I have a query but it is not working correctly,
Select *
from "Firms"
Where "Properties" IN ('{1,2}')
That's my postgres query,
"Properties" column is int array.
Only those containing these two values are coming, but I want to fetch records containing any of the values, and I want to list by number of matching values if possible.
Test case:
create table array_any(id integer, array_fld int[]);
insert into array_any values (1, ARRAY[1,2]), (2, ARRAY[2,3]), (3, ARRAY[3,4]);
select id, count(*) from array_any,
lateral unnest(array_fld) as s where s = ANY(ARRAY[1,2]) group by id order by id;
id | count
----+-------
1 | 2
2 | 1
Related
I've got a problem with making union of 2 tables that have values masked using random function. Unless someone has permission to read all data, user should see random values between (-1000,2000)
making separate views for each table generates the values in a correct way, however there's problem when I try to make union of those 2 tables or views. Instead of seeing random values I see 0 for everything
Let's say there's table A defined as:
ID INT IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL,
Value MONEY MASKED WITH (FUNCTION = 'random(-1000, 20000)') NOT NULL
and table B as:
ID INT IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL,
Value DECIMAL (18, 6) MASKED WITH (FUNCTION = 'random(-1000.000000, 20000.000000)') NULL
in table A:
ID Value
1 12
2 21
3 34
in table B:
ID Value
7 17.12
8 23.01
9 2.56
view on each of table shows ID's of each tables and masked values for user without permissions and values as in table for user with permissions which is correct
however UNION of both tables should show ID's and masked values but instead it shows values = 0.000000.
I'm kinda confused on how to make those values appear as masked random values in union
You can UNION / UNION ALL a select of the same table without problems. But using two different tables gives 0 for all masked values.
You can use the following as a workaround using temporary tables:
SELECT * INTO #t1 FROM TableA
SELECT * INTO #t2 FROM TableB
SELECT * FROM #t1
UNION ALL
SELECT * FROM #t2
demo on dbfiddle.uk
Am inserting rows in the table from another table
I need to the id columns should be running number like the below how to do that
i have set id column is unique key, so that the below code shows error
insert into Tbl1 (Id, DislayName,IsEnabled)
select 16000,Names,0 from Tbl2
Insertion should be like
16000 | John | false
16001 | Deo | false
16002 | Jake | false
NOTE: no auto increment should be used, because already its been assigned for another column
Add row_number() window function (minus one)
insert into Tbl1 (Id, DislayName,IsEnabled)
select 16000 -1 + row_number () over (order by Names),
Names,0
from Tbl2;
I'm refactoring very old code. Currently, PHP generates a separate select for every value. Say loc contains 1,2 and data contains a,b, it generates
select val from tablename where loc_id=1 and data_id=a;
select val from tablename where loc_id=1 and data_id=b;
select val from tablename where loc_id=2 and data_id=a;
select val from tablename where loc_id=2 and data_id=b;
...etc which all return either a single value or nothing. That meant I always had n(loc_id)*n(data_id) results, including nulls, which is necessary for subsequent processing. Knowing the order, this was used to generate an HTML table. Both data_id and loc_id can in theory scale up to a couple thousands (which is obviously not great in a table, but that's another concern).
+-----------+-----------+
| data_id 1 | data_id 2 |
+----------+-----------+-----------+
| loc_id 1 | - | 999.99 |
+----------+-----------+-----------+
+ loc_id 2 | 888.88 | - |
+----------+-----------+-----------+
To speed things up, I was looking at replacing this with a single query:
select val from tablename where loc_id in (1,2) and data_id in (a,b) order by loc_id asc, data_id asc;
to get a result like (below) and iterate to build my table.
Rownum VAL
------- --------
1 null
2 999.99
3 777.77
4 null
Unfortunately that approach drops the nulls from the resultset so I end up with
Rownum VAL
------- --------
1 999.99
2 777.77
Note that it is possible that neither data_id or loc_id have any match, in which case I would still need a null, null.
So I don't know which value matches which. I ways to match with the expected loc_id/data_id combination in php if I add loc_id and data_id... but that's getting messy.
Still a novice in SQL in general and that's absolutely the first time I work on PostgreSQL so hopefully that's not too obvious... As I post this I'm looking at two ways to solve this: any in array[] and joins. Will update if anything new is found.
tl;dr question
How do I do a where loc_id in (1,2) and data_id in (a,b) and keep the nulls so that I always get n(loc)*n(data) results?
