Hello,
I have a query with 11 left joins. Some hits against tables with small amounts of reference data, whereas others are not so small. Should I rewrite this in another way, as performance is a requirement on this one? Or, should I do it another way?
How would I rewrite left joins? Any examples?
Thanks.
Hi All,
Im having a problem with a statement i cannot seem to get 2 left joins working at the same time 1 works fine but when i try the second join i get this error:-
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers error '80040e14'
[Microsoft][ODBC Microsoft Access Driver] Syntax error (missing operator) in query expression 'children_tutorial.school_id=schools.idx LEFT JOIN regions ON children_tutorial.region_id=region.idx'.
My SQL statment is as follows :-
SELECT children_tutorial.*,schools.schoolname,regions.rname FROM children_tutorial LEFT JOIN schools ON children_tutorial.school_id=schools.idx LEFT JOIN regions ON children_tutorial.region_id=region.idx
I am using an Access database i have tried all sorts to get it working and its driving me mad!! any help would be really appreciated.
I'm trying to write a 3 table query using two LEFT JOINs. Originally, I only had one LEFT JOIN and prior to the addition of the the third table (parts) this query worked. Now it doesn't. I think it has to do with my GROUP BY.
SELECT
quote.quote_id, parts.material, machining_operations.machine, machining_operations.per_roughing, machining_operations.per_of_machining,
machining_operations.programming_time, machining_operations.setup_time, machining_operations.cycle_time, machining_operations.notes
quote.part_name, quote.revision_no, quote.quantity, quote.initial_volume, quote.final_volume, quote.material_price, machining_operations.mo_id
FROM quote
LEFT JOIN machining_operations
ON machining_operations.quote_num = quote.quote_id
LEFT JOIN parts
ON parts.package_no = quote.package_no AND parts.part_name = quote.part_name
GROUP BY quote.quote_id
I am having an issue with large queries using Microsoft SQL Server 2005 - 9.00.2221.00 (X64).
I have a query with many INNER/LEFT OUTER/RIGHT OUTER joins which is taking very very very long to run. This looks exactly like this problem described in http://support.microsoft.com/kb/318530. However, this doc says it was fixed in SP1, which is already installed.
Basically I have a query:
SELECT ....
FROM TABLEA
INNER JOIN TABLEB ...
LEFT OUTER TABLEC...
LEFT OUTER TABLED...
RIGHT OUTER TABLEF...
LEFT OUTER TABLEJ..
LEFT OUTER TABLEH...
LEFT OUTER TABLEI...
RIGHT OUTER TABLEK...
LEFT OUTER TABLEM..
... 17 joined tables in all......
WHERE TABLEB.field1 = 'abc'
The query plan for this is using TABLEA as the "main" table and joining everything else to it. The problem is, TABLEA has 117 MILLION records. TABLEB has 10,000 records which match the WHERE. I stopped this query after it ran for 62 HOURS.
If I simply change the query to:
SELECT ....
FROM TABLEB
INNER JOIN TABLEA ...
LEFT OUTER TABLEC...
LEFT OUTER TABLED...
RIGHT OUTER TABLEF...
LEFT OUTER TABLEJ..
LEFT OUTER TABLEH...
LEFT OUTER TABLEI...
RIGHT OUTER TABLEK...
LEFT OUTER TABLEM..
... 17 joined tables in all......
WHERE TABLEB.field1 = 'abc'
The query runs in 15 mins. The query plan now uses TABLEB and the WHERE clause to join all the other tables.
The problem is, this query is generated from a report writter, and I have no control over the way it creates the SQL code.
Any ideas how I can fix this?
We have a view with many left joins. The original creators of this view might have been lazy or sloppy, I don't know. I have rewritten the query to proper inner joins where required and also nested left joins.
So rather then the following exemplary fragment
select <many items>
from A
left join B on B.id_A = A.id
left join C on C.id_B = B.idthis now looks like
select <many items>
from A
left join (B
join C on C.id_B = B.id
) on B.id_A = A.id
Compilation time of the original view was 18s, of the new rewritten view 4s. The performance of execution is also better (not counting the compile of course). The results of the query are identical. There are about 30 left joins in the original view.
I can imagine that the optimizer has difficulty with all these left joins. But 14s is quite a big difference. I haven't looked into detail in the execution plans yet. I noticed that in both cases the Reason for Early Termination of Statement Optimization was Time Out.
To the wise,
This may be a very simple problem but it's been racking may brains for a while and I just can't seem to think it through clearly.
I'm trying to return a query which uses a left join and where. I'm hoping to get a result set which shows - let us says all the departments in a company. I would like to see all the department but only the names of department heads that earn 20.000+.
In MS Access I used a subquery. My subquery returned only departments with department heads that earned 20.000+ - I then left joined the departments table to that query - no problem.
With MSSQL I've tried IN, ANY, ALL but my result sets only returns the departments that earn 20.000+ and the employees for those particular departments.
