I think my head is muddy or something. I'm trying to figure out how a t-sql update works without a join when updating one table from another. I've always used joins in the past but came across a stored proc where someone else created one without a join. This update is being used in SQL 2008R2 and it works.
Update table1
SET col1 = (SELECT TOP 1 colX FROM table2 WHERE colZ = colY),
col2 = (SELECT TOP 1 colE FROM table2 WHERE colZ = colY)
Obviously, colY is a field in table1. To get the same results in a select statement (not update), a join is required. I guess I don't understand how an update works behind the scenes but it must be doing some kind of join?
SQL Server translates those subqueries into joins. You can look at this by getting the query plan. You can write an equivalent query with UPDATE ... FROM ... JOIN syntax and observe the query plan to be essentially the same.
The sample code shown is unusual, hard to understand, redundant and inflexible. I recommend against using this style.
No it's doing a sub query, well two in this case. Be damn painful if you have another 98 col fields.
You can do something similar for select
select *,
(SELECT TOP 1 colX FROM table2 WHERE colZ = colY) as col1
From table1
A left join would simply be more efficient
Your example unless the dbms optimises it it running the subquery(ies) for each row in table.
Got to say whoever wrote it is less than competent.
These subqueries are what is called correlated subqueries. If you were to write the same query as a SELECT rather than an UPDATE it would look like this.
SELECT col1 = (SELECT TOP 1 table2.colX FROM table2 WHERE table2.colZ = table1.colY),
col2 = (SELECT TOP 1 table2.colE FROM table2 WHERE table2.colZ = table1.colY)
FROM table1
The JOIN is in the fact that you are referencing a column from an outside table on the inside of the subquery. Table1 is referenced in the UPDATE command. You can include a FROM clause but it isn't required for a setup like this.
You can use the same syntax in a SELECT with no join, but you need to alias the table if colY also exists in table2
SELECT (SELECT TOP 1 colX FROM table2 WHERE colZ = T.colY)
, (SELECT TOP 1 colE FROM table2 WHERE colZ = T.colY)
FROM table1 AS T
I only ever use this sort of thing when building up an ad hoc query just for my own infomation. If it's going to be put into any sort of permanent code I'll convert it to a join as it's easier to read and more maintainable.
Related
Can you set multiple column names from a SQL table as a macro in SQL to query against?
For example I have multiple columns I am hitting against multiple times, can I use a macro or some type of reference to identify them ONCE to avoid displaying them repetitively and cluttering up the code?
The current code works, I am just looking for a cleaner/streamlined option.
Current Code:
WHERE ('ABC') IN
([CODE1],[CODE2],[CODE3],[CODE4],[CODE5],[CODE6],[CODE7],[CODE8]
,[CODE9],[CODE10],[CODE11],[CODE12],[CODE13],[CODE14],[CODE15]
,[CODE16],[CODE17],[CODE18],[CODE19],[CODE20],[CODE21],[CODE22]
,[CODE23],[CODE24],[CODE25]
AND ('CFS') IN
([CODE1],[CODE2],[CODE3],[CODE4],[CODE5],[CODE6],[CODE7],[CODE8]
,[CODE9],[CODE10],[CODE11],[CODE12],[CODE13],[CODE14],[CODE15]
,[CODE16],[CODE17],[CODE18],[CODE19],[CODE20],[CODE21],[CODE22]
,[CODE23],[CODE24],[CODE25]
ect...(20 more times)
Goal:
WHERE 'ABC' IN (&columnsmentionedabove)
OR 'FGS' in (&columnsmentionedabove)
OR 'g6s' in (&columnsmentionedabove)
etc.....
This is inherited code and just seems very clunky.
Thank you
Numbered columns like this are almost always a sign you should have an additional table. So if your existing table structure is like this:
Table1
Table1ID, OtherFields, Code1, Code2, Code3.... Code25
You really want something more like this:
Table1
Table1ID, OtherFields
Table1Codes
Table1ID, Code
Where each entry in Table1 will have many entries in Table1Codes. Then you write JOIN statements to show the two sets side-by-side when needed.
FROM Table1 t
INNER JOIN Table1Codes tc1 ON tc.Table1ID = t.Table1ID AND tc.Code = 'ABC'
INNER JOIN Table1Codes tc2 ON tc.Table1ID = t.Table1ID AND tc.Code = 'CFS'
Or
FROM Table1 t
INNER JOIN Table1Codes tc1 ON tc.Table1ID = t.Table1ID AND tc.Code IN ('ABC','FGS','g6s')
If you can't change the table's schema, as in often the case, you can UNPIVOT it. For example, assuming CODE1...CODE25 come from MyTable, wrap the UNPIVOT operation inside a CTE:
;WITH
cte AS
(
SELECT upvt.*
FROM MyTable
UNPIVOT (
CodeValue FOR CodeLabel IN ([CODE1], [CODE2], ..., [CODE25])
) upvt
)
SELECT *
FROM cte
WHERE CodeValue IN ('ABC', 'DEF', ...)
The unpivot operation is not free. Make sure you filter as much as possible from MyTable before unpivoting the it.
For Sql Server 2014, what syntax do I need, if this is even possible?
(in pseudo-code)
DECLARE #searchstring nvarchar(20)
LOOP #searchstringstring = (SELECT keyword FROM table1)
SELECT column FROM table2 where column LIKE '%#searchstring%'
END LOOP
I want it to return all columns in a single table.
Unless I'm missing something, you want to select all the values in table2.Column that contains the text in table2.Keyword. This can be done easily with a simple inner join:
SELECT t2.column
FROM table2 t2
INNER JOIN table1 t1 ON(t2.column LIKE '%'+ t1.keyword +'%'
Sql works best with set based operations. looping is rarely the desired approach.
