Adding Conditions In The ON Clause Of A JOIN
Feb 12, 2008
Hi Faculties,
I have two queries which give me the same output.
-- Query 1
SELECT prod.name, cat.name
FROM products prod INNER JOIN categories cat
ON prod.category_id = cat.id
WHERE cat.id = 1;
-- Query 2
SELECT prod.name, cat.name
FROM products prod INNER JOIN categories cat
ON prod.category_id = cat.id AND cat.id = 1;
The first query uses the WHERE clause and the second one has all the
conditions in the ON clause. Is there anthing wrong with the second
approach in terms of performance? Please suggest.
Thanks in advance
Jackal
View 6 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Jan 10, 2008
My question is fairly simple. When I join between two tables, I always use the ON syntax. For example:
SELECT
*
FROM
Users
JOIN UserRoles
ON (Users.UserRoleId = UserRoles.UserRoleId)
No problems there. However, if I then decide to further filter the selection based on some trait of the UserRole, I have two options: I can add the condition as a WHERE statement, or I can add the condition within the ON block.
--Version 1:
SELECT
*
FROM
Users
JOIN UserRoles
ON (Users.UserRoleId = UserRoles.UserRoleId)
WHERE
UserRoles.Active = 'TRUE'
-- Version 2
SELECT
*
FROM
Users
JOIN UserRoles
ON (Users.UserRoleId = UserRoles.UserRoleId
AND UserRoles.Active = 'TRUE')
So, the question is, which is faster/better, if either? The Query Analyzer shows the two queries have the exact same execution plan, which makes sense, since they're both joining the same tables. However, I'm wondering if adding the condition in the ON statement results in fewer rows the JOIN statement initially needs to join up, thus reducing the overall initial size of the results table before the WHERE conditions are applied.
So is there a difference, performance wise? I imagine that if Users had a thousand records, and UserRoles had 10 records, then the JOIN would create a cartesian product of the two tables, resulting in 10,000 records in the table before the WHERE conditions are applied. However, if only three of the UserRoles is set to Active, would that mean that the resulting table, before applying WHERE conditions, would only contain 3000 records?
Thanks for whatever information you can provide.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Mar 19, 2012
Code:
Drop table #table
Drop table #table_with_groupid
-- Prepare test data
CREATE TABLE #table
([Admissions_key] bigint NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
MRN nvarchar(10) NOT NULL,
[Code] ....
How can I compare dates with conditions. I only want to Mark C where the difference between adm_datetime and prevsep_datetime is <= 1 otherwise E as well
where datediff(MINUTE,tg.adm_datetime,tg.pre_sep_date)< =1 ??
is it correct ? where should I put this to implement correctly ?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Apr 1, 2008
I have a report and in it there is a dataset that of course contains a query.
I want the query conditions to be changed automatically (the 'WHERE' clause) according to the environment it runs on, so if I put the same report on different customer computers, it will act differently according to the relevant 'WHERE' clause conditions.
Is it possible to use a parameter or "solution configurations" (or something else) in order to decide the conditions in the 'WHERE' clause?
Help will be really appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Dec 12, 2007
I have a table (GLTRANS) with thousands of lines.
1 column in the table (ACCNO) has 300 different values which all need to change to a new value.
ie. 11100 all change to 8100
11200 all change to 8200
I know how to do a simple UPDATE
UPDATE GLTRANS
SET ACCNO = '8100'
WHERE ACCNO = '11100'
But how can i combine into 1 script rather than having to continually change this script 300 times??
Thanks
Wilbur
View 6 Replies
View Related
Aug 18, 2004
We have three fields in a table: firstname, Surname & Organisation. Firstname & surname will always be filled but in most cases organisation is NULL.
Part of what these fields will be used for is a mailshot. If there is no organisation data then the mailshot will open with 'Dear Firstname Surname, ' but if the organisation is present they would like 'Dear Organisation'.