I'm thinking there must be some way of doing this without having to use a union clause.
Thanks for taking the time to read this message through.
Sincerely,
Arthur Lambiris
My understanding of relevant topics as well as SQL Books Online definition of left outer joins is that each record in the left table will be retrieved and where no associated right record exists then null values will be displayed for records in the right hand table but I've obviously misunderstood and would be grateful if someone could show me how to produce the required effect.
My scenario is pretty simple: 2 tables DiningTables and Reservations with columns as follows:
DiningTables: TBL_ID and TBL_Location - TBL_ID is the primary key
Reservationss::RES_TBL_ID and RES_Diner_Name - RES_TBL_ID is the primary key
There are 8 records in DiningTables and 4 records in Reservations and the objective is obtain the following output:
TBL_ID RES_Diner_Name
1 Jones
2 Smith
3 Bloggs
4 Mack
5 null
6 null
7 null
8 null
The SQL query I used is
SELECT Reservations.RES_Diner_Surname, DiningTables.TBL_ID
FROM DiningTables LEFT OUTER JOIN
Reservations ON DiningTables.TBL_ID = Reservations.RES_TBL_ID
That query generates 11 rows as follows:
TBL_ID RES_Diner_Name
1 Jones
1 Smith
1 Bloggs
1 Mack
2 null
3 null
4 null
5 null
6 null
7 null
8 null
I'm clealry missing something incredibly obvious and I kinda feel like the village idiot and would be extremely grateful for a clue!!
Hi All,
This may be a stupid question. But I just want to make sure i'm going in right direction.
I wrote the following query. My purpose is to retrieve all the members who submitted loan applications.
I just want to make sure my query is right? Can anyone veryfy this query?
Do I have to use loanApplication table first instead of members. Also Do I need to use right outer joins instead of left outer joins?
Code Block
SELECT Member.CUMemberId, LoanApplication.SubmittedOn, Member.LastName, Member.FirstName, Member.MiddleName, LoanApplication.Amount,
LoanApplication.Decision, LoanApplication.Term, Rate.InterestRate, LoanApplication.Status, Member.CuStatus
FROM Member INNER JOIN
MemberLogon ON Member.Id = MemberLogon.MemberFK INNER JOIN
LoanApplication ON Member.LastLoanApplicationFK = LoanApplication.Id AND Member.Id = LoanApplication.MemberFK LEFT OUTER JOIN
Account ON Member.Id = Account.MemberFK AND LoanApplication.LoanFK = Account.Id LEFT OUTER JOIN
Rate ON LoanApplication.RateFK = Rate.Id
WHERE (LoanApplication.Status = 'Submitted')
Thanks
Hello,
I am working on a query that has 11 left join statements, some are hitting against reference data that has a small amount of records, whereas others not so small. From a performance standpoint, should I look at rewriting this query, and how would I do so? What is an alternative to left joins; any examples anyone has?
Thanks.
Hi,
First of all, is this an appropriate place to get answers related to SQL CE? If not, do you have any recomended forums elsewhere?
I'm trying to get a list of various related tables using ResultSets on SQLCE 3. The query is something like this:
SELECT A.*
, F.Descricao AS FamiliasDescricao
, M.Descricao AS MarcasDescricao
, I.Descricao AS IVADescricao
FROM Artigos AS A
LEFT OUTER JOIN Familias AS F ON A.FamiliasUID = F.UID
LEFT OUTER JOIN Marcas AS M ON A.MarcasUID = M.UID
LEFT OUTER JOIN IVA AS I ON A.IVAUID = I.UID
INNER JOIN ArtigosTipos AS AT ON A.ArtigosTiposUID = AT.UID;
The column ArtigosTiposUID cannot be NULL, so an INNER JOIN is used, but the other UID columns can have a NULL value, and I need all the rows on Artigos to show up even if these other UIDs are NULL. The query runs fine like this in VS2005, returning NULL values for the columns if there are no rows on the other tables, both on the SQL Server 2005 database and the .sdf database used on the Windows Mobile device. But on Windows Mobile SQL CE gives me an "Unspecified error [7]", Native error 25607, an the stack trace ends with:
em System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeCommand.ProcessResult s()
em System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeCommand.CompileQueryP lan()
em System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeCommand.ExecuteComman d()
em System.Data.SqlServerCe.SqlCeCommand.ExecuteResult Set()
If I replace all the LEFT OUTER JOINs with INNER JOINs only the rows where all UIDs have a value show up, but as I said, I want all rows on tabela Artigos. Even if I remove all JOINs except the last one and replace it with a LEFT OUTER JOIN I get the same erro, all rows having the column ArtigosTiposUID defined... it seems as if the simple presence of LEFT OUTER JOIN makes SQL CE return an error.
Is there a way to run the queries on VS using the SQL CE engine so that one can check whether the query will run successfuly on Windows Mobile?
Any other sugestions?
