as the subject line says, I would like to automatically create tables based on a list of tables in an excel, but if these are tables ending with _ERR, I want to strip any non-null limitations (a flaw in the old system).
Is there a way to do that? Just the actual statement, the rest of the logic is covered.
So something like :
CREATE TABLE … LIKE ... SET NULLABLE
would be nice.
Thank you!
CREATE [ OR REPLACE ] TABLE <table_name> LIKE <source_table>
then use alter to remove the NULL.
ALTER TABLE t1 ALTER COLUMN c1 DROP NOT NULL;
This is not a thing you can do natively with Snowflake's SQL variant. You'll need to script this out yourself.
you can create you statements by awk
awk 'FS="_" { if($NF=="ERR") print "create table like",$0 , "as nullable;"; else print "create table like",$0} ' file
o/p
create table like table_1
create table like table_2
create table like table_3_ERR as nullable;
create table like table_4
where i guess file includes below table names.
cat file
table_1
table_2
table_3_ERR
table_4
Related
It's the first time that I am working with SQL Server, and I need some help. I've to write a stored procedure (with an empty table as input parameter, or maybe a string containing the name is better (?)) that:
Identifies all tables on the database ending with the name of an input table. E.g. when the input table is called 'test', tables with names like 'table1_test', 'table2_test', ... should be selected.
merges those tables into the input table (which is empty).
Assumption: tables ending with 'test' have the same structure.
I can identify the tables by using the like operator on the information_schema.tables table. Then, a table with one column containing all the selected table names is returned. At this point, I'm stuck.
Does somebody know what to do? Thanks in advance!
Edit: the code I currently have for identifying which tables to insert
DECLARE #TARGET VARCHAR(255)
SET #TARGET = 'TEST'
BEGIN
SELECT TABLE_NAME FROM sfdc_replica.information_schema.tables WHERE TABLE_NAME LIKE CONCAT('%', #TARGET);
END;
I have a SQL Server Database Project in which I've made several changes to the schema where I've changed column data types from NUMERIC (18,0) to INT. We're trying to normalize the data type used for Primary Keys, it's a currently 50/50 mix.
When I generate the Publish script, some of the tables are recreated in the script:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[tmp_XYZ]
INSERT TABLE [dbo].[tmp_XYZ] SELECT ... FROM [dbo].[XYZ]
DROP TABLE [dbo].[XYZ]
sp_rename N'[dbo].[tmp_XYZ]', N'XYZ';
but other tables are just updated via ALTER statements
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[ABC] ALTER COLUMN [AbcID] INT NULL;
Is there some rule that dictates when a table will be recreated, and when it's just altered in place ?
Probably the best way is to Right Click on your object name and choose script as ...
Then you have options to create or alter
If you couldn't find Alter ,you can go to design view, right click and choose Generate Change Script ... to find the alter statement.
This is just an easy problem. It's the same problem as changing a table in the table designer. I think you've changed a column inside your table design which needs to drop and recreate the table to let the column order in the same position.
Here is a short example. Take this table design as given:
CREATE TABLE dbo.Test(
id int identity(1,1),
firstname nvarchar(100),
name nvarchar(100),
street nvarchar(100)
)
This will create the columns in a specified order. You can see this order here:
SELECT name, column_id
FROM sys.columns
WHERE object_id = OBJECT_ID(N'dbo.Test')
You'll see something like that:
column_name column_id
id 1
firstname 2
name 3
street 4
If you change the the column name via designer or in your case in the data project, this will cause SQL Server to obtain this order upright.
In this case you try to change the column name to lastname. This will enforce SQL Management Studio and other programs like that to keep the column_id upright. This can only be done, if the table is completely recreated with the right columnorder. SQL Server create a temporary table stub, insert everything into it, drop the old table and rename the temporary table to the old original name. Just as in your code above.
After that you'll see something like that:
column_name column_id
id 1
firstname 2
lastname 3
street 4
If you would simply rename the last column or do it manually, everything would be fine. Manually would be much more efficient, as there isn't the need to move ALL data to a new table. The manual way would be this:
-- Create the new column
ALTER TABLE dbo.Test ADD lastname nvarchar(100)
GO
-- Populate the new column using the old one
UPDATE dbo.Test
SET lastname = name
GO
-- Drop the old column afterwards
ALTER TABLE dbo.Test DROP COLUMN name
This behavior will result in the following result:
column_name column_id
id 1
firstname 2
street 4
lastname 5
The last one will be much more efficient, as already stated.