Is it possible to create a select state that checks the organisation field, and if a value is present return that value else return the firstname, surname combination? I have tried various things but I cannot get it to work.
I know the ideal situation would be to do this type of condition check at scripting level (PHP, ASP, Visual Basic) but my bosses would like to try it at SQL level.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Oct 24, 2006
pls:
1/ can we do it this way:
inner join Table2 ON table1.fld1=table2.fld21 AND table1.fld12=table2.fld22
2/also:
what s the difference between join , iner join and left join
Thanks .
View 4 Replies
View Related
Apr 7, 2008
I have three table For example
Employee (Empid , Empname , Esal)
Department (Deptid , Deptname , empid )
Staff (staffid , Staffname , Empid)
It is just example
how can i update Empname whose staffid =1 accor to staffid)
using Join Conditions :- Pls help me out ..
or
how to update data using JOIN Conditions
Yaman
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 11, 2008
Dear All,
I am not sure this is the correct forum for my issue, still im going on.....
I have a sql query which uses left outer join and where clause
select I.ir_id, I.ir_title,I. ir_b_type, I.ir_label, I.ir_createdby, I.ir_createdon, B.mstatus, B.bstatus from BR_IR I left outer join BR_BS Bon I.ir_id = B.bs_ir_id where I.ir_tr_rel = 'V03.03.06' order by I.ir_id desc
this works perfect. Now I want to exclude few records from the result on condn 'bstatus <> 'Yes'. So now my query will be
select I.ir_id, I.ir_title, I.ir_b_type, I.ir_label, I.ir_createdby, I.ir_createdon, B.mstatus, B.bstatus from BR_IR I left outer join BR_BS Bon I.ir_id = B.bs_ir_id where I.ir_tr_rel = 'V03.03.06' and B.bstatus <> 'Yes'order by I.ir_id desc
The below query will not return the left table records which doesnt have a matching one in the right table. It works something like inner join.
Could you please anyone tell me,where I am wrong?
Thanks,
Girija
View 3 Replies
View Related
Mar 17, 2008
I am using Transact-Sql 2005, and I'm trying to do a left outer join, including only certain accounts. The account number is x-xxx-xxxx-xxxx.
I want to include only accounts where the last 4 digits are > 7149, and the first 5 digits are between 2-110 and 2-999, or are equal to 8-001.
This is my code, based on 2 temporary tables I have previously populated:
select
b.gl7accountsid,
b.accountnumber,
t.description,
t.category,
t.postdate,
t.poststatus,
t.transactiontype,
t.transamount,
coalesce(t.transamount,0) as TransactionAmount,
t.encumbrancestatus,
t.gl7fiscalperiodsid,
b.budamount,
b.gl7budgetscenariosid
from
#budgets b
left outer
join
#transactions t
on t.accountnumber=b.accountnumber
And right(t.accountnumber,4) > 7149
and (left(t.accountnumber,5) between '2-110' and '2-999' or left(t.accountnumber,5)='8-001')
order by b.accountnumber
I keep getting accounts with the last 4 digits > 7149, and also accounts whose numbers don't fall into the desired group of the first 5 digits.
I'm fairly new to SQL, and I'm thinking there must be a way to do what I want to do, but I don't know what it is.
Can anyone help?
Thanks very much ,
Sue
View 5 Replies
View Related
Sep 21, 2006
I have a SELECT Statement that I am using that is pulling from two tables. There won't always be results in the second table so I made a LEFT OUTER JOIN. The problem I am having is that I need to have three conditions in there:WHERE (employee.emp_id = @emp_id) AND (request.requested_time_taken = 'FALSE') AND (request.request_end_date >= GETDATE()))The two conditions from the request table are causing the entire query to return NULL as the value. I need help trying get a value whether or not there are any results in the request table.Here is the full select statement:SELECT (SELECT SUM(ISNULL(request.request_duration, '0')) AS Expr1
FROM employee LEFT OUTER JOIN
request AS request ON employee.emp_id = request.emp_id
WHERE (employee.emp_id = @emp_id) AND (request.requested_time_taken = 'FALSE') AND (request.request_end_date >= GETDATE()))
AS dayspending
FROM employee AS employee_1 LEFT OUTER JOIN
request AS request_1 ON employee_1.emp_id = request_1.emp_id
WHERE (employee_1.emp_id = @emp_id)
GROUP BY employee_1.emp_id, employee_1.emp_begin_accrual, employee_1.emp_accrual_rate, employee_1.emp_fname, employee_1.emp_minitial,
employee_1.emp_lname
View 2 Replies
View Related
Mar 24, 2015
I have this sql....
