I found this link and it works as long as I don't join to other tables Generate nested nth level JSON SQL Server using recursive CTE
The problem is some of the data I need is via a join. The below is from the original link and it works.
The data for parent child is nth levels deep so the original function works as I expected.
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.GetJson (#parentID int)
RETURNS nvarchar(max)
AS BEGIN
RETURN (
SELECT
propertyID,
title,
typeid,
[value],
children = JSON_QUERY(dbo.GetJson(propertyID))
FROM property p
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT parentID INTERSECT SELECT #parentID)
FOR JSON PATH
);
END;
If I start adding joins
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.GetJson (#parentID int)
RETURNS nvarchar(max)
AS BEGIN
RETURN (
SELECT
p.propertyID,
p.title,
p.typeid,
p.[value],
s.someField,
children = JSON_QUERY(dbo.GetJson(propertyID))
FROM property p
LEFT OUTER JOIN someTable s ON s.propertyID = p.propertyID
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT parentID INTERSECT SELECT #parentID)
FOR JSON PATH
);
END;
When I add any joins the root item seems to be repeated and I've not been able to figure out how to keep this working correctly in its original state and add in the joins I need to grab some extra data.
Turns out it was bad data in the database I was using. The table being joined to had some duplicate rows that shouldn't of been there (dev database go figure) once I noticed that I was able to change the join to return only 1 row and that fixed the issue.
Related
I am new to PostgreSQL and trying to convert mssql scripts to Postgres.
For Merge statement, we can use insert on conflict update or do nothing but am using the below statement, not sure whether it is the correct way.
MSSQL code:
Declare #tab2(New_Id int not null, Old_Id int not null)
MERGE Tab1 as Target
USING (select * from Tab1
WHERE ColumnId = #ID) as Source on 0 = 1
when not matched by Target then
INSERT
(ColumnId
,Col1
,Col2
,Col3
)
VALUES (Source.ColumnId
,Source.Col1
,Source.Col2
,Source.Col3
)
OUTPUT INSERTED.Id, Source.Id into #tab2(New_Id, Old_Id);
Postgres Code:
Create temp table tab2(New_Id int not null, Old_Id int not null)
With source as( select * from Tab1
WHERE ColumnId = ID)
Insert into Tab1(ColumnId
,Col1
,Col2
,Col3
)
select Source.ColumnId
,Source.Col1
,Source.Col2
,Source.Col3
from source
My query is how to convert OUTPUT INSERTED.Id in postgres.I need this id to insert records in another table (lets say as child tables based on Inserted values in Tab1)
In PostgreSQL's INSERT statements you can choose what the query should return. From the docs on INSERT:
The optional RETURNING clause causes INSERT to compute and return value(s) based on each row actually inserted (or updated, if an ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE clause was used). This is primarily useful for obtaining values that were supplied by defaults, such as a serial sequence number. However, any expression using the table's columns is allowed. The syntax of the RETURNING list is identical to that of the output list of SELECT. Only rows that were successfully inserted or updated will be returned.
Example (shortened form of your query):
WITH [...] INSERT INTO Tab1 ([...]) SELECT [...] FROM [...] RETURNING Tab1.id
When using a SELECT query to produce values for an INSERT like this:
INSERT INTO some_table (
foo,
bar
)
SELECT
at.foo,
at.bar
FROM another_table at;
How to return the fields from the SELECT query in the RETURNING clause along with the newly INSERTED rows? Something like:
INSERT INTO some_table AS t (
foo,
bar
)
SELECT
at.foo,
at.bar
FROM another_table at
RETURNING t.id, at.id;
I'm sure I've done this before or I've overlooked something really obvious.
Is it possible to do this? If so, how?
demo: db<>fiddle
WITH selecting AS (
SELECT id, x FROM a
), inserting AS (
INSERT INTO b AS b (y)
SELECT x FROM selecting
RETURNING id, y
)
SELECT
i.id,
s.id
FROM
inserting i
JOIN
selecting s
ON i.y = s.x
You can try a CTE approach. First selecting all relevant data, store the result internally. After that do the INSERT statement with these data, store the RETURNING values internally. After all you can you all saved data, combine them with a join and print out what you want.
It is not possible to return the fields from the query that provides the values for an INSERT. You can only return fields from the newly inserted rows.
An UPDATE can return fields from the updated rows as well as from the from list of the query.