Thank you,
Hugo Lopes
Could somebody tell me what is the secret of being able to write a SELECT statement having mulitple LEFT or RIGHT joins, I seem to get in trouble as soon as I add the second LEFT join, as I am obviously doing it wrong.
These are my tables, would somebody mind having a go,or explaining what do i need to be aware of in a case like this
emailDetails table ( emailID_PK,emailName,emailText,emailSubject,emailN otificationTypeID)
emailRecipients table (emailID_PK, RecipientID, SentToEmail)
luEmailNotificationTypes look up table (emailNOtificationTypeID_PK, emailNotificationTypeName)
Thanks
Other than being much less readable, is there a downside to combining left and right outer joins in the same SELECT? I'm reviewing some generally poor code done by a contractor and it's peppered with queries with both left and right joins. I've always thought it was just a semantic difference, but I was just wondering if, other than readability, there were any performance issues.
Thanks,
Pete
Hi,
I am working a DTS package and I need to Join to completely differnet tables in such a way that I need to do an inline view and an Outer Join. In this current form, it drops all columns for a day if one of the inline views returns null.
SELECT 01 as WHSE_ID
, A.On_Time
, B.Early
, C.Late
, (D.AVG_Duration / (A.On_Time + B.Early + C.Late))AS AVG_Duration
, E.DelDate
, F.*
FROM
(SELECT COUNT(SDD_Status) AS On_Time
, SDD_Date as On_Time_Date
FROM SDD_Store_Delivery_Data_Table
WHERE SDD_Route LIKE '01%' AND SDD_Status = 'On Time'
AND SDD_Date < '12/19/2004' AND SDD_Date > '12/10/2004'
GROUP BY SDD_Date) a,
(SELECT COUNT(SDD_Status) AS Early
,SDD_DATE As Early_Date
FROM SDD_Store_Delivery_Data_Table
WHERE SDD_Route LIKE '01%' AND SDD_Status = 'Early'
And SDD_Date < '12/19/2004' AND SDD_Date > '12/10/2004'
GROUP BY SDD_Date) b,
(SELECT COUNT(SDD_Status) AS Late
, SDD_Date As Late_Date
FROM SDD_Store_Delivery_Data_Table
WHERE SDD_Route LIKE '01%' AND SDD_Status = 'Late'
AND SDD_Date < '12/19/2004' AND SDD_Date > '12/10/2004'
GROUP BY SDD_Date) c,
(SELECT SUM(CAST(SDD_Stay AS NUMERIC)) AS AVG_Duration
, SDD_Date As Stay_Date
FROM SDD_Store_Delivery_Data_Table
WHERE SDD_Route LIKE '01%'
AND SDD_Date < '12/19/2004' AND SDD_Date > '12/10/2004'
GROUP BY SDD_Date) d,
(SELECT DISTINCT(SDD_Date) AS DelDate
FROM SDD_Store_Delivery_Data_Table
WHERE SDD_Date < '12/19/2004' AND SDD_Date > '12/10/2004'
GROUP BY SDD_Date)e,
(SELECT *
FROM WAREHOUSE_METRICS
WHERE MTRC_DTE < '12/19/2004' AND MTRC_DTE > '12/10/2004'
AND WHSE_ID = 2
GROUP BY MTRC_DTE
, MTRC_ID
, WHSE_ID
, INVN_LVL_CS_CNT
, INVN_LVL_DLLR
, INVN_LVL_PLLT_CNT
, RCV_CS_CNT
, SHP_CS_CNT
, SRVC_LVL_PCT
, SCRTCH_CNT
, DROP_CNT
, RPLNSH_CNT
, DMG_CNT
, RET_CNT
, PICK_CYC_CNT
, PICK_ERR_CNT
, RSV_CHK_CNT
, ERR_CNT
, DLY_CS_VRNC
, DLY_DLLR_VRNC
, CMB_THRUPUT
, DELAY_MINS_CNT
, DELAY_PCT
, UNLOAD_AVG
, LABOR_AVG
, SELECT_HR_CNT
, CRT_USERID
, CRT_DTE_TME
, UPD_USERID
, UPD_DTE_TME) f
WHERE a.On_Time_Date = E.DelDate
AND B.Early_Date = E.DelDate
AND C.Late_Date = E.DelDate
AND D.Stay_Date = E.DelDate
AND F.MTRC_DTE = E.DelDate
GROUP BY E.DelDate
, A.On_Time
, B.Early
, C.Late
, AVG_Duration
, A.On_Time_Date
, B.Early_Date
, C.Late_Date
, D.Stay_Date
, F.WHSE_ID
, F.INVN_LVL_CS_CNT
, F.INVN_LVL_DLLR
, F.INVN_LVL_PLLT_CNT
, F.RCV_CS_CNT
, F.SHP_CS_CNT
, F.SRVC_LVL_PCT
, F.SCRTCH_CNT
, F.DROP_CNT
, F.RPLNSH_CNT
, F.DMG_CNT
, F.RET_CNT
, F.PICK_CYC_CNT
, F.PICK_ERR_CNT
, F.RSV_CHK_CNT
, F.ERR_CNT
, F.DLY_CS_VRNC
, F.DLY_DLLR_VRNC
, F.CMB_THRUPUT
, F.DELAY_MINS_CNT
, F.DELAY_PCT
, F.UNLOAD_AVG
, F.LABOR_AVG
, F.SELECT_HR_CNT
, F.CRT_USERID
, F.CRT_DTE_TME
, F.UPD_USERID
, F.UPD_DTE_TME
, F.MTRC_ID
, F.MTRC_DTE
Order By E.DelDate
Please excuse the length of the code but one of the tables has a lot of columns.