Select
DISTINCT p.dbPatID, p.dbpatfirstname, p.dbPatLastName,
s.dbSchTypeCnt as SchDetailType, t.dbSchTypeCnt as SchTypeType,
ISNULL(r.dbStatusDesc, 'No Ref') AS dbStatusDesc,
ISNULL(t.dbSchTypeCode, 'No Ref') AS dbSchTypeCode,
ISNULL(t.dbSchTypeDesc, 'No Ref') AS dbSchTypeDesc,
[code]....
however, I only want the lastest a.dbPatApptTime and only when a.dbPFStatus = 1 and a.ClientRef = 'EPS'
So the stand alone sql could be....
Select Top(1) dbPatApptTime as LastVisitDate, dbSchTypeDesc as LastVisitDesc
from appointments
where dbPFStatus = 1 and clientref = 'EPS'
order by dbPatApptTime desc
I'm just not sure how to incorporate that into my sql or whether there is a better way,
View 9 Replies
View Related
May 27, 2008
I am using web developer 2008, while connecting to I wanted to fetch data from Lotus notes database file, for this i used notesql connector, while connectiong to notes database i am fetting error
ERROR [42000] [Lotus][ODBC Lotus Notes]Table reference has to be a table name or an outer join escape clause in a FROM clause
I have already checked that database & table name are correct, please help me out
How i can fetch the lotus notes data in my asp.net pages.
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 27, 2008
I am using web developer 2008, while connecting to I wanted to fetch data from Lotus notes database file, for this i used notesql connector, while connectiong to notes database i am fetting error
ERROR [42000] [Lotus][ODBC Lotus Notes]Table reference has to be a table name or an outer join escape clause in a FROM clause
I have already checked that database & table name are correct, please help me out
How i can fetch the lotus notes data in my asp.net pages.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jun 5, 2008
I have the following query where I select records from Active_Activities_temp which do not match on cde_actv in the table ACTIVITY_CORE_LISTING:
SELECT Active_Activities_temp.*
FROM Active_Activities_temp LEFT JOIN
ACTIVITY_CORE_LISTING ON
Active_Activities_temp.cde_actv=ACTIVITY_CORE_LISTING.cde_actv
WHEREACTIVITY_CORE_LISTING.cde_actv is null
ORDER BY prtcpnt_id
So for example, if a participant has a cde_actv=38 (which doesn't exist in ACTIVITY_CORE_LISTING), that record would appear as the query is currently.
The issue is that participants can have multiple records in Active_Activities_temp and if a participant has a record that does exist in ACTIVITY_CORE_LISTING, no records for that participant should appear in this query result. For example, if a participant has two records in Active_Activities_temp, one with a cde_actv 38 (which does not appear in ACTIVITY_CORE_LISTING) and one with a cde_actv 33 (which does appear in ACTIVITY_CORE_LISTING), no records for that participant should appear in the result. Currently the record with cde_actv=38 does appear.
What code can I implement to do what I need to do? Thanks so much.
