I have two tables A and B. I want to insert data into tables C and D based on join between A and B (A.column = B.column). What is the best way to accomplish this type of task?
IE-------> If column = xyz then insert into table C
IF column = abc then insert into table D
ELSE do_not_insert
Please help.
Regards
Ziggy
I've setup RDA (Sql Server 2005) for my WM5 device and it works great to pull a simple table, even with a simple where clause.
I tried to join to tables to limit the number of records but I'm getting an error saying something about cannot track because of multitable query. So is it only possible to pull simple tables with RDA. If it is, is there a workaround?
Jesus saves. But Gretzky slaps in the rebound.
Hello, I am sort of new to SQL so I thought I would ask you people about this problem I'm having.
Let's say I have two tables defined as follows, where the Ids are the primary keys -
Team Table Player Table
id Name TeamId PName
1 Gophers 1 Carman
2 Pioneers 1 Stoa
1 Wheeler
2 Bozak
2 Butler
2 Ostrow
Now let's say I join them using the following statement
SELECT * FROM Team INNER JOIN Player ON Player.TeamId = Team.Id
and it gives me the following -
id Name TeamId PName
1 Gophers 1 Carman
1 Gophers 1 Stoa
1 Gophers 1 Wheeler
2 Pioneers 2 Bozak
2 Pioneers 2 Butler
2 Pioneers 2 Ostrow
But what I want as my end result, and I don't know if this is possible using SQL is this -
id Name TeamId PName
1 Gophers 1 Wheeler
NULL NULL 1 Stoa
NULL NULL 1 Carman
2 Pioneers 2 Ostrow
NULL NULL 2 Bozak
NULL NULL 2 Butler
Can this be done in SQL using JOIN and how would I do it?
Hello there,
I'm experiencing a really weird problem:
I have a SqlCE subscriber connecting via IIS to a SQL Server 2005 database. The database publisher/distributor and the web server are on different machines (IIS being in a DMZ) and I want to avoid the use of Kerberos delegation to share priviledges on the snapshot folder.
I configured the web synchronization to accept basic authentication and obviously the subscriber sends @internetlogin and @internetpassword. Plus, I used a DB authentication on the SQL Server database.
First problem, if i disable on the publisher configuration the anonymous authentication, replication fails (I expected to be an authenticated user)
If i enable anonymous authentication, the replication succeed but ONLY if I don't use join filters. Everything goes well with static filters, overlapping/non overlapping articles, download only tables. Using a dynamic filter results in a "The merge process was unable to deliver the snapshot to the Subscriber" error.
I really can't imagine a way to fix this behaviour.
Thanks in advance
Hi,
I have a merge (SQL 2005 Standard -> Express) topolgoy which is having problems
The main problem is that the join filters don't seem to work for one area and I am hoping someone can help me with some troubleshooting advice
There are 140+ tables in the topology but the ones causing particular pain are a parent child relationship where the child is actually a bridge/linking table to another table.
Therefore although it is a parent child in the replication filters it is the reverse. i.e. the child has the paramterised filter on it and the parent is one level down joined by it's id. There are other tables joined to this parent table but it stays at three levels deep. The @join_unique_key therefore is set to 0 as is the partition options for the parent /child relationship.
However, when we synchronise we have a problem. The rows get inserted in to the database in RI order but only the child records are replicated down to the subscriber.
The child table with the parameterised filter has 13 articles joined to it in total and one of the other branches of join filters go down as deep as four levels. Most though do not.
Does anyone have any suggestions as to why this might be happening? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers, James
P.S. I should add this problem only occurs when the edits are made at the publisher. If new records are added at the subscriber everything is fine.
Please refer to the below query. I want to filter inner join rows based on outer query column value (refer to bold text).
SELECT M.MouldId, SI.StockCode, MI.Cavity, MI.ShotCounter, CQ.SumOfCastedQty  as CastedQty, MI.CounterStartupÂ
FROM Â Â Â Â MouldItem MI
JOIN (SELECT JD.MouldId, JC.StockCode, SUM(JS.CastedQty) AS SumOfCastedQty
FROM JobCasting AS JS INNER JOIN JobCreationDet AS JD ON JS.JobDetId = JD.Uniid INNER JOIN JobCreation AS JC ON JD.JobIdx = JC.Uniid
[Code] ....