Can anyone tell me if it's possble to do a join on an inline view?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
John
Hello,
I am trying to understand the concept of left joins. I have the following query and am not sure about the left joins.
I am familiar with joins but the left join below is a little confusing.Below it seems like a third table is involved. Is this because there is no column to map to in the from table? Also, since tables sl and sc are mapped based on the SecurityID column and sl and ex do not have any common columns, table sc is mapped to ex using the left join? Which table's data will be returned based on the left join?
I checked the column type for the Exchange column(ex.LSECode) and it appears varchar(3).
SELECT SecurityID = sl.SecurityID
, Security = RTRIM(sec.Name) + ' - ' + RTRIM(sec.Description)
, Ticker = ISNULL(ids.RIC, ids.Ticker)
, Sedol = ids.Sedol
, ISIN = ids.ISIN
, Exchange = ex.LSECode
, Country = cty.iso_code
FROM #SecList sl
JOIN SecurityClassification sc
ON sl.SecurityID = sc.securityId
AND sc.source = 99
LEFT JOIN exchange_table ex
ON sc.ExchangeID = ex.exchange
Thanks in advance!!!
novicesql123
Hi,I'm curious about the computational complexity of a query I have. Thequery contains multiple nested self left joins, starting with a simpleselect, then doing a self left join with the results, then doing a selfleft join with those results, etc. What puzzles me is that the timerequired for the query seems to grow exponentially as I add additionalleft joins, which I didn't expect. I expected the inner select toreturn about 25 rows (it does), then I expected the self join to resultin about 25 rows (it does), etc. Each join just adds another column; itdoesn't add more rows. So the left part of the join is staying the samesize, and so is the right part of the join, since I'm always joiningwith the same table.So I would think the time for this query should be (time to join 25rows against the source table) * (num joins), but it seems to besomething like (num rows) ^ (num joins). Any ideas? I'm just trying tounderstand the system a little better. (But if you have any ideas aboutimproving the query, I'm always open to those, too.)The execution plan is what you'd expect: an index seek loop-joined withanother index seek, the results of which are merge-joined with anotherindex seek, the results of which are merge-joined with another indexseek, ad nauseum, until a final "compute scalar cost (39%)" and "select(0%)"For the brave and curious, I've pasted the query below.Thanksselect right(x.cp_yyyymm, 2)+'-'+left(x.cp_yyyymm, 4) as [Month],table0.cp_num_loans/1 as [AFCM9704], table1.cp_num_loans/1 as[AFC9104], table2.cp_num_loans/1 as [BFAT01C], table3.cp_num_loans/1 as[BFAT02B], table4.cp_num_loans/1 as [BFAT03D], table5.cp_num_loans/1 as[BFAT03E], table6.cp_num_loans/1 as [BFAT03F], table7.cp_num_loans/1 as[BFAT04A], table8.cp_num_loans/1 as [BFAT04C], table9.cp_num_loans/1 as[BFAT04D], table10.cp_num_loans/1 as [BFAT99C] from (((((((((((selectdistinct cp_yyyymm from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id in('AFCM9704', 'AFC9104', 'BFAT01C', 'BFAT02B', 'BFAT03D', 'BFAT03E','BFAT03F', 'BFAT04A', 'BFAT04C', 'BFAT04D', 'BFAT99C') and cp_yyyymmbetween 200304 and 200504) as x left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='AFCM9704') astable0 on x.cp_yyyymm=table0.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='AFC9104') as table1on x.cp_yyyymm=table1.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT01C') as table2on x.cp_yyyymm=table2.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT02B') as table3on x.cp_yyyymm=table3.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT03D') as table4on x.cp_yyyymm=table4.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT03E') as table5on x.cp_yyyymm=table5.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT03F') as table6on x.cp_yyyymm=table6.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT04A') as table7on x.cp_yyyymm=table7.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT04C') as table8on x.cp_yyyymm=table8.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT04D') as table9on x.cp_yyyymm=table9.cp_yyyymm) left join (select cp_yyyymm,cp_num_loans from cp_deal_history where cp_deal_id='BFAT99C') astable10 on x.cp_yyyymm=table10.cp_yyyymm order by x.cp_yyyymm
View 4 Replies View RelatedI need to do multiple left outer join to return search profiles that could contain NULL in them that could also be foreign keys. I bolded the three IDs that could be NULL or have a foreign key for a value. An example with my code would be great I've tried decyphering the many employee and company examples on the web but I haven't figured it out yet. Right now I only get profiles that have foreign key values and it misses the rest in the search. So NULL MakeID or ModelID no result on that item my SQL statement below. Using SQL Server 2005. Pretty new this to SQL and databases but so far this has been the only trying part.
