I'm still fairly new to T-SQL and SQL 2005. I need to import a column of integers from a table in database1 to a identical table (only missing the column I need) in database2. Both are sql 2005 databases. I've tried the built in import command in Server Management Studio but it's forcing me to copy the entire table. This causes errors due to constraints and 'read-only' columns (whatever 'read-only' means in sql2005). I just want to grab a single column and copy it to a table.
There must be a simple way of doing this. Something like:
INSERT INTO database1.myTable columnINeed
SELECT columnINeed from database2.myTable
Inserting won't do it since it'll attempt to insert new rows at the end of the table. What it sounds like your trying to do is add a column to the end of existing rows.
I'm not sure if the syntax is exactly right but, if I understood you then this will do what you're after.
Create the column allowing nulls in database2.
Perform an update:
UPDATE database2.dbo.tablename
SET database2.dbo.tablename.colname = database1.dbo.tablename.colname
FROM database2.dbo.tablename INNER JOIN database1.dbo.tablename ON database2.dbo.tablename.keycol = database1.dbo.tablename.keycol
There is a simple way very much like this as long as both databases are on the same server. The fully qualified name is dbname.owner.table - normally the owner is dbo and there is a shortcut for ".dbo." which is "..", so...
INSERT INTO Datbase1..MyTable
(ColumnList)
SELECT FieldsIWant
FROM Database2..MyTable
first create the column if it doesn't exist:
ALTER TABLE database2..targetTable
ADD targetColumn int null -- or whatever column definition is needed
and since you're using Sql Server 2005 you can use the new MERGE statement.
The MERGE statement has the advantage of being able to treat all situations in one statement like missing rows from source (can do inserts), missing rows from destination (can do deletes), matching rows (can do updates), and everything is done atomically in a single transaction. Example:
MERGE database2..targetTable AS t
USING (SELECT sourceColumn FROM sourceDatabase1..sourceTable) as s
ON t.PrimaryKeyCol = s.PrimaryKeyCol -- or whatever the match should be bassed on
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE SET t.targetColumn = s.sourceColumn
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
INSERT (targetColumn, [other columns ...]) VALUES (s.sourceColumn, [other values ..])
The MERGE statement was introduced to solve cases like yours and I recommend using it, it's much more powerful than solutions using multiple sql batch statements that basically accomplish the same thing MERGE does in one statement without the added complexity.
You could also use a cursor. Assuming you want to iterate all the records in the first table and populate the second table with new rows then something like this would be the way to go:
DECLARE #FirstField nvarchar(100)
DECLARE ACursor CURSOR FOR
SELECT FirstField FROM FirstTable
OPEN ACursor
FETCH NEXT FROM ACursor INTO #FirstField
WHILE ##FETCH_STATUS = 0
BEGIN
INSERT INTO SecondTable ( SecondField ) VALUES ( #FirstField )
FETCH NEXT FROM ACursor INTO #FirstField
END
CLOSE ACursor
DEALLOCATE ACursor
MERGE is only available in SQL 2008 NOT SQL 2005
insert into Test2.dbo.MyTable (MyValue) select MyValue from Test1.dbo.MyTable
This is assuming a great deal. First that the destination database is empty. Second that the other columns are nullable. You may need an update instead. To do that you will need to have a common key.
Related
I'm new to SQL Server and am doing some cleanup of our transaction database. However, to accomplish the last step, I need to update a column in one table of one database with the value from another column in another table from another database.
I found a SQL update code snippet and re-wrote it for our own needs but would love someone to give it a once over before I hit the execute button since the update will literally affect hundreds of thousands of entries.
So here are the two databases:
Database 1: Movement
Table 1: ItemMovement
Column 1: LongDescription (datatype: text / up to 40 char)
Database 2: Item
Table 2: ItemRecord
Column 2: Description (datatype: text / up to 20 char)
Goal: set Column1 from db1 to the value of Colum2 from db2.
Here is the code snippet:
update table1
set table1.longdescription = table2.description
from movement..itemmovement as table1
inner join item..itemrecord as table2 on table1.itemcode = table2.itemcode
where table1.longdescription <> table2.description
I added the last "where" line to prevent SQL from updating the column where it already matches the source table.
This should execute faster and just update the columns that have garbage. But as it stands, does this look like it will run? And lastly, is it a straightforward process, using SQL Server 2005 Express to just backup the entire Movement db before I execute? And if it messes up, just restore it?
Alternatively, is it even necessary to re-cast the tables as table1 and table 2? Is it valid to execute a SQL query like this:
update movement..itemmovement
set itemmovement.longdescription = itemrecord.description
from movement..itemmovement
inner join item..itemrecord on itemmovement.itemcode = itemrecord.itemcode
where itemmovement.longdescription <> itemrecord.description
Many thanks in advance!
