I am a newbie to ABAP. I am trying this program with open sql, and when I execute the program, the first column's data is always missing. I have looked up and the syntax appears to be correct. I am using kna1 table, the query is pretty simple too. If anybody notice the issue, please help me out.
DATA: WA_TAB_KNA1 TYPE KNA1,
IT_TAB_KNA1 TYPE TABLE OF KNA1,
V_KUNNR TYPE KUNNR.
SELECT-OPTIONS: P_KUNNR FOR V_KUNNR.
SELECT name1 kunnr name2
INTO TABLE IT_TAB_KNA1 FROM KNA1
WHERE KUNNR IN P_KUNNR.
LOOP AT IT_TAB_KNA1 INTO WA_TAB_KNA1.
WRITE:/ WA_TAB_KNA1-KUNNR,' ', WA_TAB_KNA1-NAME1.
ENDLOOP.
This is a classic - I suppose every ABAP developer has to experience this at least once.
You're using an internal table of structure KNA1, which means that your target variable has the following structure
ccckkkkkkkkkklllnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN...
with ccc being the client, kkkkkkkkkk being the field KUNNR (10 characters), lll the field LAND1 (3 characters), then 35 ns for the field NAME1, 35 Ns for the field NAME2 and so on.
In your SELECT statement, you tell the system to retrieve the columns NAME1, KUNNR and NAME2 - in that order! This will yield a result set that has the following structure, using the nomenclature above:
nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnkkkkkkkkkkNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Instead of raising some kind of type error, the system will then try to squeeze the data into the target structure - mainly for historical reasons. Because the first fields are all character fields, it will succeed. The result: the field MANDT of your internal table contains the first three characters of NAME1, the field KUNNR contains the characters 4-13 of the source field NAME1 and so on.
Fortunately the solution is easy: use INTO CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF TABLE instead of INTO TABLE. This will cause the system to use a fieldname-based mapping when filling the target table. As tomdemuyt mentioned it's also possible to roll your own target structure -- and for large data sets, that's a really good idea because you're wasting a lot of memory otherwise. Still, sometimes this is not an option, so you really have to know this error - recognize it as soon as you see it and know what to do.
Related
Used this site https://community.oracle.com/thread/3937159?start=0&tstart=0 to learn how to manually process interactive grids. I got it to work on a small table with 3 columns, but when I tried to get it to work for a bigger table, it keeps throwing this error:
PL/SQL: numeric or value error: character string buffer too small for.
I tried only updating 1 column and converting the datatype to the correct one, and it is not going away.
this message usually means you're trying to store 'AAAA' into a column that only accepts 1, 2 or 3 chars, like varchar2(3).
Make sure your columns have a proper limit size for the data you're processing.
I have a column in MS Access in which the data could be any of the following:
A date
Text string: "n/a"
Text string: "n/e"
The vast majority of entries will be dates but a very few will need to be these specified text strings. I would like to still be able to perform date calculations on the column. Whats the best datatype to use?
In my opinion the best approach would be to leave the date field as Date/Time and then add another field to indicate the status if the Date/Time field is Null. Something like:
DateField DateStatus
--------- ----------
2014-09-21
n/a
2014-09-23
2014-09-25
n/e
You could use a single Text field, but then any time you wanted to use the field value as a proper Date/Time value you'd have to convert it using CDate(). You would also have the possibility of other junk getting in there, or dates getting entered in different formats (e.g. d/m/yyyy vs. m/d/yyyy). And finally, you would lose the ability to easily determine whether a Date/Time value is in a particular row (which in my approach would simply be ... WHERE DateField IS [NOT] NULL).
I agree with Gord Thompson's answer - mainly because it's so non-intuitive to have, essentially, two completely different types of data in a single column, and because it's going to make validation/data integrity stuff so much harder with little upside - and, as he indicates with the CDate() reference, dates basically only work reliably like dates if they're in a "date/time" field. Microsoft has a page on choosing a data type that explains some of the Access-specific differences in more detail.
I also suggest that you don't actually have a text field for those "comments," since you say there's only a handful of potential options - use a Long Integer and connect back to a separate table with the list of allowable entries. This will allow you to run reports more easily, change the "display text" in one step instead of potentially dozens of times, etc. It also saves a relatively small amount of space per record (long integer = 4 bytes; text = up to 255 bytes.)
