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) = COUNT(*)
This says the Condition must be true for all rows. It filters the "empty" set case away with the INNER JOINs.

Related

SQL query having CASE WHEN EXISTS statement

I trying to create a SQL query with a CASE WHEN EXISTS clause in SQL Server. I assume I am doing something wrong as when I run the SELECT * FROM [Christmas_Sale] it takes forever for SQL to load the code.
CREATE VIEW [Christmas_Sale]
AS
SELECT
C.*,
CASE
WHEN EXISTS (SELECT S.Sale_Date
FROM [Christmas_Sale] s
WHERE C.ID = S.ID)
THEN 0
ELSE 1
END AS ChristmasSale
FROM
[Customer_Detail] C ;
I'm trying to write a sub select which I need to return a 1 if Sale_Date= 1 and 0 for anything else.
The syntax of your query looks ok. But since your stated:
I'm trying to write a sub select which I need to return a 1 if Sale_Date= 1 and 0 for anything else.
... Then you could rephrase your query by adding one more condition in the WHERE clause of the subquery:
CREATE VIEW [Christmas_Sale]AS
SELECT
C.*,
CASE WHEN EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM [Christmas_Sale] s
WHERE C.ID = S.ID and S.Sale_Date = 1
) THEN 0 ELSE 1 END AS ChristmasSale
FROM [Customer_Detail] C ;
If a record exists in [Christmas_Sale] with the corresponding ID and Sale_Date = 1, then ChristmasSale will have value 1, else it will display 0.
This query looks correct:
CREATE VIEW [Christmas_Sale] AS
SELECT C.*,
(CASE WHEN EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM [Christmas_Sale] s
WHERE C.ID = S.ID
)
THEN 0 ELSE 1
END) AS ChristmasSale
FROM [Customer_Detail] C ;
If performance is an issue, you want an index on Christmas_Sale(ID).
Note that the SELECT S.Sale_Date in the subquery is meaningless, because EXISTS checks for rows not columns. Hence, I replaced it with the simpler 1.

Join SQL Server Showing Duplicate Row

I want to ask something about joining query. I have a query like this:
SELECT b.compilecodingid,
a.subjobfamily,
b.position,
b.nocoding,
( CASE
WHEN (SELECT Count(0)
FROM trlspbia
WHERE learningsystemid = a.learningsystemid
AND compilecodingid = b.compilecodingid
AND moduleid = '2018081616230361362303614'
AND learningroadmap = 'Basic') > 0 THEN 1
ELSE 0
END ) AS CountPickPBIA
FROM trlsplanning a,
trcompilecodingheader b
WHERE a.learningsystemid = b.learningsystemid
AND a.position = b.position
AND a.learningsystemid = '2018081513283162000000001'
order by CountPickPBIA desc
I know it's because Column Position on Table TrLsPlanning has more than 1 data,
Anyone can help me to find the solution?
Thank you.
The simplest solution is probably select distinct:
SELECT cch.compilecodingid, p.subjobfamily, cch.position, cch.nocoding,
(CASE WHEN EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM trlspbia s
WHERE s.learningsystemid = p.learningsystemid AND
s.compilecodingid = ccb.compilecodingid AND
s.moduleid = '2018081616230361362303614' AND
s.learningroadmap = 'Basic'
)
THEN 1
ELSE 0
END) AS CountPickPBIA
FROM trlsplanning p JOIN
trcompilecodingheader cch
ON p.learningsystemid = cch.learningsystemid AND
p.position = cch.position
WHERE p.learningsystemid = '2018081513283162000000001'
ORDER BY CountPickPBIA DESC;
SELECT DISTINCT incurs its own overhead. But without more information about the structure and contents of the table, this is the simplest solution.
Note other changes in the query:
Table aliases are abbreviations for table names, rather than being arbitrary letters.
The JOIN syntax is fixed, to use modern, proper, and standard JOIN/ON.
All columns are qualified with the table alias, particularly those in the correlated subqueries.
The subquery uses EXISTS rather than COUNT(*). This is both more efficient and it probably better expresses the logic you want.

SQL Subquery Having COUNT(var) turns 0 to NULLs

I have written a SQL query with a subquery to include counts. When the count is 0, and I try to filter out the 0, it turns the 0's to NULLs and keeps the rows, and vice versa. The result is that I can't filter out the 0's, which was the purpose of including the counts.
SELECT distinct
a
,b
,
(SELECT
count(id)
FROM seq_stud
WHERE scs.SequenceID = seq_stud.SequenceID
and seq_stud.EndDate is null
HAVING count(id) <> 0
) As t1
FROM sp
INNER JOIN p on sp.ProgramID = p.ProgramID
...etc.
Does anyone know why this is happening and how I can filter out the 0 counts?
You don't filter in the SELECT clause. If you don't want rows that have no match in seq_stud, then use WHERE:
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM seq_stud ss
WHERE scs.SequenceID = ss.SequenceID and ss.EndDate is null
)
I would remove the HAVING statement altogether. You need to put that in the WHERE clause. Otherwise, it will return null, as you found.
SELECT distinct a, b,
(SELECT count(id)
FROM seq_stud
WHERE scs.SequenceID = seq_stud.SequenceID
and seq_stud.EndDate is null
) As t1
FROM sp
INNER JOIN p on sp.ProgramID = p.ProgramID
WHERE t1 > 0
I just figured this out. The Select subquery should be included as a WHERE statement
Using having count() in exists clause

