Related
I have a table that I need to add the same values to a whole bunch of items
(in a nut shell if the item doesn't have a UNIT of "CTN" I want to add the same values i have listed to them all)
I thought the following would work but it doesn't :(
Any idea what i am doing wrong ?
INSERT INTO ICUNIT
(UNIT,AUDTDATE,AUDTTIME,AUDTUSER,AUDTORG,CONVERSION)
VALUES ('CTN','20220509','22513927','ADMIN','AU','1')
WHERE ITEMNO In '0','etc','etc','etc'
If I understand correctly you might want to use INSERT INTO ... SELECT from original table with your condition.
INSERT INTO ICUNIT (UNIT,AUDTDATE,AUDTTIME,AUDTUSER,AUDTORG,CONVERSION)
SELECT 'CTN','20220509','22513927','ADMIN','AU','1'
FROM ICUNIT
WHERE ITEMNO In ('0','etc','etc','etc')
The query you needs starts by selecting the filtered items. So it seems something like below is your starting point
select <?> from dbo.ICUNIT as icu where icu.UNIT <> 'CTN' order by ...;
Notice the use of schema name, terminators, and table aliases - all best practices. I will guess that a given "item" can have multiple rows in this table so long as ICUNIT is unique within ITEMNO. Correct? If so, the above query won't work. So let's try slightly more complicated filtering.
select distinct icu.ITEMNO
from dbo.ICUNIT as icu
where not exists (select * from dbo.ICUNIT as ctns
where ctns.ITEMNO = icu.ITEMNO -- correlating the subquery
and ctns.UNIT = 'CTN')
order by ...;
There are other ways to do that above but that is one common way. That query will produce a resultset of all ITEMNO values in your table that do not already have a row where UNIT is "CTN". If you need to filter that for specific ITEMNO values you simply adjust the WHERE clause. If that works correctly, you can use that with your insert statement to then insert the desired rows.
insert into dbo.ICUNIT (...)
select distinct icu.ITEMNO, 'CTN', '20220509', '22513927', 'ADMIN', 'AU', '1'
from ...
;
Working on a physical security migration. Have two tables. First table (AreaAccess) lists the badgeholder with the areaid's the badgeholder has access to. Second table (AreaGroups) has areaid's grouped together in sets. The goal is to read the cardholder's AreaAccess records and then search the AreaGroups for the count of the best or exact match of the cardholder's areas to a group.
Curious why you didn't give this a shot first. If you aren't as familiar with SQL, here's a great link to get started: https://www.w3schools.com/sql/
Also, it's extremely helpful if you can provide a sample of what you want the outcome to look like. It doesn't have to be fancy, just a few rows/columns that can demonstrate what you're hoping to see.
Here's a possible look. However, your question is a little vague, so this is a best guess.
create table ##CardToArea --Is this table a log, or is it grouping of permission? I'm treating it as a log, but the wording of your question isn't quite clear.
(
CardholderID int not null
, AreaID int not null
);
insert into ##CardToArea
(CardholderID,AreaID)
values
(1961,11)
,(1961,25)
,(1961,28)
,(1961,71)
,(1961,73)
,(1961,74)
,(1961,44)
,(1961,50)
,(1961,51)
,(1961,52);
create table ##AreaToGroup
(
AreaID int not null
, AreaGroupID int not null
, unique (AreaID,AreaGroupID)
);
insert into ##AreaToGroup
(AreaID,AreaGroupID)
values
(33,0)
,(45,0)
,(45,7)
,(19,16)
,(17,16)
,(11,16)
,(11,48)
,(17,48)
,(17,49)
,(15,49)
,(11,49);
select
isnull(convert(nvarchar,atg.AreaGroupID),'Not defined') as [AreaGroupID]
, cta.CardholderID
, count(*) as [CountOfAccesses]
from ##CardToArea as cta
left join ##AreaToGroup as atg on cta.AreaID = atg.AreaID
group by
atg.AreaGroupID
, cta.CardholderID;
drop table ##AreaToGroup;
drop table ##CardToArea;
#Robert - thanks for the response.
This is my query I had worked through yesterday. Looking only at two sample users (23006 and 28190). The result is a full report of the areasets these users are part of. What I have been trying to do, hence yesterdays question, is to limit the query to the top five areacounts for each cardholder. Attempted to use ROW_NUMBER processing but that was not working primarily because of the alias for "count(g.areaid)" in the select. I also tried numerous sub queries but to no avail.
select g.AreaGroupID, ag.caption, count(g.areaid) as AreaCount, a.CardholderID
from AHBadgeActivity B
join areaaccess a on a.CardholderID=b.CardholderID
left join AreaGroupSet g
on g.areaid=a.AreaID
left join AreaGroup ag on AG.AreaGroupID=g.AreaGroupID
where (a.CardholderID=23006 or a.CardholderID=28190) and DeleteFlag=0 and g.AreaGroupID <> 0
group by g.AreaGroupID, ag.Caption, a.CardholderID
order by a.cardholderid, AreaCount desc
Here is the sample output. My goal is to limit to the top five AreaCounts for each Cardholder.