Hi,
Using Merge replication, I have a table that is filtered using the HOST_NAME() function. The filter also makes use of a function (as the HOST_NAME() is overriden to return some complex data).
Everything replicates and filters just fine. but when I add a join filter on a different table (the join filter is a simple foreign key join) I get the following error when the snapshot agent is run:
Message: Conflicting locking hints are specified for table "fn_GetIDList". This may be caused by a conflicting hint specified for a view.
Command Text: sp_MSsetup_partition_groups
Parameters: @publication = test1
fn_GetIDList is the function used in the original filter.
Thanks for any help
Graham
I have a set of udf's dealing that return a one column table of valuesparsed from a comma delimeted string.For example:CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[udf_filter_patient](@patient_list varchar(2000))RETURNS @patient TABLE(patient_id int)ASBEGINinsert into @patientselect patient_id from patient-- parse @patient_list stuff excludedRETURNENDI have come up with the following two schemes to use these udfs. Theseexamples are obviously simplified, and I have a handful of stored proceduresthat will use between 10 or more of these filters. If the two areequivalent, I prefer Method 2 because it makes for much neater SQL whenusing many filter criteria.So my question is, will one noticebly outperform the other? Or is there abetter way in which to filter on a list of criteria?Method 1 :CREATE PROC sp__filter_open_bills@patient_list varchar(2000)ASCREATE TABLE #patient(patient_id int)INSERT INTO #patientSELECTpatient_idFROMdbo.udf_filter_patient( @patient_list )SELECT*FROMopen_billsINNER JOIN #patient on #patient.patient_id = open_bills.patient_idGOMethod 2 :CREATE PROC sp__filter_open_bills@patient_list varchar(2000)ASSELECT*FROMopen_billsWHEREopen_bills.patient_id IN ( SELECT patient_id FROMdbo.udf_filter_patient( @patient_list ) )GOThanks for the help!Chris G
View 4 Replies View RelatedHello,
Here is my problem:
I use SQL Server 2005. I have approx. 50 tables in my database and 30 of them have a filed named "CompanyID". Example:
create table A (ID int identity, NAME varchar(100), COMPANYID int)create table A (ID int identity, REF_ID int, FIELD1 varchar(100), FIELD2 varchar(100), COMPANYID int)
Also there are nearly 200 stored procedures that read data from these tables. Example:
create procedure ABCasbegin /* some checks and expressions here ... */ select ... from A inner join B on (A.ID = B.REF_ID) where ... /* ... */end;
All my queries in the Stored procedure does not filter the tables by CompanyID, so they process the entire data.
However, now we have a requirement to separate the data for each company. That means that we have to put a filter by CompanyID to each of those 20 tables in each query where the tables appear.
Firstly, I put the CompanyID in the context so now its value is accessible through the context_info() function. Thus I do not need now to pass it as a parameter to the stored procedures.
However, I don't know what is the easiest and fastest way to filter the tables. Example:
I modified the above mentioned procedure in the following way:
create procedure ABCasbegin /* some checks and expressions here ... */
-- gets the CompanyID from the context: DECLARE @CompanyID int; SELECT @CompanyID = CONVERT(float, CONVERT(varchar(128), context_info()))
select ... from A inner join B on (A.ID = B.REF_ID) where ...
and A.COMPANYID = @CompanyID and B.COMPANYID = @CompanyID /* ... */end;
Now I have the desired filter by CompanyID. However, modifying over 200 stored procedures is rather tedious work and I don't think that this is the best approach. Is there any functionality in SQL Server that can provide the possibility to put an automatic filter to the tables.
For example: when I wrote "SELECT * FROM A", the actual statements to be executed would be "SELECT * FROM A WHERE CompanyID = CONVERT(float, CONVERT(varchar(128), context_info()))".
I was looking for something like "INSTEAD OF SELECT" triggers but I didn't manage to find any answer.