Conditional where clause results in terrible performance Firebird

Firebird does not know how to execute a conditional where. Or that is what I think.
The First query returns values after 15ms.
SELECT DISTINCT
A.MANID,
A.DISNO,
A.DISID
FROM
TABLEB B
INNER JOIN TABLEA A ON (A.ITEM_ID = B.ITEM_ID)
WHERE
(
(POSITION('%' IN :ISEARCH) = 0 AND B.CATID = :ISEARCH)
)
This second query takes more than 40 seconds and all is about the OR condition.
SELECT DISTINCT
A.MANID,
A.DISNO,
A.DISID
FROM
TABLEB B
INNER JOIN TABLEA A ON (A.ITEM_ID = B.ITEM_ID)
WHERE
(
(POSITION('%' IN :ISEARCH) = 0 AND B.CATID = :ISEARCH) OR
POSITION('%' IN :ISEARCH) <> 0
)
How can I tell firebird to behave in this type of situations?
A bit far-fetched and I'm not familiar with Firebird but for this particular case I'd suggest to try
(
(POSITION('%' IN :ISEARCH) = 0 AND B.CATID = :ISEARCH) OR
POSITION('%' IN :ISEARCH) <> 0
)
be written like
(
(POSITION('%' IN :ISEARCH) <> 0 OR B.CATID = :ISEARCH)
)
which might make more sense to the query optimizer?
It's still an OR and a lot of RDBMSs don't like ORs but it's worth a try...
Worst case you could try to split the statement into 2 separate queries that you UNION ALL together again where one handles POSITION('%' IN :ISEARCH) <> 0 and the other B.CATID = :ISEARCH. The trouble with that approach might be doubled entries which will require filtering out again. (aka: a new can of worms...)

SQL Having Clause

I'm trying to get a stored procedure to work using the following syntax:
select count(sl.Item_Number)
as NumOccurrences
from spv3SalesDocument as sd
left outer join spv3saleslineitem as sl on sd.Sales_Doc_Type = sl.Sales_Doc_Type and
sd.Sales_Doc_Num = sl.Sales_Doc_Num
where
sd.Sales_Doc_Type='ORDER' and
sd.Sales_Doc_Num='OREQP0000170' and
sl.Item_Number = 'MCN-USF'
group by
sl.Item_Number
having count (distinct sl.Item_Number) = 0
In this particular case when the criteria is not met the query returns no records and the 'count' is just blank. I need a 0 returned so that I can apply a condition instead of just nothing.
I'm guessing it is a fairly simple fix but beyond my simple brain capacity.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Wally
First, having a specific where clause on sl defeats the purpose of the left outer join -- it bascially turns it into an inner join.
It sounds like you are trying to return 0 if there are no matches. I'm a T-SQL programmer, so I don't know if this will be meaningful in other flavors... and I don't know enough about the context for this query, but it sounds like you are trying to use this query for branching in an IF statement... perhaps this will help you on your way, even if it is not quite what you're looking for...
IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM spv3SalesDocument as sd
INNER JOINs pv3saleslineitem as sl on sd.Sales_Doc_Type = sl.Sales_Doc_Type
and sd.Sales_Doc_Num = sl.Sales_Doc_Num
WHERE sd.Sales_Doc_Type='ORDER'
and sd.Sales_Doc_Num='OREQP0000170'
and sl.Item_Number = 'MCN-USF')
BEGIN
-- Do something...
END
I didn't test these but off the top of my head give them a try:
select ISNULL(count(sl.Item_Number), 0) as NumOccurrences
If that one doesn't work, try this one:
select
CASE count(sl.Item_Number)
WHEN NULL THEN 0
WHEN '' THEN 0
ELSE count(sl.Item_Number)
END as NumOccurrences
This combination of group by and having looks pretty suspicious:
group by sl.Item_Number
having count (distinct sl.Item_Number) = 0
I'd expect this having condition to approve only groups were Item_Number is null.
To always return a row, use a union. For example:
select name, count(*) as CustomerCount
from customers
group by
name
having count(*) > 1
union all
select 'No one found!', 0
where not exists
(
select *
from customers
group by
name
having count(*) > 1
)