I try to make a script as to output all the foos that are used by only one user, if a foo is used by more than one user, it shouldn't be outputed.
here's my tables
foos (id, value)
users (id, name)
used (foo_id, user_id)
and my not working script
FUNCTION output_unshared_foos ()
RETURNS foos AS
$a$
DECLARE
foocounts RECORD;
BEGIN
SELECT u.foo_id, count(*)
INTO foocounts -- store in the local variable
FROM used u
GROUP BY u.foo_id;
FOR f IN SELECT * FROM foos
LOOP
IF (SELECT fc.count < 2 FROM foocounts fc WHERE fc.foo_id = f.id) THEN
RETURN NEXT f;
END IF;
END LOOP;
END
$a$ language plpgsql;
doesn't seem to work, every rows are returned and the conditional control seems to be always true.
Your first problem is that you can't store the result of a query that returns more than one row into a single variable (the SELECT u.foo_id, count(*) INTO ... part). I'm surprised you don't get a runtime error when you call your function.
Your function also doesn't compile because the record f is not declared and a functioned defined as returns foos can't use return next
But your approach is wrong (even if it worked). Doing row-by-row processing is almost always the wrong choice in SQL. SQL and relational databases are meant to handle sets, not single rows.
Your problem can be solved with a single query:
select foo_id
from used
group by foo_id
having count(distinct user_id) = 1
will return all foo ids that are used by exactly one user.
If you need the additional information from the foos table, you can join the above query to the foos table:
select f.*
from foos f
join (
select foo_id
from used
group by foo_id
having count(distinct user_id) = 1
) u on f.id = u.foo_id
How do I join 2 sets of records solely based on the default order?
So if I have a table x(col(1,2,3,4,5,6,7)) and another table z(col(a,b,c,d,e,f,g))
it will return
c1 c2
-- --
1 a
2 b
3 c
4 d
5 e
6 f
7 g
Actually, I wanted to join a pair of one dimensional arrays from parameters and treat them like columns from a table.
Sample code:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION "Test"(timestamp without time zone[],
timestamp without time zone[])
RETURNS refcursor AS
$BODY$
DECLARE
curr refcursor;
BEGIN
OPEN curr FOR
SELECT DISTINCT "Start" AS x, "End" AS y, COUNT("A"."id")
FROM UNNEST($1) "Start"
INNER JOIN
(
SELECT "End", ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY ("End")) rn
FROM UNNEST($2) "End" ORDER BY ("End")
) "End" ON ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY ("Start")) = "End".rn
LEFT JOIN "A" ON ("A"."date" BETWEEN x AND y)
GROUP BY 1,2
ORDER BY "Start";
return curr;
END
$BODY$
Now, to answer the real question that was revealed in comments, which appears to be something like:
Given two arrays 'a' and 'b', how do I pair up their elements so I can get the element pairs as column aliases in a query?
There are a couple of ways to tackle this:
If and only if the arrays are of equal length, use multiple unnest functions in the SELECT clause (a deprecated approach that should only be used for backward compatibility);
Use generate_subscripts to loop over the arrays;
Use generate_series over subqueries against array_lower and array_upper to emulate generate_subscripts if you need to support versions too old to have generate_subscripts;
Relying on the order that unnest returns tuples in and hoping - like in my other answer and as shown below. It'll work, but it's not guaranteed to work in future versions.
Use the WITH ORDINALITY functionality added in PostgreSQL 9.4 (see also its first posting) to get a row number for unnest when 9.4 comes out.
Use multiple-array UNNEST, which is SQL-standard but which PostgreSQL doesn't support yet.
So, say we have function arraypair with array parameters a and b:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION arraypair (a integer[], b text[])
RETURNS TABLE (col_a integer, col_b text) AS $$
-- blah code here blah
$$ LANGUAGE whatever IMMUTABLE;
and it's invoked as:
SELECT * FROM arraypair( ARRAY[1,2,3,4,5,6,7], ARRAY['a','b','c','d','e','f','g'] );
possible function definitions would be:
SRF-in-SELECT (deprecated)
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION arraypair (a integer[], b text[])
RETURNS TABLE (col_a integer, col_b text) AS $$
SELECT unnest(a), unnest(b);
$$ LANGUAGE sql IMMUTABLE;
Will produce bizarre and unexpected results if the arrays aren't equal in length; see the documentation on set returning functions and their non-standard use in the SELECT list to learn why, and what exactly happens.