I would very grateful is someone suggests a solution for something like "global table filter" (that will help me make an easy refactoring)?
Thanks in advance.
Best regards,
Beroetz
Howdy,
I have a table that has a group. In this group, I want to filter by 2 different expressions, concatenated with an OR. BUT I can't change the "And/Or" column value for the first entry because it is grayed out. The column will automatically change to an OR value if both my expression column fields are the same (which I don€™t want) but if I put any other value in to the expression field of the second row, the "And/Or" field of the first row automatically changes to an AND.
PLEASE! How do I get the And/Or field "ungrayed" so I can change it to what I want?
The 2 filters I and using check the UserID = to the user, and the other is checking a count to get the Top N 1. (So just showing the current user and the top producer)
Hello
Can any one tell me the difference between Cross Join, inner join and outer join in laymans language
by just taking examples of two tables such as Customers and Customer Addresses
Thank You
I have two xml source and i need only left restricted data.
how can i perform left restricted join?
I was writing a query using both left outer join and inner join. And the query was ....
SELECT
       S.companyname AS supplier, S.country,P.productid, P.productname, P.unitprice,C.categoryname
FROM
       Production.Suppliers AS S LEFT OUTER JOIN
      (Production.Products AS P
        INNER JOIN Production.Categories AS C
[code]....
However ,the result that i got was correct.But when i did the same query using the left outer join in both the cases
i.e..
SELECT
       S.companyname AS supplier, S.country,P.productid, P.productname, P.unitprice,C.categoryname
FROM
       Production.Suppliers AS S LEFT OUTER JOIN
(Production.Products AS P
LEFT OUTER JOIN Production.Categories AS C
ON C.categoryid = P.categoryid)
ON
S.supplierid = P.supplierid
WHERE
S.country = N'Japan';
The result i got was same,i.e
supplier   country   productid   productname   unitprice   categorynameSupplier QOVFD   Japan   9   Product AOZBW   97.00   Meat/PoultrySupplier QOVFD   Japan  10   Product YHXGE   31.00   SeafoodSupplier QOVFD   Japan  74   Product BKAZJ   10.00   ProduceSupplier QWUSF   Japan   13   Product POXFU   6.00   SeafoodSupplier QWUSF   Japan   14   Product PWCJB   23.25   ProduceSupplier QWUSF   Japan   15   Product KSZOI   15.50   CondimentsSupplier XYZ   Japan   NULL   NULL   NULL   NULLSupplier XYZ   Japan   NULL   NULL   NULL   NULL
and this time also i got the same result.My question is that is there any specific reason to use inner join when join the third table and not the left outer join.
I have two select statements, in between select statement taking UNION ALL . I need to avoid the error
Warning: The join order has been enforced because a local join hint is used.
Scenario:
OLEDB source 1
SELECT ...
,[MANUAL DCD ID] <-- this column set to sort order = 1
...
FROM [dbo].[XLSDCI] ORDER BY [MANUAL DCD ID] ASC
OLEDB source 2
SELECT ...
,[Bo Tkt Num] <-- this column set to sort order = 1
...
FROM ....[dbo].[FFFenics] ORDER BY [Bo Tkt Num] ASC
These two tasks are followed immediately by a MERGE JOIN
All columns in source1 are ticked, all column in source2 are ticked, join key is shown above.
join type is left outer join (source 1 -> source 2)
result of source1 (..dcd column)
...
4-400-8000119
4-400-8000120
4-400-8000121
4-400-8000122 <--row not joining
4-400-8000123
4-400-8000124
...
result of source2 (..tkt num column)
...
4-400-1000118
4-400-1000119
4-400-1000120
4-400-1000121
4-400-1000122 <--row not joining
4-400-1000123
4-400-1000124
4-400-1000125
...
All other rows are joining as expected.
Why is it failing for this one row?
I'm having trouble with a multi-table JOIN statement with more than one JOIN statement.
For each order, I need to return the following: CarsID, CarModelName, MakeID, OrderDate, ProductName, Total ordered the Car Category.
The carid (primary key) and carmodelname belong to the Cars table.
The makeid and orderdate belong to the OrderDetails table.