View 5 Replies
View Related
Oct 10, 2007
I am getting incorrect results from my paging query, where the same results are being returned multiple times. Here are two queries I have found to bring the same results:select top 20 * from lookupdocuments_dbv where catname_cst='MyCategoryName' and (docid_cin not in (select top 620 docid_cin from lookupdocuments_dbv where catname_cst='MyCategoryName'))select top 20 * from lookupdocuments_dbv where catname_cst='MyCategoryName' and (docid_cin not in (select top 640 docid_cin from lookupdocuments_dbv where catname_cst='MyCategoryName'))When I remove the catname_cst where clause it brings back results properly (i.e. records 622-642 and 643-663). What is wrong with my where clause that is causing identical data to be returned?
View 8 Replies
View Related
Jan 21, 2008
Hi everyone,
I saw some queries where SQL inner join clause and the where clause is used at the same time. I knew that "on" is used instead of the "where" clause. Would anyone please exaplin me why both "where" and "on" clause is used in some sql Select queries ?
Thanks
View 6 Replies
View Related
Sep 21, 2007
I think I am getting 0 records returned... because....
I am joining the third value based on a zip code. The two tables if directly compared to each other would never have an = match.
SELECT t2.company_name, t2.firstname, t2.lastname, modelname, configname, format, version, username, t2.zip,
t2.country
FROM EtechModelRequests JOIN
CC_Host.dbo.USR_SC as t2 ON
Cast(t2.user_id As char) = username
--JOIN
--Sales.dbo.RF_Postal_Code_Salesman_Canada as t3 ON PostalCode = zip
WHERE RequestDateTime > CONVERT(DATETIME, '2007-09-1 00:00:00', 102) AND interfacename LIKE '%download%' AND
result=0 AND country='CA'
--AND t3.PostalCode Like 'z1x%'
ORDER BY company_name
I was trying to do it by using a Where clause AND t3.PostalCode Like 'z1x%' that I will later turn into an Input Parameter after I get it working.
Is there anyway to trim the PostalCode to the first three characters during the join process?
Something like Sales.dbo.RF_Postal_Code_Salesman_Canada as t3 ON LEFT(PostalCode, 3) = zip
Not sure I got the LEFT function syntax correct even. Help appreciated.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Apr 22, 2008
I'm joining one table on to another table using one of 2 possibile fields (so table 1 key one can either match table 2 key 1 or key 2)... When the first key is null for a record, the script is to attempt to join using the second key instead. It is possible to have both values present, in which case the first one should be used.
I've taken a few runs at this so far:
...
from table1 t1
left join table2 t2
on
(t1.key1 = t2.key1
or
t1.key1 = t2.key2)
If either t2.key1 or t2.key2 are populated, this works. Unfortunately, it's bringing back multiple records if both key1 and key2 are populated. Question # 1... Is there a different relational operator I can be using instead of OR that would logically look like 'if thie first key didn't find anything try the second instead'?
As an alternative, I've put the NVL to use...
NVL(t2.key1, t2.key2) = t1.key1
That seems to work, but it's pretty heavy on the server. Any suggestions on how else to handle this scenario would be greatly appreciated
(and ya, I didn't design this datamodel).
View 6 Replies
View Related
Aug 15, 2007
view 1
I have a view that is drawing from two tables. Each table contains fields representing cube coordinates. The view is filtering the results based on some simple logic (where the defference between two values in the tables are greater than x) this part works fine.
view 2
notes field
I want to include a note field in my view. This field will contain the contents of a note field from another view. This second view also contains coordinates that I can use to map the notes to the appropriate rows in view 1. However, if I join the views in my FROM clause, I will end up filtering my resultset down to rows that correspond to view 2's contents.
I want to have the full contents of view 1, displayed with a note field containing the note field content from view 2 only in the rows that have corresponding notes. (some rows will have notes, some will not)
eg.
VIEW 1
row1 row2 row3 note_row (from view 2)
fsdfs sdfsdf sdfsdf <no note>
sdfs sdfsd sdfsd "note"
sdfsdf sdfsdf ssdfsd <no note>
so... my question: is there any way that I can include this field without joining the views in my FROM clause (meking my resultset exclusive)..... possibly somehow in fields list of the select statement?
THANKS!