generate_subscripts
This is likely the safest option:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION arraypair (a integer[], b text[])
RETURNS TABLE (col_a integer, col_b text) AS $$
SELECT
a[i], b[i]
FROM generate_subscripts(CASE WHEN array_length(a,1) >= array_length(b,1) THEN a::text[] ELSE b::text[] END, 1) i;
$$ LANGUAGE sql IMMUTABLE;
If the arrays are of unequal length, as written it'll return null elements for the shorter, so it works like a full outer join. Reverse the sense of the case to get an inner-join like effect. The function assumes the arrays are one-dimensional and that they start at index 1. If an entire array argument is NULL then the function returns NULL.
A more generalized version would be written in PL/PgSQL and would check array_ndims(a) = 1, check array_lower(a, 1) = 1, test for null arrays, etc. I'll leave that to you.
Hoping for pair-wise returns:
This isn't guaranteed to work, but does with PostgreSQL's current query executor:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION arraypair (a integer[], b text[])
RETURNS TABLE (col_a integer, col_b text) AS $$
WITH
rn_c1(rn, col) AS (
SELECT row_number() OVER (), c1.col
FROM unnest(a) c1(col)
),
rn_c2(rn, col) AS (
SELECT row_number() OVER (), c2.col
FROM unnest(b) c2(col)
)
SELECT
rn_c1.col AS c1,
rn_c2.col AS c2
FROM rn_c1
INNER JOIN rn_c2 ON (rn_c1.rn = rn_c2.rn);
$$ LANGUAGE sql IMMUTABLE;
I would consider using generate_subscripts much safer.
Multi-argument unnest:
This should work, but doesn't because PostgreSQL's unnest doesn't accept multiple input arrays (yet):
SELECT * FROM unnest(a,b);
select x.c1, z.c2
from
x
inner join
(
select
c2,
row_number() over(order by c2) rn
from z
order by c2
) z on x.c1 = z.rn
order by x.c1
If x.c1 is not 1,2,3... you can do the same that was done with z
The middle order by is not necessary as pointed by Erwin. I tested it like this:
create table t (i integer);
insert into t
select ceil(random() * 100000)
from generate_series(1, 100000);
select
i,
row_number() over(order by i) rn
from t
;
And i comes out ordered. Before this simple test which I never executed I though it would be possible that the rows would be numbered in any order.
By "default order" it sounds like you probably mean the order in which the rows are returned by select * from tablename without an ORDER BY.
If so, this ordering is undefined. The database can return rows in any order that it feels like. You'll find that if you UPDATE a row, it probably moves to a different position in the table.
If you're stuck in a situation where you assumed tables had an order and they don't, you can as a recovery option add a row number based on the on-disk ordering of the tuples within the table:
select row_number() OVER (), *
from the_table
order by ctid
If the output looks right, I recommend that you CREATE TABLE a new table with an extra field, then do an INSERT INTO ... SELECT to insert the data ordered by ctid, then ALTER TABLE ... RENAME the tables and finally fix any foreign key references so they point to the new table.
ctid can be changed by autovacuum, UPDATE, CLUSTER, etc, so it is not something you should ever be using in applications. I'm using it here only because it sounds like you don't have any real ordering or identifier key.
If you need to pair up rows based on their on-disk ordering (an unreliable and unsafe thing to do as noted above), you could per this SQLFiddle try:
WITH
rn_c1(rn, col) AS (
SELECT row_number() OVER (ORDER BY ctid), c1.col
FROM c1
),
rn_c2(rn, col) AS (
SELECT row_number() OVER (ORDER BY ctid), c2.col
FROM c2
)
SELECT
rn_c1.col AS c1,
rn_c2.col AS c2
FROM rn_c1
INNER JOIN rn_c2 ON (rn_c1.rn = rn_c2.rn);
but never rely on this in a production app. If you're really stuck you can use this with CREATE TABLE AS to construct a new table that you can start with when you're working on recovering data from a DB that lacks a required key, but that's about it.
The same approach given above might work with an empty window clause () instead of (ORDER BY ctid) when using sets that lack a ctid, like interim results from functions. It's even less safe then though, and should be a matter of last resort only.
(See also this newer related answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/17762282/398670)
Let's say we have a table with some data in it.