You don't necessarily need to alias your tables but I recommend you do for faster typing and reduce the chances of making a typo.
update m
set m.longdescription = i.description
from movement..itemmovement as m
inner join item..itemrecord as i on m.itemcode = i.itemcode
where m.longdescription <> i.description
In the above query I have shortened the alias using m for itemmovement and i for itemrecord.
When a large number of records are to be updated and there's question whether it would succeed or not, always make a copy in a test database (residing on a test server) and try it out over there. In this case, one of the safest bet would be to create a new field first and call it longdescription_text. You can make it with SQL Server Management Studio Express (SSMS) or using the command below:
use movement;
alter table itemmovement add column longdescription_test varchar(100);
The syntax here says alter table itemmovement and add a new column called longdescription_test with datatype of varchar(100). If you create a new column using SSMS, in the background, SSMS will run the same alter table statement to create a new column.
You can then execute
update m
set m.longdescription_test = i.description
from movement..itemmovement as m
inner join item..itemrecord as i on m.itemcode = i.itemcode
where m.longdescription <> i.description
Check data in longdescription_test randomly. You can actually do a spot check faster by running:
select * from movement..itemmovement
where longdescription <> longdescription_test
and longdescription_test is not null
If information in longdescription_test looks good, you can change your update statement to set m.longdescription = i.description and run the query again.
It is easier to just create a copy of your itemmovement table before you do the update. To make a copy, you can just do:
use movement;
select * into itemmovement_backup from itemmovement;
If update does not succeed as desired, you can truncate itemmovement and copy data back from itemmovement_backup.
Zedfoxus provided a GREAT explanation on this and I appreciate it. It is excellent reference for next time around. After reading over some syntax examples, I was confident enough in being able to run the second SQL update query that I have in my OP. Luckily, the data here is not necessarily "live" so at low risk to damage anything, even during operating hours. Given the nature of the data, the updated executed perfectly, updating all 345,000 entries!
I have one table named "Staff" in access and also have this table(same name) in SQL 2008.
Both table have thousands of records. I want to merge records from the access table to sql table without affecting the existing records in sql. Normally, I just export using OCBC driver and that works fine if that table doesn't exist in sql server. Please advise. Thanks.
A simple append query from the local access table to the linked sql server table should work just fine in this case.
So, just drop in the first (from) table into the query builder. Then change the query type to append, and you are prompted for the append table name.
From that point on, just drop in the columns you want (do not drop in the PK column, as they need not be used nor transferred in this case).
You can also type in the sql directly in the query builder. Either way, you will wind up with something like:
INSERT INTO dbo_custsql
( ADMINID, Amount, Notes, Status )
SELECT ADMINID, Amount, Notes, Status
FROM custsql1;
This may help: http://www.red-gate.com/products/sql-development/sql-compare/
Or you could write a simple program to read from each data set and do the comparison, adding, updating, and deleting, etc.
I want to insert some data on the local server into a remote server, and used the following sql:
select * into linkservername.mydbname.dbo.test from localdbname.dbo.test
But it throws the following error
The object name 'linkservername.mydbname.dbo.test' contains more than the maximum number of prefixes. The maximum is 2.
How can I do that?
I don't think the new table created with the INTO clause supports 4 part names.
You would need to create the table first, then use INSERT..SELECT to populate it.
(See note in Arguments section on MSDN: reference)
The SELECT...INTO [new_table_name] statement supports a maximum of 2 prefixes: [database].[schema].[table]
NOTE: it is more performant to pull the data across the link using SELECT INTO vs. pushing it across using INSERT INTO:
SELECT INTO is minimally logged.
SELECT INTO does not implicitly start a distributed transaction, typically.
I say typically, in point #2, because in most scenarios a distributed transaction is not created implicitly when using SELECT INTO. If a profiler trace tells you SQL Server is still implicitly creating a distributed transaction, you can SELECT INTO a temp table first, to prevent the implicit distributed transaction, then move the data into your target table from the temp table.
Push vs. Pull Example
In this example we are copying data from [server_a] to [server_b] across a link. This example assumes query execution is possible from both servers:
Push
Instead of connecting to [server_a] and pushing the data to [server_b]:
INSERT INTO [server_b].[database].[schema].[table]
SELECT * FROM [database].[schema].[table]
Pull
Connect to [server_b] and pull the data from [server_a]:
SELECT * INTO [database].[schema].[table]
FROM [server_a].[database].[schema].[table]
I've been struggling with this for the last hour.