View 4 Replies
View Related
Feb 12, 2004
I have a table "Users" like this:
GroupId
CompanyId
UserId
I need to query the users getting the company's and group's names, but I only know how to join one table. Example:
Select UserId, GroupId, Groups.Name, CompanyId, Companies.Name
From Users JOIN Groups ON Users.GroupId = Groups.Id
Hon can I add the companies table in the Join ?
Thanks,
Moshe
View 2 Replies
View Related
Dec 1, 2005
like so often my Forums database design (in its simplest form) is:Forums -ForumID -Title -CategoryForumsMsgs -fmID -DateIn -AuthorID -MessageI need to create a sql query which returns all forum titles along with some data for 1) the first message entry (date created and author) and 2) the last one. So how can I do a JOIN query which joins with a ORDER BY clause so that the top/bottom entry only is joined from the messages table?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 26, 2004
In simple terms, if possible, what is the difference between using the WHERE clause in a SELECT statement vs an INNER JOIN? According to Rob Viera's book the WHERE is "inclusive" in nature, meaning that all records that meet the WHERE condition are included in the result set. The text further stated that an INNER JOIN is "exclusive" in nature meaning that data not meeting the JOIN condition is excluded from the result set.
In layman's terms, what is the difference? Any examples? Thanks in advance.
ddave
View 6 Replies
View Related
Mar 7, 2008
I am trying to get all of the Fund_cdes to show up even if there was no transaction on the brkg fact table. The problem I coming up with is I am also retricting what I show in the brkg fact table so I am not getting all of the row from the fund table. How do I write a left join that shows all of the fund cdes
SELECT
SEP_ACCOUNT.sep_acct_cde as Account,
FUND.fund_cde as FUND,
BRKG_FACT.accum_unit_cnt as Units_Purchased,
BRKG_FACT.transaction_amt as Amount_Purchased
FROM
BRKG_FACT
SEP_ACCOUNT
FUND
where
BRKG_FACT.sep_acct_id_num = SEP_ACCOUNT.sep_acct_id_num
brkg_fact.FUND_ID_NUM = FUND_DIM.FUND_ID_NUM
brkg_fact.SEP_ACCT_ID_NUM = 5 and
brkg_fact.product_cde <> 'MM' and
brkg_fact.transaction_amt <= 0 and
brkg_fact.source_sys_id_num <> 3 and
brkg_fact.source_sys_id_num <> 5 and
BRKG_FACT.trans_process_dte >= '1/1/2008' and
BRKG_FACT.trans_process_dte <= '1/2/2008'
order by fund_cde
current output
ACCOUNT FUND UNITS_PURCHASED AMOUNT_PURCHASED
U BLCD -0.01137 -1.48000
U BOND -0.01283 -1.67000
U CGDE -0.06743 -0.95000
U EQIN -0.13277 -2.39000
U GRST -0.11799 -4.07000
U IX4S -0.53996 -12.55000
U LCCS -0.18216 -5.31000
wanted output
ACCOUNT FUND UNITS_PURCHASED AMOUNT_PURCHASED
U BLCD -0.01137 -1.48000
U BOND -0.01283 -1.67000
U BWDS NULL NULL
U CGDE -0.06743 -0.95000
U EQIN -0.13277 -2.39000
U GAFR NULL NULL
U GRST -0.11799 -4.07000
U IX4S -0.53996 -12.55000
U LIGE NULL NULL
U LCCS -0.18216 -5.31000
View 2 Replies
View Related
Aug 23, 2007
Using SQL Server 2005
I am reporting on a system with 32 devices, each of these devices can have certain events that happen to it that are logged and timestamped.
I need a to show the count of each events that have happened to it within a certain time period.
This code snippet below works fine BUT if there are no events that happen to a certain device in the time period, then that device is 'missing' from the table.
What I need is basically a row for every device, regardless of if it has had any events happen to it (I will just show '0' for the event count)
Any thoughts? I'm a complete newbie at this by the way.