Thanks
String dbsql = "SELECT a.EquipmentID " +
" , a.SerialNo " +
" , b.Category " +
" , c.Subcategory " +
" , d.Make " +
" , e.Model " +
" , f.Status " +
" FROM tblEquipInfo a " +
" , tblEquipCat b " +
" , tblEquipSubcat c " +
" , tblEquipMake d " +
" , tblEquipModel e " +
" , tblStatus f " +
" WHERE b.Category = '" + val + "' " +
" AND a.CategoryID = b.CategoryID " +
" AND a.SubcategoryID = c.SubcategoryID " +
" AND a.MakeID = d.MakeID " +
" AND a.ModelID = e.ModelID " +
" AND a.StatusID = f.StatusID";
Until today, I was always under the impression that left vs. right was determined by which side of the comparison operator the table was located.
In other words:
LEFT JOIN LeftTable.ID = RightTable.ID
would pull all the records from LeftTable and those that matched from from RightTable and that:
RIGHT JOIN RightTable.ID = LeftTable.ID
would pull exactly the same result set but I was wrong. So, if it is not the table position in relation to the comparison operator, is it simply that the tables listed first in the FROM clause aren the ones "Left" of those subsequently entered?
Hi, I am trying to write a query that gets the percentage of students in specific racial groups in specific schools. Some ethnicity values of students are null so I have to use left joins. My query is below, when I run it I get the error "join expression not supported", I've tried a couple different ways of doing it but I always get that error or "syntax error in from clause". Can anybody help me with formatting multiple and nested left joins in general?
Thanks in advance.
drop table percentMinorities;
create view percentMinorities as
select s1.schoolid,
round(count(s2.studentid)/count(s1.studentid),2) as percentWhite,
round(count(s3.studentid)/count(s1.studentid),2) as percentBlack,
round(count(s4.studentid)/count(s1.studentid),2) as percentHispanic,
round(count(s5.studentid)/count(s1.studentid),2) as percentAsian
from
students as s1 left join
(students as s2 left join
(students as s3 left join
(students as s4 left join students as s5
on s4.studentid is not null and s5.ethnicity = 'A')
on s3.studentid is not null and s4.ethnicity = 'H')
on s2.studentid is not null and s3.ethnicity = 'N')
on s1.studentid is not null and s1.ethnicity = 'O'
group by s1.schoolid
Hi,
The following query should return a list of clr_id's that have a match in at least 1 of the other fields mentioned in the joins.
declare @keyWord varchar(40)
set @keyWord = 'merc'
set NOCOUNT on
SELECT distinct clr.clr_id
FROM CLR
LEFT OUTER JOIN CO ON CLR.CO_ID = CO.CO_ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN CLR_NM ON CLR.CLR_ID = CLR_NM.CLR_ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN CLR_USE_YR ON CLR.CLR_ID = CLR_USE_YR.CLR_ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN MODL ON CLR_USE_YR.MODL_ID = MODL.MODL_ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN PAINT_CD ON CLR.CLR_ID = PAINT_CD.CLR_ID
WHERE co.long_nm like '%'+@keyWord+'%'
OR clr_nm.clr_nm like '%'+@keyWord+'%'
OR clr_use_yr.yr_num like '%'+@keyWord+'%'
OR paint_cd.paint_cd like '%'+@keyWord+'%'
OR modl.modl_nm like '%'+@keyWord+'%'
The query runs at 3secs.
Could I improve the query somehow?
I was thinking that, since I actually need a distinct set of clr_id's, I should somehow check only the clr_id's that don't have a match in any of the previous joins.