You can also do fun data/reporting stuff with that Comment (long integer) field and dates - even combined into ranges, by the way - queries let you use the two different columns to create a single answer. I have a report that's grouped so that you can see stats for everything that's active (by quarter in which they start) plus everything that's pending (with the code indicating who's responsible for watching this record,) plus everything that's not pending but still doesn't have a start date (with the reason code displayed,) plus everything that's expired (by quarter in which they ended.) It looks like each of those things is in a single column in the report, but it's actually like five columns that have been concatenated with the IIf function.
(Almost every argument I can come up with boils down to "this is what relational databases are all about and why they're so awesome.)
I'm converting one of our Delphi 7 projects to Delphi X3 because we want to support Unicode. We're using MS SQL Server 2008/R2 as our database server. After changing some database fields from VARCHAR to NVARCHAR (and the fields in the accompanying ClientDatasets to ftWideString), random crashes started to occur. While debugging I noticed some unexpected behaviour by the TClientDataset/DbExpress:
For a NVARCHAR(10) databasecolumn I manually create a TWideStringField in a clientdataset and set the 'Size' property to 10. The 'DataSize' property of the field tells me 22 bytes are needed, which is expected since TWideStringField's encoding is UTF-16, so it needs two bytes per character and some space for storing the length. Now when I call 'CreateDataset' on the ClientDataset and write the dataset to XML (using .SaveToFile), in the XML file the field is defined as
<FIELD WIDTH="20" fieldtype="string.uni" attrname="TEST"/>
which looks ok to me.
Now, instead of calling .CreateDataset I call .Open on the TClientDataset so that it gets its data through the linked components ->TDatasetProvider->TSQLDataset (.CommandText = a simple select * from table)->TSQLConnection. When I inspect the properties of the field in my watch list, Size is still 10, Datasize is still 22. After saving to XML file however, the field is defined as
<FIELD WIDTH="40" fieldtype="string.uni" attrname="TEST"/>
..the width has doubled?
Finally, if I call .Open on the TClientDataset without creating any fielddefinitions in advance at all, the Size of the field will afterwards be 20(incorrect !) and Datasize 42. After saving to XML, the field is still defined as
<FIELD WIDTH="40" fieldtype="string.uni" attrname="TEST"/>
Does anyone have any idea what is going wrong here?
Check the fieldtype and it's size at the SQLCommand component (which is before DatasetProvider).
Size doubling may be a result of two implicit "conversions": first - server provides NVarchar data which is stored into ansi-string field (and every byte becomes a separate character), second - it is stored into clientdataset's field of type Widestring and each character becomes 2 bytes (size doubles).
Note that in prior versions of Delphi string field size mismatch between ClientDataset's field and corresponding Query/Command field did not result in an exception but starting from one of XE*'s it offten results in AV. So you have to check carefully string field sizes during migration.
Sounds like because of the column datatype being changed, it has created unexpected issues for you. My suggestion is to
1. back up the table,multiple ways to doing this,pick your poison figuratively speaking
2. delete the table,
3. recreate the table,
4. import the data from the old table to the newly created table. See if that helps.
Sql tables DO NOT like it when column datatypes get changed, and unexpected issues may arise from doing just that. So try that, and worst case scenario, you have wasted maybe ten minutes of your time trying a possible solution.
How can I make Sybase's database engine return an unsorted list of records in non-numeric order?
~~~
I have an issue where I need to reproduce an error in the application where I select from a table where the ID is generated in sequence, but the ID is not the last one in the selection.
Let me explain.
ID STATUS
_____________
1234 C
1235 C
1236 O
Above is 3 IDs. I had code where these would be the results of a
select #p_id = ID from table where (conditions).
However, there wasn't a clause to check for status = 'O' (open). Remember Sybase saves the last returned record into a variable.
~~~~~
I'm being asked to give the testing team something that will make the results not work. If Sybase selects the above in an unordered list, it could appear in ascending order, or, if the database engine needs to change blocks of stored data or something technical magic stuff, the order could be messed up. The original error was when the procedure would return say 1234 instead of 1236.