You can achieve that in a single query with two steps:
Generate a matrix of all desired rows in the output.
LEFT [OUTER] JOIN to actual rows.
You get at least one row for every cell in your table.
If (loc_id, data_id) is unique, you get exactly one row.
SELECT t.val
FROM (VALUES (1), (2)) AS l(loc_id)
CROSS JOIN (VALUES ('a'), ('b')) AS d(data_id) -- generate total grid of rows
LEFT JOIN tablname t USING (loc_id, data_id) -- attach matching rows (if any)
ORDER BY l.loc_id, d.data_id;
Works for any number of columns with any number of values.
For your simple case:
SELECT t.val
FROM (
VALUES
(1, 'a'), (1, 'b')
, (2, 'a'), (2, 'b')
) AS ld (loc_id, data_id) -- total grid of rows
LEFT JOIN tablname t USING (loc_id, data_id) -- attach matching rows (if any)
ORDER BY ld.loc_id, ld.data_id;
where (loc_id in (1,2) or loc_id is null)
and (data_id in (a,b) or data_id is null)
Select the fields you use for filtering, so you know where the values came from:
select loc,data,val from tablename where loc in (1,2) and data in (a,b);
You won't get nulls this way either, but it's not a problem anymore. You know which fields are missing, and you know those are nulls.
I have two tables, X and Y, with identical schema but different records. Given a record from X, I need a query to find the closest matching record in Y that contains NULL values for non-matching columns. Identity columns should be excluded from the comparison. For example, if my record looked like this:
------------------------
id | col1 | col2 | col3
------------------------
0 |'abc' |'def' | 'ghi'
And table Y looked like this:
------------------------
id | col1 | col2 | col3
------------------------
6 |'abc' |'def' | 'zzz'
8 | NULL |'def' | NULL
Then the closest match would be record 8, since where the columns don't match, there are NULL values. 6 WOULD have been the closest match, but the 'zzz' disqualified it.
What's unique about this problem is that the schema of the tables is unknown besides the id column and the data types. There could be 4 columns, or there could be 7 columns. We just don't know - it's dynamic. All we know is that there is going to be an 'id' column and that the columns will be strings, either varchar or nvarchar.
What is the best query in this case to pick the closest matching record out of Y, given a record from X? I'm actually writing a function. The input is an integer (the id of a record in X) and the output is an integer (the id of a record in Y, or NULL). I'm an SQL novice, so a brief explanation of what's happening in your solution would help me greatly.
There could be 4 columns, or there could be 7 columns.... I'm actually writing a function.
This is an impossible task. Because functions are deterministic, so you cannot have a function that will work on an arbitrary table structure, using dynamic SQL. A stored procedure, sure, but not a function.
However, the below shows you a way using FOR XML and some decomposing of the XML to unpivot rows into column names and values which can then be compared. The technique used here and the queries can be incorporated into a stored procedure.
MS SQL Server 2008 Schema Setup:
-- this is the data table to match against
create table t1 (
id int,
col1 varchar(10),
col2 varchar(20),
col3 nvarchar(40));
insert t1
select 6, 'abc', 'def', 'zzz' union all
select 8, null , 'def', null;
-- this is the data with the row you want to match
create table t2 (
id int,
col1 varchar(10),
col2 varchar(20),
col3 nvarchar(40));
insert t2
select 0, 'abc', 'def', 'ghi';
GO
Query 1:
;with unpivoted1 as (
select n.n.value('local-name(.)','nvarchar(max)') colname,
n.n.value('.','nvarchar(max)') value
from (select (select * from t2 where id=0 for xml path(''), type)) x(xml)
cross apply x.xml.nodes('//*[local-name()!="id"]') n(n)
), unpivoted2 as (
select x.id,
n.n.value('local-name(.)','nvarchar(max)') colname,
n.n.value('.','nvarchar(max)') value
from (select id,(select * from t1 where id=outr.id for xml path(''), type) from t1 outr) x(id,xml)
cross apply x.xml.nodes('//*[local-name()!="id"]') n(n)
)
select TOP(1) WITH TIES
B.id,
sum(case when A.value=B.value then 1 else 0 end) matches
from unpivoted1 A
join unpivoted2 B on A.colname = B.colname
group by B.id
having max(case when A.value <> B.value then 1 end) is null
ORDER BY matches;
Results:
| ID | MATCHES |
----------------
| 8 | 1 |
i have a table some departments tagged with user as
User | Department
user1 | IT,HR,House Keeping
user2 | HR,House Keeping
user3 | IT,Finance,HR,Maintainance
user4 | Finance,HR,House Keeping
user5 | IT,HR,Finance
i have created a SP that take parameter varchar(max) as filter (i dynamically merged if in C# code)
in the sp i creat a temp table for the selected filters eg; if user select IT & Finance & HR
i merged the string as IT##Finance##HR (in C#) & call the sp with this parameter
in SP i make a temp table as
FilterValue
IT
Finance
HR
now the issue how can i get the records that contains all the departments taged with them
(users that are associated with all the values in temp table) to get
User | Department
user3 | IT,Finance,HR,Maintainance
user5 | IT,HR,Finance
as optput
please suggest an optimised way to achive this filtering
This design is beyond horrible -- you should really change this to use truly relational design with a dependent table.