I have a situation where I'm trying to add a text field to allowlarge Notes to be linked to record in an existing table (rather thansimply adding the new field into the table since relatively fewrecords will have the Note)Tables are basically:T1IDInvNumFK----------------------40|142|243|244|1T2MatDetIdEqpNote-------------------------------------------------40|text44|additional NoteI'm trying to create a subform that will allow the user to view/updaterecords in T1 (there are other fields in T1 that aren't relevant tothe problem) and also add a record into the T2.EqpNote field or edit arecord that already exists.This query works in Access (allows me to type in text into the EqpNotefield and automatically create a new record in T2 with the T1.Id valuein the T2.MatDetId field) :SELECT T1.ID, T1.InvNumFK, T2.EqpNote, T2.MatDetIdFROM T1 LEFT JOIN T2 ON T1.ID = T2.MatDetIdWHERE (((T1.ID)=10230));but when I try to 'translate' it into a version that I can use for thesubform in the adp (it's an Access 2000 project with a SQL Server 2000backend) the 'child' record does not get added into T2.Here's the record source I'm using for the form in the adpSELECT T1.ID, T1. InvNumFK, T2.MatDetId, T2.EqpNote FROM T1 LEFTOUTER JOIN dbo.T2ON T1.ID =T2.MatDetIdWHERE T1.InvNumFk = XX--'master' tableCREATE TABLE [dbo].[T1] ([ID] [int] IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL ,[InvNumFK] [int] NOT NULL) ON [PRIMARY]GOALTER TABLE [dbo].[tblBSMaterialDet] WITH NOCHECK ADDCONSTRAINT [PK_T1] PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED([ID]) ON [PRIMARY]GO--Sub tableif exists (select * from dbo.sysobjects where id =object_id(N'[dbo].[T2]') and OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)drop table [dbo].[T2]GOCREATE TABLE [dbo].[T2] ([MatDetId] [int] NOT NULL ,[EqpNote] [text] COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL) ON [PRIMARY] TEXTIMAGE_ON [PRIMARY]GOALTER TABLE [dbo].[T2] WITH NOCHECK ADDCONSTRAINT [PK_T2] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED([MatDetId]) ON [PRIMARY]
View 1 Replies View Related
Hi everybody,
In SQL Server is there a quick way to automatically insert empty value instead of NULL? I have a long Insert-SQL command with LEFT JOIN and don't want to use ISNULL for every field.
Researching on this in the meantime myself and I believe there is no way.
Thanks in advance.
Hi all,
Here's the code I'd like to update, and below it a set of sample data:
Declare @StartDate DateTime
Declare @EndDate DateTime
Set @StartDate = '20-mar-2008'
Set @EndDate = '25-mar-2008'
SELECT
COUNT (iqs.childid) as Cnt
,CASE
--Search Categories and Create Initial Groupings--
WHEN Category LIKE '%Jewel%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Beauty%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Accs%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Gift%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Grooming%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%Prem%Brands%' THEN 'WomensPremiumOutsideBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%Prem%OB%' THEN 'WomensPremiumOwnBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%Brand%' THEN 'WomensOutsideBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%OB%%' THEN 'WomensOwnBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%' THEN 'Womenswear'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%Prem%Brands%' THEN 'MensPremiumOutsideBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%Prem%OB%' THEN 'MensPremiumOwnBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%Brand%' THEN 'MensOutsideBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%OB%' THEN 'MensOwnBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%' THEN 'MensOwnBrand'
END AS CategoryGroup
,CONVERT(VARCHAR(10), iqs.StatusDate, 103) AS StatusDate
FROM InventoryQueryStatus iqs
JOIN InventoryStatus [is]
ON [is].StatusID = iqs.StatusID
JOIN Inventory i
ON i.InventoryID = iqs.InventoryID
JOIN InventoryCategory ic
ON ic.CategoryID = i.CategoryID
WHERE iqs.StatusID = 31000
and Category NOT LIKE 'Force%'
--AND iqs.StatusDate >=GETDATE()-1
AND iqs.StatusDate BETWEEN @StartDate AND @EndDate
GROUP BY
CASE
--Search Categories and Create Initial Groupings--
WHEN Category LIKE '%Jewel%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Beauty%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Accs%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Gift%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Grooming%' THEN 'Accessories'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%Prem%Brands%' THEN 'WomensPremiumOutsideBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%Prem%OB%' THEN 'WomensPremiumOwnBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%Brand%' THEN 'WomensOutsideBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%OB%%' THEN 'WomensOwnBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Female%' THEN 'Womenswear'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%Prem%Brands%' THEN 'MensPremiumOutsideBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%Prem%OB%' THEN 'MensPremiumOwnBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%Brand%' THEN 'MensOutsideBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%OB%' THEN 'MensOwnBrand'
WHEN Category LIKE '%Male%' THEN 'MensOwnBrand'
END
,CONVERT(VARCHAR(10), iqs.StatusDate, 103)
Order By StatusDate
Sample Data:
164WomensOutsideBrand 20/03/2008
5MensOutsideBrand 20/03/2008
78WomensOwnBrand 20/03/2008
92WomensPremiumOutsideBrand 20/03/2008
1Accessories 20/03/2008
However, I'd like to enable a total for the day (340)
Thanks,
JB
Is there a efficient way to write this query?
SELECT CASE
WHEN Population BETWEEN 0 AND 100 THEN '0-100' WHEN Population BETWEEN 101 AND 1000 THEN '101-1000' ELSE 'Greater than 1000' END AS Population_Range,
COUNT(CASE WHEN Population BETWEEN 0 AND 100 THEN '0-100' WHEN Population BETWEEN 101 AND 1000 THEN '101-1000' ELSE 'Greater than 1000' END) AS [No. Of Countries]
FROM Country
GROUP BY
CASE WHEN Population BETWEEN 0 AND 100 THEN '0-100' WHEN Population BETWEEN 101 AND 1000 THEN '101-1000' ELSE 'Greater than 1000' END
Hello.