IF OBJECT_ID('dbo.table1') IS NOT NULL
BEGIN
DROP TABLE dbo.table1;
END
CREATE TABLE table1 ( DATA INT );
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Generating testing data
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INSERT INTO dbo.table1(data)
SELECT 100
UNION ALL
SELECT 200
UNION ALL
SELECT NULL
UNION ALL
SELECT 400
UNION ALL
SELECT 400
UNION ALL
SELECT 500
UNION ALL
SELECT NULL;
How to delete the 2nd, 5th, 6th records in the table? The order is defined by the following query.
SELECT data
FROM dbo.table1
ORDER BY data DESC;
Note, this is in SQL Server 2000 environment.
Thanks.
In short, you need something in the table to indicate sequence. The "2nd row" is a non-sequitur when there is nothing that enforces sequence. However, a possible solution might be (toy example => toy solution):
If object_id('tempdb..#NumberedData') Is Not Null
Drop Table #NumberedData
Create Table #NumberedData
(
Id int not null identity(1,1) primary key clustered
, data int null
)
Insert #NumberedData( data )
SELECT 100
UNION ALL SELECT 200
UNION ALL SELECT NULL
UNION ALL SELECT 400
UNION ALL SELECT 400
UNION ALL SELECT 500
UNION ALL SELECT NULL
Begin Tran
Delete table1
Insert table1( data )
Select data
From #NumberedData
Where Id Not In(2,5,6)
If ##Error <> 0
Commit Tran
Else
Rollback Tran
Obviously, this type of solution is not guaranteed to work exactly as you want but the concept is the best you will get. In essence, you stuff your rows into a table with an identity column and use that to identify the rows to remove. Removing the rows entails emptying the original table and re-populating with only the rows you want. Without a unique key of some kind, there just is no clean way of handling this problem.
As you are probably aware you can do this in later versions using row_number very straightforwardly.
delete t from
(select ROW_NUMBER() over (order by data) r from table1) t
where r in (2,5,6)
Even without that it is possible to use the undocumented %%LOCKRES%% function to differentiate between 2 identical rows
SELECT data,%%LOCKRES%%
FROM dbo.table1`
I don't think that's available in SQL Server 2000 though.
In SQL Sets don't have order but cursors do so you could use something like the below. NB: I was expecting to be able to use DELETE ... WHERE CURRENT OF but that relies on a PK so the code to delete a row is not as simple as I was hoping for.
In the event that the data to be deleted is a duplicate then there is no guarantee that it will delete the same row as CURRENT OF would have. However in this eventuality the ordering of the tied rows is arbitrary anyway so whichever row is deleted could equally well have been given that row number in the cursor ordering.
DECLARE #RowsToDelete TABLE
(
rowidx INT PRIMARY KEY
)
INSERT INTO #RowsToDelete SELECT 2 UNION SELECT 5 UNION SELECT 6
DECLARE #PrevRowIdx int
DECLARE #CurrentRowIdx int
DECLARE #Offset int
SET #CurrentRowIdx = 1
DECLARE #data int
DECLARE ordered_cursor SCROLL CURSOR FOR
SELECT data
FROM dbo.table1
ORDER BY data
OPEN ordered_cursor
FETCH NEXT FROM ordered_cursor INTO #data
WHILE EXISTS(SELECT * FROM #RowsToDelete)
BEGIN
SET #PrevRowIdx = #CurrentRowIdx
SET #CurrentRowIdx = (SELECT TOP 1 rowidx FROM #RowsToDelete ORDER BY rowidx)
SET #Offset = #CurrentRowIdx - #PrevRowIdx
DELETE FROM #RowsToDelete WHERE rowidx = #CurrentRowIdx
FETCH RELATIVE #Offset FROM ordered_cursor INTO #data
/*Can't use DELETE ... WHERE CURRENT OF as here that requires a PK*/
SET ROWCOUNT 1
DELETE FROM dbo.table1 WHERE (data=#data OR data IS NULL OR #data IS NULL)
SET ROWCOUNT 0
END
CLOSE ordered_cursor
DEALLOCATE ordered_cursor
To perform any action on a set of rows (such as deleting them), you need to know what identifies those rows.
So, you have to come up with criteria that identifies the rows you want to delete.
Providing a toy example, like the one above, is not particularly useful.
You plan ahead and if you anticipate this is possible you add a surrogate key column or some such.
In general you make sure you don't create tables without PK's.
It's like asking "Say I don't look both directions before crossing the road and I step in front of a bus."