Thanks
Code Snippet
SELECT DeviceStatusWords.DeviceName, COUNT(DeviceEventDurationLog.StatusBit) AS BitCount, DeviceEventDurationLog.StatusBit AS Bit
FROM DeviceEventDurationLog RIGHT OUTER JOIN
DeviceStatusWords ON DeviceEventDurationLog.DeviceID = DeviceStatusWords.DeviceID
WHERE (DeviceEventDurationLog.TimeIn > @StartDate) AND (DeviceEventDurationLog.TimeIn < @EndDate)
GROUP BY DeviceStatusWords.DeviceName, DeviceEventDurationLog.StatusBit
ORDER BY DeviceStatusWords.DeviceName
View 5 Replies
View Related
Aug 14, 2001
Hi,
I'm trying to inner join an update statement.
Something like this:
update #point_connection_temp AS a inner join #point_connection_temp_two as b on a.key_fld = b.key_fld set a.next_point = b.next_point
where #point_connection_temp.next_point is null
order by a.key_fld
I'm getting an error message:Incorrect syntax error near AS
Any help will be greatly appreciated.Thank you!!!!!!!!!1
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jul 29, 2005
Just curious. The exec plan is the same for both qry's, and they both show the same estimated row counts @ the point of question in the exec plan. The exec times are roughly the same, any variances I'm attributing to db load from other things going on, since any benefits of one over the other are not consistent from execution to execution. So is there any benefit to filtering in the join conditions vs. the where clause? My thinking was that by filtering earlier in the qry (when joining) as opposed to "waiting" to do it in the where clause, the rest of the qry after the join would inherently be dealing w/a smaller result set for the rest of it's execution, thus improving performance. After the exec plan checking I did, I guess I was wrong. Seems that Sql Server is intelligent about such filtering when analyzing the entire qry, and building its execution accordingly. The execution plan for both qry's showed the same where clause argument for the tables being joined.
Filtering in where clause....
Code:
select...
FromtProject p with (noLock)
jointProjectCall pc with (noLock) on P.ID = pc.project_id
jointStore S with (noLock) on pc.store_id = s.id
jointZip Z with (noLock) on Z.zip5 = s.zip5
jointManager M on M.ID = case ... end
leftjoin
(
selectprojectCall_RecNum as RecNum, sum(answer) as HoursUsed
fromtCall C
whereAnswer > 0 and question_id in (1, 2)
group by projectCall_Recnum
) as C on pc.recnum = c.recnum
wherepc.removed = 0
andp.cancelled = 0
andp.deleted = 0
ands.closed = 0
ands.deleted = 0
andyear(getDate()) between year(P.startDate) and year(P.expDate)
Filtering in joins...
Code:
select...
FromtProject p with (noLock)
jointProjectCall pc with (noLock) on P.ID = pc.project_id
and pc.removed = 0
and p.cancelled = 0
and p.deleted = 0
and year(getDate()) between year(P.startDate) and year(P.expDate)
jointStore S with (noLock) on pc.store_id = s.id
jointZip Z with (noLock) on Z.zip5 = s.zip5
and s.closed = 0
and s.deleted = 0
jointManager M on M.ID = case ... end
leftjoin
(
selectprojectCall_RecNum as RecNum, sum(answer) as HoursUsed
fromtCall C
whereAnswer > 0 and question_id in (1, 2)
group by projectCall_Recnum
) as C on pc.recnum = c.recnum
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 11, 2005
Having problems rewriting my join condition using the "inner join" syntax.
My query, working with an intersection table:
SELECT Description, EmailAddress
FROM Accounts_Roles r, Accounts_Users u, Accounts_UserRoles ur
WHERE
r.RoleID = ur.RoleID
AND
u.UserID = ur.UserID
This works fine, but i want to write it using 'inner join' style, so I tried:
SELECT Description, EmailAddress
FROM Accounts_Roles r, Accounts_Users u
INNER JOIN Accounts_UserRoles ur
ON
r.RoleID = ur.RoleID
AND
u.UserID = ur.UserID
which gives me an error (The column prefix 'r' does not match with a table name or alias name used in the query.)