The productname and carcategory belong to the Product table.
The number of rows returned should be the same as the number of rows in OrderDetails.
Why would I use a left join instead of a inner join when the columns entered within the SELECT command determine what is displayed from the query results?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI have a merge join (full outer join) task in a data flow. The left input comes from a flat file source and then a script transformation which does some custom grouping. The right input comes from an oledb source. The script transformation output is asynchronous (SynchronousInputID=0). The left input has many more rows (200,000+) than the right input (2,500). I run it from VS 2005 by right-click/execute on the data flow task. The merge join remains yellow and the task never finishes. I do see a row count above the flat file destination that reaches a certain number and seems to get stuck there. When I test with a smaller file on the left it works OK. Any suggestions?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI'm using SQL Server 2005.
A piece of software I wrote starting timing out on a query that left outer joins a table to a view. Both the table and view have approximately the same number of rows (about 170000).
The table has 2 very similar columns, one is a varchar(1) and another is varchar(100). Neither are included in any index and beyond the size difference, the columns have the same properties. One of the employees here uses the varchar(1) column (called miscsearch) to tag large sets of rows to perform some action on. In this case, he had set 9000 rows miscsearch value to "g". The query then should join the table and view for all rows where miscsearch is set to g in the table. This query takes at least 20 minutes to run (I stopped it at this point).
If I remove the "where" clause and join all rows in the two tables, the query completes in about 20 seconds. If set the varchar(100) column (called descrip) to "g" for the same rows set via miscsearch, the query completes in about 20 seconds.
If I force the join type to a hash join, the query completes using miscsearch in about 30 seconds.
So, this works:
SELECT di.File_No, prevPlacements, balance,'NOT PLACED' as status FROM Info di LEFT OUTER HASH JOIN View_PP pp ON di.ram_file_no = pp.file_no WHERE miscsearch = 'g' ORDER BY balance DESC
and this works:
SELECT di.File_No, prevPlacements, balance,'NOT PLACED' as status FROM Info di LEFT OUTER JOIN View_PP pp ON di.ram_file_no = pp.file_no WHERE descrip = 'g' ORDER BY balance DESC
But this does't:
SELECT di.File_No, prevPlacements, balance,'NOT PLACED' as status FROM Info di LEFT OUTER JOIN View_PP pp ON di.ram_file_no = pp.file_no WHERE miscsearch = 'g' ORDER BY balance DESC
What should I be looking for here to understand why this is happening?
Thanks,
john
Awesome! I don't alway get the email notification of whoever reply to the posting. I think it only work after I log off of the forum.
Scott
We are trying to migrate from sql 2005 to 2012. I am changing one of the implicit join to explicit join. As soon as I change the join, the number of rows returned are fewer than before.
Below is my Implict join query
INSERT #RIF_TEMP1 (rf1_row_no,rf1_rif, rf1_key_id_no, rf1_last_date, rf1_start_date)
SELECT currow.rf0_row_no, currow.rf0_rif, currow.rf0_key_id_no, prevrow.rf0_start_date, currow.rf0_start_date
FROM #RIF_TEMP0 currow , #RIF_TEMP0 prevrow
[Code] ....
and below is explict join query
INSERT #RIF_TEMP1 (rf1_row_no,rf1_rif, rf1_key_id_no, rf1_last_date, rf1_start_date)
SELECT currow.rf0_row_no, currow.rf0_rif, currow.rf0_key_id_no, prevrow.rf0_start_date, currow.rf0_start_date
FROM #RIF_TEMP0 currow LEFT JOIN #RIF_TEMP0 prevrow
ON (currow.rf0_row_no = prevrow.rf0_row_no + 1)
[Code] ....
the count returned from both the queries is different.
I am not sure what am I doing wrong. The count of #RIF_TEMP0 is always 32, it never changes, but the variable @countTemp is different for both the queries.
Why does this right join return the same results as using a left (or even a full join)?There are 470 records in Account, and there are 1611 records in Contact. But any join returns 793 records.
select Contact.firstname, Contact.lastname, Account.[Account Name]
from Contact
right join Account
on Contact.[Account Name] = Account.[Account Name]
where Contact.[Account Name] = Account.[Account Name]
Hi guys,
I'll appreciate any help with the following problem:
I need to retrieve data from 3 tables. 2 master tables and 1 transaction table.
