select *
from nsclc_thought_spot
where patientid = 11000001
and service_date in ('2019-07-08', '2019-07-10')
order by patientid, service_date
is returning the results properly
But this is not working as expected:
select *
from nsclc_thought_spot
where patientid = 11000001
and service_date in (2019-07-08, 2019-07-10)
order by patientid, service_date
This query is not returning results.
If I have defined service_date column as date, then why do I have to pass the values in quotes inside IN operator in redshift?
Because 2019-07-08 means the integer 2019 minus the integer 7 minus the integer 8 which equals the integer 2004. Without quotes in SQL numbers are seen as numeric values. To be interpreted as something else you need to quote them (which is a text value) and then they need to be cast to the data type needed. In this case '2019-07-08' is a text value but Redshift will implicitly cast this to a date to make the comparison to the column data "service_date".
If you want to do this explicitly you can add the casting to the values - ... service_date IN ('2019-07-08'::date,'2019-07-10'::date) ... - which might make things clearer for you.
Related
I have a column(field1) defined as varchar in snowflake. It is storing both string and numbers(ex values: US15876, 1.106336965E9). How can I convert the numeric values to display something like 1106336965, without losing the columns that is storing string values or null values. I am trying try_to_numeric(field1), but this is eliminating the record with string values and showing them as null. Any help is appreciated.
So try_to_number is the way to have numbers, and nulls for non-number without errors. But if you want to keep the strings, you actually have to convert your newly create number, back to text (or variant), otherwise it cannot be in the same column, so nothing is gained:
select column1
,try_to_number(column1) as_num
,nvl(as_num::text, column1) as why_not_both
from values
('US15876'),
('1.106336965E9'),
('1.106336965'),
('1106336965');
COLUMN1
AS_NUM
WHY_NOT_BOTH
US15876
null
US15876
1106336965
1,106,336,965
1106336965
1.106336965
1
1
1106336965
1,106,336,965
1106336965
In this query the 'Daily' in the case will be replaced by a variable. I am not able to make this query work. I want to have the date column being either a day, a week a month or a year based on the value of the variable. but it is giving me various errors..
CASE types date and double precison cannot be matched
syntax error near "as"
what am I doing wrong?
select
case 'Daily'
when 'Daily' then DATE(to_timestamp(e.startts)) as "Date",
when 'Weekly' then DATE_PART('week',to_timestamp(e.startts)) as "Date",
when 'Monthly' then to_char(to_timestamp(e.startts), 'mm/yyyy') as "Date",
when 'Yearly' then to_char(to_timestamp(e.startts), 'yyyy') as "Date",
end
sum(e.checked)
from entries e
WHERE
e.startts >= date_part('epoch', '2020-10-01T15:01:50.859Z'::timestamp)::int8
and e.stopts < date_part('epoch', '2021-11-08T15:01:50.859Z'::timestamp)::int8
group by "Date"
CASE ... END is an expression. An expression must have a well-defined data type, so PostgreSQL makes sure that the expressions in the THEN clause have the same data type (or at least compatible ones).
You would need a type cast, probably to text, in the first two branches:
... THEN CAST (date(to_timestamp(e.startts)) AS text)
But it would be much better to use to_char in all branches – there are format codes for everything you need.
An expression can have no alias, only an entry in the SELECT or FROM list can. So you need to append AS "Date" at the end of the CASE ... END expression, not somewhere in the middle.
original query looks like this :
UPDATE reponse_question_finale t1, reponse_question_finale t2 SET
t1.nb_question_repondu = (9-(ISNULL(t1.valeur_question_4)+ISNULL(t1.valeur_question_6)+ISNULL(t1.valeur_question_7)+ISNULL(t1.valeur_question_9))) WHERE t1.APPLICATION = t2.APPLICATION;
I know you cannot update 2 tables in a single query so i tried this :
UPDATE reponse_question_finale t1
SET nb_question_repondu = (9-(COALESCE(t1.valeur_question_4,'')::int+COALESCE(t1.valeur_question_6,'')::int+COALESCE(t1.valeur_question_7)::int+COALESCE(t1.valeur_question_9,'')::int))
WHERE t1.APPLICATION = t1.APPLICATION;
But this query gaves me an error : invalid input syntax for integer: ""
I saw that the Postgres equivalent to MySQL is COALESCE() so i think i'm on the good way here.
I also know you cannot add varchar to varchar so i tried to cast it to integer to do that. I'm not sure if i casted it correctly with parenthesis at the good place and regarding to error maybe i cannot cast to int with coalesce.
Last thing, i can certainly do a co-related sub-select to update my two tables but i'm a little lost at this point.
The output must be an integer matching the number of questions answered to a backup survey.
Any thoughts?
Thanks.
coalesce() returns the first non-null value from the list supplied. So, if the column value is null the expression COALESCE(t1.valeur_question_4,'') returns an empty string and that's why you get the error.
But it seems you want something completely different: you want check if the column is null (or empty) and then subtract a value if it is to count the number of non-null columns.
To return 1 if a value is not null or 0 if it isn't you can use:
(nullif(valeur_question_4, '') is null)::int
nullif returns null if the first value equals the second. The IS NULL condition returns a boolean (something that MySQL doesn't have) and that can be cast to an integer (where false will be cast to 0 and true to 1)
So the whole expression should be:
nb_question_repondu = 9 - (
(nullif(t1.valeur_question_4,'') is null)::int
+ (nullif(t1.valeur_question_6,'') is null)::int
+ (nullif(t1.valeur_question_7,'') is null)::int
+ (nullif(t1.valeur_question_9,'') is null)::int
)
Another option is to unpivot the columns and do a select on them in a sub-select:
update reponse_question_finale
set nb_question_repondu = (select count(*)
from (
values
(valeur_question_4),
(valeur_question_6),
(valeur_question_7),
(valeur_question_9)
) as t(q)
where nullif(trim(q),'') is not null);
Adding more columns to be considered is quite easy then, as you just need to add a single line to the values() clause
What is the argument type for the order by clause in Postgresql?