Is there a way that I can have a 100% guarantee that Sybase will search over a block of data and have to double back, effectively 'breaking' the ascending search, and returning not the last record, but any other one? (all records except the maximum will end up erroring, because they are all 'Closed')
I want some sort of magical SQL code that will make sure things don't search the table in exactly numeric order. Ideally I'd like to not have to change the procedure, as the test team want to see the exact same procedure breaking (as easy as plonking a order by id desc would fudge the results).
If you don't specify an order, there is no way to guarantee the return order of the results. It will be however the index is built - and can depend on the order of insertion, the type of index, and the content of index keys.
It's generally a bad idea to do those sorts of singleton SELECTs. You should always specify a specific record with the WHERE clause, or use a cursor, or TOPn or similar. The problem comes when someone tries to understand your code, because some databases when they see multiple hits take the first value, some take the last value, some take a random value (they call that "implementation-defined"), and some throw an error.
Is this by any chance related to 1156837? :)
I have a bunch of records in several tables in a database that have a "process number" field, that's basically a number, but I have to store it as a string both because of some legacy data that has stuff like "89a" as a number and some numbering system that requires that process numbers be represented as number/year.
The problem arises when I try to order the processes by number. I get stuff like:
1
10
11
12
And the other problem is when I need to add a new process. The new process' number should be the biggest existing number incremented by one, and for that I would need a way to order the existing records by number.
Any suggestions?
Maybe this will help.
Essentially:
SELECT process_order FROM your_table ORDER BY process_order + 0 ASC
Can you store the numbers as zero padded values? That is, 01, 10, 11, 12?
I would suggest to create a new numeric field used only for ordering and update it from a trigger.
Can you split the data into two fields?
Store the 'process number' as an int and the 'process subtype' as a string.
That way:
you can easily get the MAX processNumber - and increment it when you need to generate a
new number
you can ORDER BY processNumber ASC,
processSubtype ASC - to get the
correct order, even if multiple records have the same base number with different years/letters appended
when you need the 'full' number you
can just concatenate the two fields
Would that do what you need?
Given that your process numbers don't seem to follow any fixed patterns (from your question and comments), can you construct/maintain a process number table that has two fields:
create table process_ordering ( processNumber varchar(N), processOrder int )
Then select all the process numbers from your tables and insert into the process number table. Set the ordering however you want based on the (varying) process number formats. Join on this table, order by processOrder and select all fields from the other table. Index this table on processNumber to make the join fast.
select my_processes.*
from my_processes
inner join process_ordering on my_process.processNumber = process_ordering.processNumber
order by process_ordering.processOrder
It seems to me that you have two tasks here.
• Convert the strings to numbers by legacy format/strip off the junk• Order the numbers
If you have a practical way of introducing string-parsing regular expressions into your process (and your issue has enough volume to be worth the effort), then I'd
• Create a reference table such as
CREATE TABLE tblLegacyFormatRegularExpressionMaster(
LegacyFormatId int,
LegacyFormatName varchar(50),
RegularExpression varchar(max)
)
• Then, with a way of invoking the regular expressions, such as the CLR integration in SQL Server 2005 and above (the .NET Common Language Runtime integration to allow calls to compiled .NET methods from within SQL Server as ordinary (Microsoft extended) T-SQL, then you should be able to solve your problem.
• See
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/string/SqlRegEx.aspx
I apologize if this is way too much overhead for your problem at hand.
Suggestion:
• Make your column a fixed width text (i.e. CHAR rather than VARCHAR).
• Pad the existing values with enough leading zeros to fill each column and a trailing space(s) where the values do not end in 'a' (or whatever).
• Add a CHECK constraint (or equivalent) to ensure new values conform to the pattern e.g. something like
CHECK (process_number LIKE '[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9][ab ]')
• In your insert/update stored procedures (or equivalent), pad any incoming values to fit the pattern.
• Remove the leading/trailing zeros/spaces as appropriate when displaying the values to humans.
Another advantage of this approach is that the incoming values '1', '01', '001', etc would all be considered to be the same value and could be covered by a simple unique constraint in the DBMS.
BTW I like the idea of splitting the trailing 'a' (or whatever) into a separate column, however I got the impression the data element in question is an identifier and therefore would not be appropriate to split it.
You need to cast your field as you're selecting. I'm basing this syntax on MySQL - but the idea's the same:
select * from table order by cast(field AS UNSIGNED);
Of course UNSIGNED could be SIGNED if required.