Output from Query
I have come up a situation which is not easy to explain in sentence so i will go ahead and give the complete scenario here.
I have one result set like the below :-
It shows header_equipment_id(s) in a group of jil_equipment_id,relationship_name,cell_group.. For example 3159398,4622903 lies in one group.
The other result set is given below, This is the table where i want to update 3 columns namely Is_Applicable_Price,prc_content_rid,prc_type_name
If you notice clearly, You will find the same header_equipment_id column here. If you group it with the result found above, You will find 3 different groups for. But out of those 3 groups, one group is red, It is red because they belong to different cell_group/relationship_name.
**
Yellow and green are passed scenario and Red, Blue are fail.
**
I want to update the columns Is_Applicable_Price,prc_content_rid,prc_type_name if the Group of header_equipment_id(s) fall under the same cell_group and relationship_name.
So the final result set would look something like below -
Please help me with any inputs if possible. It's a situation where i know one single query won't work. But i will need to have multiple Temp tables for the transformation. But this is the shortest i have came across.
I am using Microsoft sql server 2012.
Please help. Even a small hint would be of great help to me. Thanks in advance.
It seems that the only thing the 2 tables have in common is that a cell_group can have a one or more rows of header_equipment_id. If we can generate a unique value based on header_equipment_id then we can join the 2 tables on this value. Note I have used a simple division , you may wish to check that this method is unique enough for your purposes.
/*create table a
(jil_equimentid int,relationship_name varchar(20),header_equipment_id int,
smart_equipment_id int,cell_group int,new_price_flag int,is_applicable_price int,prc_content_rid int,prc_type_name varchar(20))
truncate table a
insert into a values
(1282977,'default',3159398,1282977,3,1,1,106347924,'New Price'),
(1282977,'default',4622903,1262578,3,1,1,106347924,'New Price'),
(1282977,'default',1659861,1282977,6,1,1,106347925,'New Price'),
(1282977,'default',4622904,1282977,6,1,1,106347925,'New Price')
go
drop table t
go
create table t
(jil_equimentid int,relationship_name varchar(20),header_equipment_id int,
smart_equipment_id int,cell_group int,new_price_flag int,is_applicable_price int,prc_content_rid int,prc_type_name varchar(20))
truncate table t
insert into t values
(1282977,'128297711111 default',4622903,1282977,1,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'128297711211 default',3159398,1262578,2,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'128297712111 default',4622904,1282977,4,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'128297712211 default',1659861,1282977,5,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'128297711101 default',3159398,1262578,1,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'128297711101 default',4622903,1282977,1,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'default' ,3159398,1262578,2,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'default' ,4622903,1282977,2,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'128297711101 default',1659861,1262577,3,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'128297711101 default',4622904,1282977,3,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'default' ,1659861,1262577,4,1,null,null,null),
(1282977,'default' ,4622904,1262577,4,1,null,null,null)
*/
DROP TABLE #TEMPA;
;WITH CTE AS
(SELECT a.cell_group,
sum(a.header_equipment_id / 10000000.0000) uniqueval
from a
group by a.cell_group
)
SELECT DISTINCT CTE.UNIQUEVAL ,IS_APPLICABLE_PRICE ,PRC_CONTENT_RID ,PRC_TYPE_NAME
INTO #TEMPA
FROM CTE
JOIN A ON A.CELL_GROUP = CTE.CELL_GROUP
;WITH CTE AS
(
SELECT t.relationship_name,t.cell_group,
sum(t.header_equipment_id / 10000000.0000) uniqueval
from t
group by t.relationship_name,t.cell_group having count(*) > 1
)
SELECT T.*,CTE.UNIQUEVAL,ta.*
FROM CTE
JOIN T ON T.RELATIONSHIP_NAME = CTE.RELATIONSHIP_NAME AND T.CELL_GROUP = CTE.CELL_GROUP
join #tempa ta on ta.uniqueval = cte.uniqueval
I'm having a problem trying to pull a specific data from two tables. According to the textbook its:
Select *
From terra..retailsales and terra..retailaccount
Where retailaccountid in retailsales = 2345678
Get date range from = 3/01/2014 to 6/30/2015
However, when running the code it produces an syntax error within the in. Yet to me the whole code looks wrong. Can someone help me. I would like to get this to work in order to do my assignment. It's driving me nuts! I contacted the prof and he said that the code in the book is correct, but I think he's wrong.