Maybe it's because it's Friday but I can't seem to get this and it feels like it should be really really easy.
I have one result set (pulls the data from multiple tables) that gives me the following result set:
Room Type | ImageID | Date
The next query (pulled from separate tables than above) result give me :
ImageID | Date | Tagged
I just want to compare the results to see which imageid's are common between the two results, and which fall into each list separately.
I have tried insert the results from each into temp tables and do a join on imageid but sql server does NOT like that. Ideally I would like a solution that allows me to do this without creating temp tables.
I researched using union but it seems that because the two results don't have the same columns I avoided that route.
Thanks!
You can do this a number of different ways, for instance you can use either a inner join or intersect using the two sets as derived tables.
select ImageID from (your_first_query)
intersect
select ImageID from (your_second_query)
or
select query1.ImageID
from (your_first_query) query1
inner join (your_second_query) query2 on query1.ImageID = query2.ImageID
You don't explain why SQL-Server does not like performing a join on ImageId. Shouldn't be a problem. As to your first question, you need to transform your two queries into subqueries and perform a Full Out Join on them:
Select * from
(Select Room Type, ImageID, Date ...) T1 Full Outer Join
(Select ImageID, Date, Tagged ...) T2 on T1.ImageId = T2.ImageId
The analysis of Null values on both side of the join should give you what you want.
SELECT TableA.ImageID
FROM TableA
WHERE TableA.ImageID
IN (SELECT TableB.ImageID FROM TableB)
select q1.ImageID
from (your_first_query) q1
WHERE EXISTS (select 1
from (your_second_query)
WHERE ImageID = q1.ImageID)
i am converting multiple rows in to a array using array_agg() function,
and i need to give that array to a select statements where condition.
My query is,
SELECT * FROM table WHERE id =
ALL(SELECT array_agg(id) FROM table WHERE some_condition)
but it gives error, how can i over come it..
the error has been cleared by type casting the array, using my query like this
SELECT * FROM table WHERE id =
ALL((SELECT array_agg(id) FROM table WHERE some_condition)::bigint[])
reference link
It seems like you are over-complicating things. As far as I can tell, your query should be equivalent to simple:
SELECT * FROM table WHERE some_condition
Or, if you are selecting from 2 different tables, use join:
SELECT table1.*
FROM table1
JOIN table2 ON table1.id = table2.id
WHERE some_condition
Not only this is simpler, it is also faster than fiddling with arrays.
I am having some performance issues with a query I am running in SQL Server 2008. I have the following query:
Query1:
SELECT GroupID, COUNT(*) AS TotalRows FROM Table1
INNER JOIN (
SELECT Column1 FROM Table2 WHERE GroupID = #GroupID
) AS Table2
ON Table2.Column1 = Table1.Column1
WHERE CONTAINS(Table1.*, #Word) GROUP BY GroupID
Table1 contains about 500,000 rows. Table2 contains about 50,000, but will eventually contain millions. Playing around with the query, I found that re-writing the query as follows will reduce the execution time of the query to under 1 second.
Query 2:
SELECT GroupID FROM Table1
INNER JOIN (
SELECT Column1 FROM Table2 WHERE GroupID = #GroupID
) AS Table2 ON Table2.Column1 = Table1.Column1
WHERE CONTAINS(Table1.*, #Word)
What I do not understand is it is a simple count query. If I execute the following query on Table 1, it returns in < 1 s:
Query 3:
SELECT Count(*) FROM Table1
This query returns around 500,000 as the result.
However, the Original query (Query 1) mentioned above only returns a count of 50,000 and takes 3s to execute even though simply removing the GROUP BY (Query 2) reduces the execution time to < 1s.
I do not believe this is an indexing issue as I already have indexes on the appropriate columns. Any help would be very appreciated.
Performing a simple COUNT(*) FROM table can do a much more efficient scan of the clustered index, since it doesn't have to care about any filtering, joining, grouping, etc. The queries that include full-text search predicates and mysterious subqueries have to do a lot more work. The count is not the most expensive part there - I bet they're still relatively slow if you leave the count out but leave the group by in, e.g.:
SELECT GroupID FROM Table1
INNER JOIN (
SELECT Column1 FROM Table2 WHERE GroupID = #GroupID
) AS Table2 ON Table2.Column1 = Table1.Column1
WHERE CONTAINS(Table1.*, #Word)
GROUP BY GroupID;
Looking at the provided actual execution plan in the free SQL Sentry Plan Explorer*, I see this:
And this:
Which lead me to believe you should:
Update the statistics on both Inventory and A001_Store_Inventory so that the optimizer can get a better rowcount estimate (which could lead to a better plan shape).
Ensure that Inventory.ItemNumber and A001_Store_Inventory.ItemNumber are the same data type to avoid an implicit conversion.
(*) disclaimer: I work for SQL Sentry.
You should have a look at the query plan to see what SQL Server is doing to retrieve the data you requested. Also, I think it would be better to rewrite your original query as follows:
SELECT
Table1.GroupID -- When you use JOINs, it's always better to specify Table (or Alias) names
,COUNT(Table1.GroupID) AS TotalRows
FROM
Table1
INNER JOIN
Table2 ON
(Table2.Column1 = Table1.Column1) AND
(Table2.GroupID = #GroupID)
WHERE
CONTAINS(Table1.*, #Word)
GROUP BY
Table1.GroupID
Also, keep in mind that a simple COUNT and a COUNT with a JOIN and GROUP BY are not the same thing. In one case, it's just a matter of going through an index and making a count, in the other there are other tables and grouping involved, which can be time consuming depending on several factors.