I have a query which spends a lot of time calculating my CASE WHEN -statements.
My query looks like this
SELECT TOP 250
UserId,
CASE WHEN
(someCol*0.4+someOtherCol*0.3) > 99 THEN 99
ELSE
(someCol*0.4+someOtherCol*0.3)
END
FROM
(
SELECT
UserId,
CASE WHEN @myparam > 50 THEN
CASE WHEN Col5+@myincrease > 99 THEN 99 ELSE Col5+@myincrease END
ELSE
CASE WHEN Col6+@myincrease > 99 THEN 99 ELSE Col6+@myincrease ENDEND as someCol,
CASE WHEN Col8+@myincrease3 > 99 THEN 99 ELSE Col8+@myincrease3 END as SomeOtherCol
FROM
SomeTable
) t1
This is just a little bit of the full query. I cannot write the whole query since it contains alot of different views and calculations, but I have traced it down to that all these case when-statements is taking a lot of time to do. So I hope that this example will be enough for you to understand my problem.
I know about some tricks that can replace a CASE WHEN, for example using COALESCE or BETWEEN but that does not seem to work in my case.
Any suggestions?
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.
:confused:
Hello
i have some problem with this MDX Statment :
with
SET [kunden] as 'Filter (descendants([Dim_x].[Alle Kunden], , LEAVES),
left([Dim_x],1,1) = "(" ) '
select
{descendants([Dim_Kx].[Alle Kunden], , LEAVES) } on rows,
{([measures].[Standard])} on columns
from z
Result :
Standard
(test1) 44444
(test2) 54567
(test3) 3214
test5 4535
test6 11111
but i want to filter i need only result with () how can i do it please
i need help
many thanks,
Prince
How can l rewrite this and trim the code.
CREATE Procedure Disbursements_Cats
(@startdate datetime,
@enddate datetime)
AS
Begin
SELECT Loan.loan_No AS Loan_No,
Loan.customer_No AS Customer_No,
Customer.first_name AS First_name,
Customer.second_name AS Second_name,
Customer.surname AS Surname,
Customer.initials AS Initials,
Bank.Bank_name AS Bank_name,
Branch.Branch_name AS Branch_name,
Branch.branch_code AS Branch_code ,
Bank_detail.bank_acc_type AS Bank_acc_type,
Transaction_Record.transaction_Amount AS Transaction_Amount,
Transaction_Record.transaction_Date AS Transaction_Date,
Loan.product AS Product,
Product.product_Type AS Product_Type,
Product_Type.loan_Type AS Loan_Type
FROM Transaction_Record INNER JOIN
Loan ON Transaction_Record.loan_No = Loan.loan_No INNER JOIN
Product ON Loan.product = Product.product INNER JOIN
Customer ON Loan.customer_No = Customer.customer_no INNER JOIN
Bank_detail ON Customer.customer_no = Bank_detail.customer_no INNER JOIN
Branch ON Bank_detail.Branch = Branch.Branch INNER JOIN
Bank ON Branch.Bank = Bank.Bank INNER JOIN
Product_Type ON Product.product_Type = Product_Type.product_Type
END;
GO
I have a WHERE clause that could be an "=" or a "LIKE" depending uponif the passed variable is populated or not. I would like to know thebest way to write the WHERE clause to make it dynamically switchbetween the 2 and make best use of the indexes.CREATE TABLE myTable(ID INT PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED, COUNTY VARCHAR(50))CREATE INDEX IDX_myTable_County ON myTable(COUNTY)DECLARE @COUNTY VARCHAR(50)SET @COUNTY = 'SANTA CLARA' -- Could also be SET @COUNTY = NULLSELECT ID FROM myTableWHERE COUNTY LIKE (CASE WHEN @COUNTY IS NOT NULL THEN @COUNTY ELSE '%'END)This does not seem like best practice to me because I am forced to use"LIKE" even when @COUNTY is populated with data. Ultimately I'd like:WHERE (CASE WHEN @COUNTY IS NOT NULL COUNTY = @COUNTY ELSE COUNTY LIKE'%' END)but that is incorrect syntax on "=".Also, I do not want to use a dynamically built statement. Is there away around this?Thanks,Josh
View 14 Replies View RelatedCurrently I just need to rechange a view which is writen by other staff member because of low performance.
This view comprises 4 query statement and link using Union statement.
Each query statement will refer more than 8 tables and other views.
Now I want to rewrite it but I can not know how to do. I change union to CTE, no performance improved.
I want to create indexed view, but because this view refer the other view, I cannot create index on it?
Any tips for me? Thank you for help.