Can someone help?
The code you provided is not TSQL - actually looks more like some kind of pseudocode.
Just guessing at your column names here, but if I've got it right your query should look something like this:-
SELECT * FROM terra..retailsales
WHERE retailaccountid = 2345678
AND [date range] BETWEEN '20140301' AND '20150630'
Not sure where the 2nd table comes into this though.
You can JOIN two table, like this:
SELECT *
FROM terra..retailsales RS
INNER JOIN terra..retailaccount RC
ON RS.retailaccountid = RC.ID
WHERE RS.retailaccountid = 2345678
AND [date] BETWEEN '20140301' AND '20150630'
Your provided code is very confusing. I see the [terra..retailsales] table, but have no idea what your other table is. Are you sure you need to get your data from two tables?
What is the syntax error you're receiving? Can you paste the exact code you're trying in a code block? Not much of that makes any sense.
In order to pull data from two tables, you could union those tables in a CTE (common table expression), throw them both into a temp table, or join them in a select statement. If the format of both tables is identical, then why do you have two of them?
You're missing the column name where you want to compare a [date] to "3/01/2014 to 6/30/2015". You can use getDate() to return the current time.
Select *
FROM [terra..retailsales]
Where [retailaccountid] = 2345678
AND [<DateColumn>] BETWEEN '3/01/2014' AND '6/30/2015'
You don't need to re-specify your table name again in line "Where retailaccountid in retailsales = 2345678". It will just assume that the retailaccountid is from retailsales.
I have a sql statement that consists of multiple SELECT statements. I want to limit the total number of rows coming back to let's say 1000 rows. I thought that using the SET ROWCOUNT 1000 directive would do this...but it does not. For example:
SET ROWCOUNT 1000
select orderId from TableA
select name from TableB
My initial thought was that SET ROWCOUNT would apply to the entire batch, not the individual statements within it. The behavior I'm seeing is it will limit the first select to 1000 and then the second one to 1000 for a total of 2000 rows returned. Is there any way to have the 1000 limit applied to the batch as a whole?
Not in one statement. You're going to have to subtract ##ROWCOUNT from the total rows you want after each statement, and use a variable (say, "#RowsLeft") to store the remaining rows you want. You can then SELECT TOP #RowsLeft from each individual query...
And how would you ever see any records from the second query if the first always returns more than 1000 if you were able to do this in a batch?
If the queries are simliar enough you could try to do this through a union and use the rowcount on that as it would only be one query at that point. If the queries are differnt in the columns returned I'm not sure what you would get by limiting the entire group to 1000 rows because the meanings would be different. From a user perspective I'd rather consistently get 500 orders and 500 customer names than 998 orers and 2 names one day and 210 orders and 790 names the next. It would be impossible to use the application especially if you happened to be most interested in the information in the second query.
Use TOP not ROWCOUNT
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189463.aspx
You trying to get 1000 rows MAX from all tables right?
I think other methods may fill up with from the top queries first, and you may never get results from the lower ones.
The requirement sounds odd. Unless you are unioning or joining the data from the two selects, to consider them as one so that you apply a max rows simply does not make sense, since they are unrelated queries at that point. If you really need to do this, try:
select top 1000 from (
select orderId, null as name, 'TableA' as Source from TableA
union all
select null as orderID, name, 'TableB' as Source from TableB
) a order by Source
SET ROWCOUNT applies to each individual query. In your given example, it's applied twice, once to each SELECT statement, since each statement is its own batch (they're not grouped or unioned or anything, and so execute completely separately).
#RedFilter's approach seems the most likely to give you what you want.
Untested and doesn't make use of ROWCOUNT, but could give you an idea?
Assumes col1 in TableA and TableB are the same type.
SELECT TOP 1000 *
FROM (select orderId
from TableA
UNION ALL
select name from TableB) t
The following worked for me:
CREATE PROCEDURE selectTopN
(
#numberOfRecords int
)
AS
SELECT TOP (#numberOfRecords) * FROM Customers
GO
this is your solution :
TOP (Transact-SQL)
and about ##RowCount you can read this Link :
SET ROWCOUNT (Transact-SQL)
Important
Using SET ROWCOUNT will not affect DELETE, INSERT, and UPDATE statements in a future release of SQL Server. Avoid using SET ROWCOUNT with DELETE, INSERT, and UPDATE statements in new development work, and plan to modify applications that currently use it. For a similar behavior, use the TOP syntax. For more information, see TOP (Transact-SQL).
I think two way will work.!