That said, if you are not in a position to change the design, you can limp around the problem with XML, and it might give you OK performance.
Try something like this (replace '#test' with your table name as needed...). You won't need to even create your temp table -- this will jimmy your comma-delimited string around into XML, which you can then use XQuery against directly:
DECLARE #test TABLE (usr int, department varchar(1000))
insert into #test (usr, department)
values (1, 'IT,HR,House Keeping')
insert into #test (usr, department)
values (2, 'HR,House Keeping')
insert into #test (usr, department)
values (3, 'IT,Finance,HR,Maintainance')
insert into #test (usr, department)
values (4, 'Finance,HR,House Keeping')
insert into #test (usr, department)
values (5, 'IT,HR,Finance')
;WITH departments (usr, department, depts)
AS
(
SELECT usr, department, CAST(NULLIF('<department><dept>' + REPLACE(department, ',', '</dept><dept>') + '</dept></department>', '<department><dept></dept></department>') AS xml)
FROM #test
)
SELECT departments.usr, departments.department
FROM departments
WHERE departments.depts.exist('/department/dept[text()[1] eq "IT"]') = 1
AND departments.depts.exist('/department/dept[text()[1] eq "HR"]') = 1
AND departments.depts.exist('/department/dept[text()[1] eq "Finance"]') = 1
I agree with others that your design is, um, not ideal, and given the fact that it may change, as per your comment, one is not too motivated to find a really fascinating solution for the present situation.
Still, you can have one that at least works correctly (I think) and meets the situation. Here's what I've come up with:
;
WITH
UserDepartment ([User], Department) AS (
SELECT 'user1', 'IT,HR,House Keeping' UNION ALL
SELECT 'user2', 'HR,House Keeping' UNION ALL
SELECT 'user3', 'IT,Finance,HR,Maintainance' UNION ALL
SELECT 'user4', 'Finance,HR,House Keeping' UNION ALL
SELECT 'user5', 'IT,HR,Finance'
),
Filter (FilterValue) AS (
SELECT 'IT' UNION ALL
SELECT 'Finance' UNION ALL
SELECT 'HR'
),
CSVSplit AS (
SELECT
ud.*,
--x.node.value('.', 'varchar(max)')
x.Value AS aDepartment
FROM UserDepartment ud
CROSS APPLY (SELECT * FROM dbo.Split(',', ud.Department)) x
)
SELECT
c.[User],
c.Department
FROM CSVSplit c
INNER JOIN Filter f ON c.aDepartment = f.FilterValue
GROUP BY
c.[User],
c.Department
HAVING
COUNT(*) = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM Filter)
The first two CTEs are just sample tables, the rest of the query is the solution proper.
The CSVSplit CTE uses a Split function that splits a comma-separated list into a set of items and returns them as a table. The entire CTE turns the row set of the form
----- ---------------------------
user1 department1,department2,...
... ...
into this:
----- -----------
user1 department1
user1 department2
... ...
The main SELECT joins the normalised row set with the filter table and selects rows where the number of matches exactly equals the number of items in the filter table. (Note: this implies there's no identical names in UserDepartment.Department).