I came across a very strange behaviour (using Postgresql 9.5). Namely, the query
select * from unnest(array[1,4,3,2]) as x order by 1;
produces 1,2,3,4 as expected. However the query
select * from unnest(array[1,4,3,2]) as x order by 1::int;
produces 1,4,3,2, which seems strange. Similarly, whenever I replace 1::int with whatever function (e.g. greatest(0,1)) or even case operator, the results are unordered (on the contrary to what I would expect).
So which type should an argument of order by have, and how do I get the expected behaviour?
This is expected (and documented) behaviour:
A sort_expression can also be the column label or number of an output column
So the expression:
order by 1
sorts by the first column of the result set (as defined by the SQL standard)
However the expression:
order by 1::int
sorts by the constant value 1, it's essentially the same as:
order by 'foo'
By using a constant value for the order by all rows have the same sort value and thus aren't really sorted.
To sort by an expression, just use that:
order by
case
when some_column = 'foo' then 1
when some_column = 'bar' then 2
else 3
end
The above sorts the result based on the result of the case expression.
Actually I have a function with an integer argument which indicates the column to be used in the order by clause.
In a case when all columns are of the same type, this can work: :
SELECT ....
ORDER BY
CASE function_to_get_a_column_number()
WHEN 1 THEN column1
WHEN 2 THEN column2
.....
WHEN 1235 THEN column1235
END
If columns are of different types, you can try:
SELECT ....
ORDER BY
CASE function_to_get_a_column_number()
WHEN 1 THEN column1::varchar
WHEN 2 THEN column2::varchar
.....
WHEN 1235 THEN column1235::varchar
END
But these "workarounds" are horrible. You need some other approach than the function returning a column number.
Maybe a dynamic SQL ?
I would say that dynamic SQL (thanks #kordirko and the others for the hints) is the best solution to the problem I originally had in mind:
create temp table my_data (
id serial,
val text
);
insert into my_data(id, val)
values (default, 'a'), (default, 'c'), (default, 'd'), (default, 'b');
create function fetch_my_data(col text)
returns setof my_data as
$f$
begin
return query execute $$
select * from my_data
order by $$|| quote_ident(col);
end
$f$ language plpgsql;
select * from fetch_my_data('val'); -- order by val
select * from fetch_my_data('id'); -- order by id
In the beginning I thought this could be achieved using case expression in the argument of the order by clause - the sort_expression. And here comes the tricky part which confused me: when sort_expression is a kind of identifier (name of a column or a number of a column), the corresponding column is used when ordering the results. But when sort_expression is some value, we actually order the results using that value itself (computed for each row). This is #a_horse_with_no_name's answer rephrased.
So when I queried ... order by 1::int, in a way I have assigned value 1 to each row and then tried to sort an array of ones, which clearly is useless.
There are some workarounds without dynamic queries, but they require writing more code and do not seem to have any significant advantages.
I need to include EXTRACT() function within WHERE clause as follow:
SELECT * FROM my_table WHERE EXTRACT(YEAR FROM date) = '2014';
I get a message like this:
pg_catalog.date_part(unknown, text) doesn't exist**
SQL State 42883
Here is my_table content (gid INTEGER, date DATE):
gid | date
-------+-------------
1 | 2014-12-12
2 | 2014-12-08
3 | 2013-17-15
I have to do it this way because the query is sent from a form on a website that includes a 'Year' field where users enter the year on a 4-digits basis.
The problem is that your column is of data type text, while EXTRACT() only works for date / time types.
You should convert your column to the appropriate data type.
ALTER TABLE my_table ALTER COLUMN date TYPE date;
That's smaller (4 bytes instead of 11 for the text), faster and cleaner (disallows illegal dates and most typos).
If you have non-standard format add a USING clause with a conversion expression. Example:
Alter character field to date
Also, for your queries to be fast with a plain index on date you should rather use sargable predicates. Like:
SELECT * FROM my_table
WHERE date >= '2014-01-01'
AND date < '2015-01-01';
Or, to go with your 4-digit input for the year:
SELECT * FROM my_table
WHERE date >= to_date('2014', 'YYYY')
AND date < to_date('2015', 'YYYY');
You could also be more explicit:
to_date('2014' || '0101', 'YYYYMMNDD')
Both produce the same date '2014-01-01'.
Aside: date is a reserved word in standard SQL and a basic type name in Postgres. Don't use it as identifier.
This happens because the column has a text or varchar type, as opposed to date or timestamp. This is easily reproducible:
SELECT 1 WHERE extract(year from '2014-01-01'::text)='2014';
yields this error:
ERROR: function pg_catalog.date_part(unknown, text) does not exist
LINE 1: SELECT 1 WHERE extract(year from '2014-01-01'::text)='2014';
^ HINT: No function matches the given name and argument types. You might need to add explicit type casts.
extract or is underlying function date_part does not exist for text-like datatypes, but they're not needed anyway. Extracting the year from this date format is equivalent to getting the 4 first characters, so your query would be:
SELECT * FROM my_table WHERE left(date,4)='2014';