1. Master table TBLOC contain 2 records :
rcd 1. S01
rcd 2. S02
2. Master table TBCODE contain 5 records:
rcd 1. C1
rcd 2. C2
rcd 3. C3
rcd 4. C4
rcd 5. C5
3. Transaction table TBITEM contain 4 records which link to 2 master table:
rcd 1. S01, C1, CAR
rcd 2. S01, C4, TOY
rcd 3. S01, C5, KEY
rcd 4. S02, C2, CAR
I use Left Join & Right Join to retrieve result below (using non-ASNI method) but it doesn't work.
Right Join method:
SELECT C.LOC, B.CODE, A.ITEM FROM TBITEM A RIGHT JOIN TBCODE B ON A.CODE = B.CODE
RIGHT JOIN TBLOC C ON A.LOC = C.LOC
GROUP BY C.LOC, B.CODE, A.ITEM ORDER BY C.LOC, B.CODE
When I use Non-ASNI method it work:
SELECT C.LOC, B.CODE, A.ITEM FROM TBITEM A, TBCODE B, TBLOC C
WHERE A.CODE =* B.CODE AND A.LOC =* C.LOC
GROUP BY C.LOC, B.CODE, A.ITEM ORDER BY C.LOC, B.CODE
Result:
LOC CODE ITEM
-----------------------------
S01 C1 NULL
S01 C2 NULL
S01 C3 CAR
S01 C4 TOY
S01 C5 KEY
S02 C1 NULL
S02 C2 CAR
S02 C3 NULL
S02 C4 NULL
S02 C5 NULL
Please Help.
Thanks.
Is there a way to do a super-table join ie two table join with no matching criteria? I am pulling in a sheet from XL and joining to a table in SQLServer. The join should read something like €œfor every row in the sheet I need that row and a code from a table. 100 rows in the sheet merged with 10 codes from the table = 1000 result rows.
This is the simple sql (no join on the tables):
select 1.code, 2.rowdetail
from tblcodes 1, tblelements 2
But how to do this in SSIS?
Thanks - Ken
I read that merge joins work a lot faster than hash joins. How would you convert a hash join into a merge join? (Referring to output on Execution Plan diagrams.)
THANKS
There is a table called "tblvZipCodes" that contain a zipcode of all cities, area code that are located in that zip code.
The problem I have with the inner join is that there are more than 1 cities in one zipcode code. Is there a way to just return only the 1st row and not return the rest of the rows from the tblvZipCodes in the INNER JOIN query?
Thanks..
Code:
SELECT TOP 100 PERCENT dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.Year, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.Make, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.Model, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.ModelType,
dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.Color, dbo.tblvZipCodes.ZIPCode, dbo.tblvZipCodes.City, dbo.tblvZipCodes.County, dbo.tblvZipCodes.State,
dbo.tblvZipCodes.AreaCode, dbo.tblvZipCodes.Region, dbo.tblaAccounts.Name, dbo.tblaAccounts.PhoneOne, dbo.tblaAccounts.AccountID,
dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.AcceptedID, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.Series, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.BodyStyle, dbo.tblaAccounts.WebSite,
dbo.tblaAccounts.SalesEmail, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.EmailTo, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.PhotoURL, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.Mileage,
dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.RawID, dbo.tblvRegions.Name AS RegionName, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.VIN, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.Style,
dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.StockDate
FROM dbo.tblPurchaseRaw INNER JOIN
dbo.tblaAccounts ON dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.AccountID = dbo.tblaAccounts.AccountID INNER JOIN
dbo.tblvZipCodes ON dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.ZipCode = dbo.tblvZipCodes.ZIPCode INNER JOIN
dbo.tblvRegions ON dbo.tblvZipCodes.Region = dbo.tblvRegions.RegionID
WHERE (CONVERT(char, dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.StockDate, 101) <> '01/01/1900') AND (dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.SoldRawID IS NULL) AND
(dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.AcceptedID <> - 10) AND (dbo.tblPurchaseRaw.AcceptedID <> - 1)
ORDER BY dbo.tblvZipCodes.ZIPCode
hello, i am running mysql server 5 and i have sql syntax like this:
select
sales.customerid as cid,
name,
count(saleid)
from
sales
inner join
customers
on
customers.customerid=sales.customerid
group by
sales.customerid
order by
sales.customerid;
it works fine and speedy. but when i change inner join to right join, in order to get all customers even there is no sale, my server locks up. note: there is about 10000 customers and 15000 sales.