Hi all,Just after some help with a query (Stored Procedure) I've managed to get wrapped round my head.The DB is as such:
COMPANY
Company_id
Company_name
COMPANY_GROUP
Group_id
Group_name
USER
User_id
User_name
Bridging tables
COMPANY_GROUP_BRIDGE
company_id
group_id
USER_COMPANY_BRIDGE
user_id
company_id Basically, the only parameter I have for the query is a User_id.I need to get the Group linked to the User and return all the companies within that group. I've
tried reading up on all the join types again but have just got this
completely wrapped round my neck. I keep thinking along the lines of
SELECT all the companies linked to all the groups linked to all the
companies linked to the User_id :s I must be able to do
this without using two Company tables...?
Any help much appreciated,Pete
I have
Categories table with CategoryID, Title, CategoryParentID columns
Questions table with QuestionID, Text columns
CategoriesQuestions table with CategoryID, QuestionID columns
Now I want to make the query which takes QuestionID and return all Categories of that provided QuestionID.
I already have made that query in 2 different styles.
First I make an Inner Join to retrieve the results
Select Categories.* from Categories Inner Join CategoriesQuestiosn on Categories.CategoryID = CategoriesQuestions.CategoryID where CategoriesQuestions.QuestionID = 1
Second I make a sub query to retrive the results.
Select * from Categories where CategoryID In (Select CategoryID From CategoriesQuestions where QuestionID = 1)
Now I am asking what is the better one in respect to performance.
And please provide any other query if you have.
Iwrote a query right, and need to get further information out of another table, so did a Join, but then also need to get further information out of another table..So, I need to add this query:
SELECT PERSONNUM as EmployeeCode
,[FIRSTNM] as Firstname
,[LASTNM] as LastName
,[HOMELABORLEVELDSC1] as Site
,[HOMELABORLEVELNM1] as SiteID
FROM [tkcsdb].[dbo].[VP_ALLPERSONV42]where USERACCOUNTSTATUS = 'active'
and homelaborlevelnm1 in ('11', '13', '32')
order by SiteID, LastName
To be included in this query:
SELECTa.PERSONNUM,
a.PERSONFULLNAME,
HOMELABORLEVELDSC1,
[SERVER]
[code]...
I have the following:
select
ad.bank,ad.account_number,ad.account_short_name,
p.security_id,isnull(b.NAME,isnull(tw.name,ms.name)) as SecurityDescription,
p.security_price,mc.classcode,
sum(case
when p.security_price = 9999999.99900 then 0
when mc.classcode between '000'and'299' then (p.quantity * p.security_price) / 100
when mc.classcode between '950'and'999' then (p.security_price * p.quantity) * -1
when mc.classcode between '300' and '324' or mc.classcode between '330' and '399'then p.acm_ctf_mtf_price * p.quantity
when p.security_price = '0' then p.cost
else
(p.security_price * p.quantity)
end) as MV,p.position_date,p.quantity,p.cost,p.acm_ctf_mtf_price
from positions p
left join BloombergEquityData b on p.security_id = b.ID_CUSIP
left join account_detail ad on p.account_id = ad.account_id
left join metavanteclasscodes mc on p.security_id = mc.cusip
left join MacgregorSecurityMaster ms on p.security_id = ms.cusip
left join TobaSecurityWarehouse tw on p.security_id = tw.cusip
where p.position_date = '03/05/2008' and
((ad.investment_authority_id in ('2','3') and ad.bank in ('98','7R')) or ad.bank = '9W')-- and ad.account_number = '41G006012'
group byad.account_number,ad.account_short_name,p.security_id,
ms.name,b.NAME,p.security_price,p.position_date,ad.bank,mc.classcode,p.quantity,p.cost,p.acm_ctf_mtf_price,isnull(b.NAME,isnull(tw.name,ms.name))
order by ad.account_number,p.security_id
For a given day, in this example 3/5 if I were to just select all the records I would get back around 550,000. If I put the filter on where I tell it to just show me one account its snappy. If I remove that filter and have it show me all the accounts it take forever. Here is the layout of my positions table where i am pulling the majority of the information:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[positions](
[account_id] [int] NOT NULL,
[security_id] [varchar](50) NOT NULL,
[position_date] [smalldatetime] NOT NULL,
[quantity] [decimal](18, 5) NOT NULL,
[cost] [decimal](18, 5) NULL,
[security_price] [decimal](18, 5) NULL,
[acm_ctf_mtf_price] [decimal](18, 9) NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_positions] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
(
[account_id] ASC,
[position_date] ASC,
[security_id] ASC
)WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY]
) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
SET ANSI_PADDING OFF
My questions is if you can identify any reason why the query might take more than 10 minutes (actually still running after 10 minutes) to complete when I have it bring me back all the records, not sure if its a lack of indexes or what, but was hoping for some suggestions on what I might be missing. I apologize if I havent included enough information, still learning how to troubleshoot the performance side of things.