Hopefully this will answer your question, even if the answer comes lately.
I would like to have a column in my DB accessible via two column names temporarily.
Why? The column name was badly chosen, I would like to refactor it. As I want my webapp to remain stable while changing the column name, it would be good to
have a (let's call it) symlink named better_column_name pointing to the column bad_column_name
change the webapplication to use better_column_name
drop the symlink and rename column to better_column_name
"Refactoring Databases" suggests to actually add a second column which is synchronized on commit in order to achieve this. I am just hoping that there might be an easier way with Oracle, with less work and less overhead.
As long as you have code that uses both column names, I don't see a way to get around the fact that you'll have two (real) columns in that table.
I would add the new column with the correct name and then create a trigger that checks which column has been modified and updates the "other" column correspondingly. So whatever is being updated, the value is synch'ed with the other column.
Once all the code that uses the old column has been migrated, remove the trigger and drop the old column.
Edit
The trigger would so do something like this:
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER ...
...
UPDATE OF bad_column_name, better_column_name ON the_table
...
BEGIN
IF UPDATING ('BAD_COLUMN_NAME') THEN
:new.better_column_name = :new.bad_column_name
END IF;
IF UPDATING ('BETTER_COLUMN_NAME') THEN
:new.bad_column_name = :new.better_column_name
END IF;
END;
The order of the IF statements controls which change has a "higher priority" in case someone updated both columns at the same time.
Rename the table:
alter table mytable rename to mytable_old;
Create a view with the original tablename with both bad_column_name and better_column_name that point to the same column (and of course all the other columns):
create or replace view mytable as
select column1
, column2
, ...
, bad_column_name
, bad_column_name better_column_name
from mytable_old
;
Since this view is updatable by default (I assume here that mytable has a primary key), you can insert/update/delete from the view and it doesn't matter if you use bad_column_name or better_column_name.
After the refactoring, drop the view and rename the table and column:
drop view mytable;
alter table mytable_old rename column bad_column_name to better_column_name;
alter table mytable_old rename to mytable;
The best solution to this is only available in Oracle 11g Release 2: Edition-based Redefinition. This really cool feature allows us to maintain different versions of database tables and PL/SQL code, using special triggers and views. Find out more.
Essentially this is Oracle's built-in implementation of #AHorseWithNoName's suggestion.
you can create a view for the table. And port your application to use that view instead of the table.
create table t (bad_name varchar2(10), c2 varchar2(10));
create view vt as select bad_name AS good_name, c2 from t;
insert into vt (good_name, c2) values ('blub', 'blob');
select * from t;
select * from vt;
If you're on 11g you could look at using a virtual column. I'd probably be tempted to change the order slightly; rename the real column and create the virtual one using the old (bad) name, which can then be dropped at leisure. You may be restricted, of course, and there may be implications on other objects being invalidated that make this order less suitable for you.
How to remove a column from an existing table?
I have a table MEN with Fname and Lname
I need to remove the Lname
How to do it?
ALTER TABLE MEN DROP COLUMN Lname
Generic:
ALTER TABLE table_name DROP COLUMN column_name;
In your case:
ALTER TABLE MEN DROP COLUMN Lname;
Your example is simple and doesn’t require any additional table changes but generally speaking this is not so trivial.
If this column is referenced by other tables then you need to figure out what to do with other tables/columns. One option is to remove foreign keys and keep referenced data in other tables.
Another option is to find all referencing columns and remove them as well if they are not needed any longer.
In such cases the real challenge is finding all foreign keys. You can do this by querying system tables or using third party tools such as ApexSQL Search (free) or Red Gate Dependency tracker (premium but more features). There a whole thread on foreign keys here
This is the correct answer:
ALTER TABLE MEN DROP COLUMN Lname
But... if a CONSTRAINT exists on the COLUMN, then you must DROP the CONSTRAINT first, then you will be able to DROP the COLUMN. In order to drop a CONSTRAINT, run:
ALTER TABLE MEN DROP CONSTRAINT {constraint_name_on_column_Lname}
In SQL Server 2016 you can use new DIE statements.
ALTER TABLE Table_name DROP COLUMN IF EXISTS Column_name
The above query is re-runnable it drops the column only if it exists in the table else it will not throw error.