what can be the problem?
thanks,
I have 2 tables, I will add sample data to them to help me explain...Table1(Fields: A, B)=====1,One2,Two3,ThreeTable2(Fields: A,B)=====2,deux9,neufI want to create a query that will only return data so long as the key(Field A) is on both tables, if not, return nothing. How can I dothis? I am thnking about using a 'JOIN' but not sure how to implementit...i.e: 2 would return data- but 9 would not...any help would be appreciated.
View 3 Replies View RelatedHi,Just curious. Would you use ANSI style table joining or the 'oldfashion' table joining; especially if performance is the main concern?What I meant is illustrated below:ANSI Styleselect * from a join b on a.id = b.idOld Styleselect * from a, b where a.id = b.idI noticed that in some SQL, the ANSI is much faster but sometimes, theold style looks much better.It's ridiculous to try out both styles to see which is better wheneverwe want to write an SQL statement.Please comment.Thanks in advance.
View 1 Replies View RelatedHello, everyoneI have one question about the standard join and inner join, which oneis faster and more reliable? Can you recommend me to use? Please,explain me...ThanksChamnap
View 12 Replies View RelatedGiven a table of building components e.g. floors, walls, etc, etc:
create table component_multiplier_table
(
system_code char(4),
system_component_code char(3),
function_code char(4),
component_multiplier dec(7,6)
)
Where function_code is the function of the area e.g. Auditorium, Classrom, etc, etc. And not all components are available for all functions e.g. Carpeting is available for Classrooms but not Power Plants or Warehouses.
I need to self join the above table to itself on system_code and system_component_code and find out which rows are missing from each side.
A query that I've been banging away at with no success is:
SELECT c1.*, c2.*
FROM [dbo].[component_multiplier_table] c1 FULL OUTER JOIN [dbo].[component_multiplier_table] c2
ON (c1.system_component_code = c2.system_component_code) AND (c1.[system_code] = c2.[system_code])
WHERE c1.function_code = '2120' AND c2.[function_code] = '2750' AND (c1.[system_code] IS NULL OR c2.system_code IS NULL);
I added the is null conditions, no joy. I've tried every flavor of outer join w/o success.
Could any T-SQL gurus out there help me figure out how to do this in a set before I start coding
DECLARE crsr CURSOR
Thanks.
Anyone know why using
SELECT *
FROM a LEFT OUTER JOIN b
ON a.id = b.id
instead of
SELECT *
FROM a LEFT JOIN b
ON a.id = b.id
generates a different execution plan?
My query is more complex, but when I change "LEFT OUTER JOIN" to "LEFT JOIN" I get a different execution plan, which is absolutely baffling me! Especially considering everything I know and was able to research essentially said the "OUTER" is implied in "LEFT JOIN".
Any enlightenment is very appreciated.
Thanks
Hello I am working in an advertising company and I have to find all records who have advertised 7 days back but if one person has advertised more than once means for different products, his name should come only once. How can I filter this. I am totally new to this language I can write simple query but don’t know how to filter it.
Name IndividualID Product Date
A 1 x 2007-01-27.23.59.59.777
A 1 y 2007-01-28.00.00.00.000
b 2 xx 2007-01-28.00.00.00.000
A 1 z 2007-01-28.00.00.00.000
b 2 yy 2007-01-28.00.00.00.000
A 1 p 2007-01-28.00.00.00.000
c 3 m 2007-01-28.00.00.00.000
d 1 n 2007-01-28.00.00.00.000
A 1 s 2007-01-28.00.00.00.000