I now realise that using the syntax
SELECT orderid, orderdate, empid, custid
INTO [linkedserver].[database].[dbo].[table]
FROM Sales.Orders;
does not work with linked servers. You have to go onto your linked server and manually create the table first, then use the following syntax:
INSERT INTO [linkedserver].[database].[dbo].[table]
SELECT orderid, orderdate, empid, custid
FROM Sales.Orders
WHERE shipcountry = 'UK';
I've experienced the same issue and I've performed the following workaround:
If you are able to log on to remote server where you want to insert data with MSSQL or sqlcmd and rebuild your query vice-versa:
so from:
SELECT * INTO linkservername.mydbname.dbo.test
FROM localdbname.dbo.test
to the following:
SELECT * INTO localdbname.dbo.test
FROM linkservername.mydbname.dbo.test
In my situation it works well.
#2Toad: For sure INSERT INTO is better / more efficient. However for small queries and quick operation SELECT * INTO is more flexible because it creates the table on-the-fly and insert your data immediately, whereas INSERT INTO requires creating a table (auto-ident options and so on) before you carry out your insert operation.
I may be late to the party, but this was the first post I saw when I searched for the 4 part table name insert issue to a linked server. After reading this and a few more posts, I was able to accomplish this by using EXEC with the "AT" argument (for SQL2008+) so that the query is run from the linked server. For example, I had to insert 4M records to a pseudo-temp table on another server, and doing an INSERT-SELECT FROM statement took 10+ minutes. But changing it to the following SELECT-INTO statement, which allows the 4 part table name in the FROM clause, does it in mere seconds (less than 10 seconds in my case).
EXEC ('USE MyDatabase;
BEGIN TRY DROP TABLE TempID3 END TRY BEGIN CATCH END CATCH;
SELECT Field1, Field2, Field3
INTO TempID3
FROM SourceServer.SourceDatabase.dbo.SourceTable;') AT [DestinationServer]
GO
The query is run on DestinationServer, changes to right database, ensures the table does not already exist, and selects from the SourceServer. Minimally logged, and no fuss. This information may already out there somewhere, but I hope it helps anyone searching for similar issues.
Some how some records in my table are getting updated with value of xyz in a certain column. Out of hundred of stored procedures, functions, triggers, how can I determine which code is doing this action. Is there a way to search through the database some how through each and every script of the code?
Please help.
One approach is to check syscomments
Contains entries for each view, rule,
default, trigger, CHECK constraint,
DEFAULT constraint, and stored
procedure within the database. The
text column contains the original SQL
definition statements..
e.g. select text from syscomments
If you are having trouble finding that literal string, the values could be coming from a table, or they could be being concatenated within a routine.
Try this
Select text from syscomments
where CharIndex('x', text) > 0
and CharIndex('y', text) > 0
and CharIndex('z', text) > 0
That might help you either find the right routine, or further indicate that the values are coming from a table.
This is going to be nearly impossible to do in SQL Server 2000 because the update might very well be from a variable that has that value or a join to another table that has that value and not hard-coded into the stored proc, trigger etc. The update could also be coming from a DTS package, a job, a piece of dynamic code run by the app or even from query analyzer, so the code itself may not be recorded inthe datbase anywhere.
Perhaps a better approach might be to create an audit table for the table in question and have it record the user and the code from the spid that generated the change as well as the old and new values. You'll have to wait until it happens again, but then you would know exactly what changed the value and what value to put it back to if need be.
Alternatively you could run profiler on the system until it happens but profiler tends to hurt performance and is not usually a good idea to run on a production system. If it is happening very often, it might be an acceptable alternative.
Here's a hint as to how you might get some of the info you want for the eventual trigger code you write:
create table #temp (eventtype nvarchar (1000), parameters int, eventinfo nvarchar (4000), myspid int)
declare #myspid int
select #myspid =##spid
insert #temp (eventtype,parameters, eventinfo)
exec ('dbcc inputbuffer (##spid)')
update #temp
set myspid = #myspid
select hostname, program_name, eventinfo
from #temp t
join sysprocesses s on t.myspid = s.spid
WHERE spid = #myspid
You might use sql-profiler to trac the update of a given table / column.
I have a requirement to update a column with multiple values. The query looks like below.
Update table1 set column1 = (
select value from table2 where table1.column0 = table2.coulmn
)
Is there any generalised stored procedure for a requirement like the above?
short of creating a statement as a string and using the "execute" statement, I don't know of one. Generally "execute" is frowned on as it's a potential injection attack point.
Why would you want to update one table with information that is easily available in another? Seems like you are just guaranteeing that you are going to have to run this query every single time you perform an update, insert or delete against the camsnav table. Otherwise how are you going to keep them in sync?
Also, if you cannot guarantee that the sub-query will return exactly one row, it is probably safer to use the SQL Server-specific and proprietary update format:
UPDATE f SET nav = n.nav
FROM camsfolio AS f
INNER JOIN camsnav AS n
ON f.schcode = n.schcode;
SQL Server doesn't use "generalised stored procedures" for this kind of thing. It's up to you to build your own SP, composed using an appropriate parameterized UPDATE statement.