Instead of using big IF wrappers to check the existence of column before dropping it you can just run the above DDL statement
The question is, can you only delete a column from an unexisting table ;-)
BEGIN TRANSACTION
IF exists (SELECT * FROM sys.columns c
INNER JOIN sys.objects t ON (c.[object_id] = t.[object_id])
WHERE t.[object_id] = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[MyTable]')
AND c.[name] = 'ColumnName')
BEGIN TRY
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[MyTable] DROP COLUMN ColumnName
END TRY
BEGIN CATCH
print 'FAILED!'
END CATCH
ELSE
BEGIN
SELECT ERROR_NUMBER() AS ErrorNumber;
print 'NO TABLE OR COLUMN FOUND !'
END
COMMIT
The simple answer to this is to use this:
ALTER TABLE MEN DROP COLUMN Lname;
More than one column can be specified like this:
ALTER TABLE MEN DROP COLUMN Lname, secondcol, thirdcol;
From SQL Server 2016 it is also possible to only drop the column only if it exists. This stops you getting an error when the column doesn't exist which is something you probably don't care about.
ALTER TABLE MEN DROP COLUMN IF EXISTS Lname;
There are some prerequisites to dropping columns. The columns dropped can't be:
Used by an Index
Used by CHECK, FOREIGN KEY, UNIQUE, or PRIMARY KEY constraints
Associated with a DEFAULT
Bound to a rule
If any of the above are true you need to drop those associations first.
Also, it should be noted, that dropping a column does not reclaim the space from the hard disk until the table's clustered index is rebuilt. As such it is often a good idea to follow the above with a table rebuild command like this:
ALTER TABLE MEN REBUILD;
Finally as some have said this can be slow and will probably lock the table for the duration. It is possible to create a new table with the desired structure and then rename like this:
SELECT
Fname
-- Note LName the column not wanted is not selected
INTO
new_MEN
FROM
MEN;
EXEC sp_rename 'MEN', 'old_MEN';
EXEC sp_rename 'new_MEN', 'MEN';
DROP TABLE old_MEN;
But be warned there is a window for data loss of inserted rows here between the first select and the last rename command.
To add columns in existing table:
ALTER TABLE table_name
ADD
column_name DATATYPE NULL
To delete columns in existing table:
ALTER TABLE table_name
DROP COLUMN column_name
This can also be done through the SSMS GUI. The nice thing about this method is it warns you if there are any relationships on that column and can also automatically delete those as well.
Put table in Design view (right click on table) like so:
Right click on column in table's Design view and click "Delete
Column"
As I stated before, if there are any relationships that would also need to be deleted, it will ask you at this point if you would like to delete those as well. You will likely need to do so to delete the column.
If you are using C# and the Identity column is int, create a new instance of int without providing any value to it.It worked for me.
[identity_column] = new int()
Syntax:
ALTER TABLE TABLE_NAME DROP COLUMN COLUMN_NAME;
For Example:
alter table Employee drop column address;
When adding a column to an existing table, Oracle always puts the column at the end of the table. Is it possible to tell Oracle where it should appear in the table? If so, how?
The location of the column in the table should be unimportant (unless there are "page sizes" to consider, or whatever Oracle uses to actually store the data). What is more important to the consumer is how the results are called, i.e. the Select statement.
rename YOUR_ORIGINAL_TABLE as YOUR_NEW_TABLE;
create table YOUR_ORIGINAL_TABLE nologging /* or unrecoverable */
as
select Column1, Column2, NEW_COLUMN, Column3
from YOUR_NEW_TABLE;
Drop table YOUR_NEW_TABLE;
Select * From YOUR_ORIGINAL_TABLE; <<<<< now you will see the new column in the middle of the table.
But why would you want to do it? It's seems illogical. You should never assume column ordering and just use named column list if column order is important.
Why does the order of the columns matter? You can always alter it in your select statement?
There's an advantage to adding new columns at the end of the table. If there's code that naively does a "SELECT *" and then parses the fields in order, you won't be breaking old code by adding new columns at the end. If you add new columns in the middle of the table, then old code may be broken.
At one job, I had a DBA who was super-anal about "Never do 'SELECT *'". He insisted that you always write out the specific fields.
What I normally do is:
Rename the old table.
Create the new table with columns in the right order.
Create the constraints for that new table.
Populate with data:Insert into new_table select * from renamed table.