Any ideas as to how I'm screwing this up would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Gordon Z
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jul 15, 2007
Hello,
first of all, some facts of the case:
Table Master Table Dimension
ID Code Price ID Name
1 A44333 5000 1 "Scanner"
2 D442 3000 2 "Notebook"
3 D6644 4000 3 "Banana"
I join both tables on ID and search one time for ID and another time for Name. Looks like
(a)
SELECT AVG(Price) From Master JOIN Dimension ON Master.id = Dimension.id
WHERE master.id=1
AND Code like 'A44'
(b)
SELECT AVG(Price) From Master JOIN Dimension ON Master.id = Dimension.id
WHERE Name = 'Scanner'
AND Code like 'A44'
Why does query (b) take longer than query (a)? Dimension has 12 Rows and
Master has about 24M Rows.
For index I did
Create Index IX_Master_ID on Master(ID)
Create Index IX_Master_Code on Master(Code)
Create Index IX_Dimension_ID on Dimension(ID)
Create Index IX_Dimension_Name on Dimension(Name)
I noticed, that when i leave the Code like 'A44' clause, query (a) and (b) do take same time. I'm really confused. Can someone please help me out?
Thank you
Silas
View 9 Replies
View Related
May 25, 2012
I have tables A and B.
Table A has data, but B may have or not.
I have to get -- at least! -- the A table data.
It works when I dont have the where clause:
select * from A left outer join B on A.IDUser = B.IDUser
But it doesn't when I try to use the WHERE clause:
select * from A left outer join B on A.IDUser = B.IDUser
where A.IDUser = 2
View 3 Replies
View Related
Apr 25, 2014
I've come across a piece of code which i have never seen before.
ON T.CT_YEAR in
(
case
.[DBO].[FN_GET_YEAR]
(
CAST
(
C.[YEAR] AS VARCHAR(4)
[Code] ....
The CT_Year column is simply C for current year L for last year, O for Other, N for Next.
The Function simply returns the year value.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Aug 12, 2014
I need to write a SQL script where a join condition is using date columns (effective_date, ineffective_date). The effective date columns can be slightly different (e.g. differ by a day) for some rows of data. I need the join condition to accommodate these date differences and return these rows of data as well.
I have a table which uses multiple joins to create another table but it turns out that the effective_date which is used in the join to match row together does not work all the time since some of the dates for the effective date column are out of sync meaning records that show data as missing even when the other table contains the data. I tried the SQL script below using the BETWEEN clause but it returning 6 rows instead of 3–
select t2.[entity_id]
,t2.[effective_date]
,[company_name]
,[last_accounts_date]
,[s_code]
,[s_code_description]
[Code] .....
View 2 Replies
View Related
May 28, 2008
I have a SQL query where am using WHERE clause as a result of which the NULL values are getting filtered...can u please help me to tranform this query into LEFT OUTER JOINS so as to avoid this filtration....my query is
SELECT A.JOINT_ID,A.SIZE_NBMM,A.ISFIELDJOINT,A.WELDTEST_CRI_ID,C.LINE_ID,D.TESTLEVELNO,E.COMPLETE FROM EALPS_DRWREVSPLJTS
A,EALPS_DRW_REV_SPL B,EALPS_DRW_REV_LINE C,EALPS_WELDTESTCRIT D,EALPS_ACTV_SEQ E WHERE B.SPOOL_ID=A.SPOOL_ID AND
B.LINE_ID=C.LINE_ID AND D.WELD_TEST_CRIT_ID=A.WELDTEST_CRI_ID AND E.ACTIVITY_CODE='VT' AND E.JOINT_ID=A.JOINT_ID
Thanks and Regards,
parama.
parama laha
View 6 Replies
View Related