I don't think that this can be done without saving the data to a temporary table, dropping the table, and recreating it. On the other hand, it really shouldn't matter where the column is. As long as you specify the columns you are retrieving in your select statement, you can order them however you want.
Bear in mind that, under the tables, all the data in the table records are glued together. Adding a column to the end of a table [if it is nullable or (in later versions) not null with a default] just means a change to the table's metadata.
Adding a column in the middle would require re-writing every record in that table to add the appropriate value (or markers) for that column. In some cases, that might mean the records take up more room on the blocks and some records need to be migrated.
In short, it's a VAST amount of IO effort for a table of any real size.
You can always create a view over the table that has the columns in the preferred order and use that view in a DML statement just as you would the table
I don't believe so - SQL Server doesn't allow these either. The method I always have to use is:
Create new table that looks right (including additional column
Begin transaction
select all data from old table into new one
Drop old table
Rename new table
Commit transaction.
Not exactly pretty, but gets the job done.
No, its not possible via an "ALTER TABLE" statement. However, you could create a new table with the same definition as your current one, albeit with a different name, with the columns in the correct order in the way you want them. Copy the data into the new table. Drop the old table. Rename the new table to match the old table name.
Tom Kyte has an article on this on AskTom
link text
Apparently there's a trick involving marking the "after" columns INVISIBLE; when restored, they end up at the back.
CREATE TABLE yourtable (one NUMBER(5, 0), two NUMBER(5, 0), three NUMBER(5, 0), four NUMBER(5, 0))
ALTER TABLE yourtable ADD twopointfive NUMBER(5, 0);
ALTER TABLE yourtable MODIFY (three INVISIBLE, four INVISIBLE);
ALTER TABLE yourtable MODIFY (three VISIBLE, four VISIBLE);
https://oracle-base.com/articles/12c/invisible-columns-12cr1#invisible-columns-and-column-ordering
1) Ok so you can't do it directly. We don't need post after post saying the same thing, do we?
2) Ok so the order of columns in a table doesn't technically matter. But that's not the point, the original question simply asked if you could or couldn't be done. Don't presume that you know everybody else's requirements. Maybe they have a table with 100 columns that is currently being queried using "SELECT * ..." inside some monstrously hacked together query that they would just prefer not to try to untangle, let alone replace "*" with 100 column names. Or maybe they are just anal about the order of things and like to have related fields next to each other when browsing schema with, say SQL Developer. Maybe they are dealing with non-technical staff that won't know to look at the end of a list of 100 columns when, logically, it should be somewhere near the beginning.
Nothing is more irritating than asking an honest question and getting an answer that says: "you shouldn't be doing that". It's MY job, not YOURS! Please don't tell me how to do my job. Just help if you can. Thanks!
Ok... sorry for the rant. Now...at www.orafaq.com it suggests this workaround.
First suppose you have already run:
CREATE TABLE tab1 ( col1 NUMBER );
Now say you want to add a column named "col2", but you want them ordered "col2", "col1" when doing a "SELECT * FROM tbl1;"
The suggestion is to run:
ALTER TABLE tab1 ADD (col2 DATE);
RENAME tab1 TO tab1_old;
CREATE TABLE tab1 AS SELECT 0 AS col1, col1 AS col2 FROM tab1_old;
I found this to be incredibly misleading. First of all, you're filling "col1" with zero's so, if you had any data, then you are losing it by doing this. Secondly, it's actually renaming "col1" to "col2" and fails to mention this. So, here's my example, hopefully it's a little clearer:
Suppose you have a table that was created with the following statement:
CREATE TABLE users (first_name varchar(25), last_name varchar(25));
Now say you want to insert middle_name in between first_name and last_name. Here's one way:
ALTER TABLE users ADD middle_name varchar(25);
RENAME users TO users_tmp;
CREATE TABLE users AS SELECT first_name, middle_name, last_name FROM users_tmp;
/* and for good measure... */
DROP TABLE testusers_tmp;
Note that middle_name will default to NULL (implied by the ALTER TABLE statement). You can alternatively set a different default value in the CREATE TABLE statement like so:
CREATE TABLE users AS SELECT first_name, 'some default value' AS middle_name, last_name FROM users_tmp;
This trick could come in handy if you're adding a date field with a default of sysdate, but you want all of the existing records to have some other (e.g. earlier) date value.