Detect not contemplated values in a CASE statement evaluation - tsql

Is there a way in T-SQL to collect all not contemplated values in a CASE condition and insert them in a table?
For example:
A SELECT that reads a table that has in Col1 the values A,B,C. This SELECT has a CASE that goes like this: CASE WHEN Col1 = 1 THEN ... WHEN Col1 = B THEN ... ELSE NULL END AS NewCol1
I would like to detect values like C, values that are not contemplated in Col1.
I could get them like this: (...) ELSE Tabl1.Col1 but I need the CASE statement to end with ELSE NULL.

You can get a list of these values like this:
SELECT DISTINCT Col1
FROM Table
WHERE Col1 not in (1,...,B)

As #avery_larry suggested, I used a debug flag, giving my query two behaviours. I could call a function/stored with the parameter and if it's up INSERT the values into a desired output.

Related

postgres case statement with subquery

I have a subquery like this
with subquery as (select host from table_A where << some condition >>)
and in my main query, I am querying data from another table called table_B, and one of the columns is called destination_host. Now I need to check if the destination_host is in the list returned from my subquery, then I want to output TypeA in my select statement or else TypeB. My select statement looks something like
select name, place, destination_host
from table_B
where <<some condition>>
I want to output a fourth column that is based on a condition check, let's say we call this host_category and if the destination_host value exists in the subquery then I want to add value typeA or else typeB. Please can you help me understand how to write this. I understand that it is hard to provide guidance if you don't have actual data to work with.
I tried using case statements such as this one:
when (destination_host in (select host from subquery)) THEN 'typeA'
when (destination_host not in (select host from subquery)) THEN 'typeB'
end as host_category
but I don't think this is the way to solve this problem.
I would use EXISTS:
WITH subquery AS (...)
SELECT CASE WHEN EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM subquery
WHERE subquery.host = table_b.destination_host)
THEN 'typeA'
ELSE 'typeB'
END
FROM table_b;
With queries like that, you have to take care of NULL values. If table_b.destination_host is NULL, the row will always show up as typeB, because NULL = NULL is not TRUE in SQL.

What does a column assignment using an aggregate in the columns area of a select do?

I'm trying to decipher another programmer's code who is long-gone, and I came across a select statement in a stored procedure that looks like this (simplified) example:
SELECT #Table2.Col1, Table2.Col2, Table2.Col3, MysteryColumn = CASE WHEN y.Col3 IS NOT NULL THEN #Table2.MysteryColumn - y.Col3 ELSE #Table2.MysteryColumn END
INTO #Table1
FROM #Table2
LEFT OUTER JOIN (
SELECT Table3.Col1, Table3.Col2, Col3 = SUM(#Table3.Col3)
FROM Table3
INNER JOIN #Table4 ON Table4.Col1 = Table3.Col1 AND Table4.Col2 = Table3.Col2
GROUP BY Table3.Col1, Table3.Col2
) AS y ON #Table2.Col1 = y.Col1 AND #Table2.Col2 = y.Col2
WHERE #Table2.Col2 < #EnteredValue
My question, what does the fourth column of the primary selection do? does it produce a boolean value checking to see if the values are equal? or does it set the #Table2.MysteryColumn equal to some value and then inserts it into #Table1? Or does it just update the #Table2.MysteryColumn and not output a value into #Table1?
This same thing seems to happen inside of the sub-query on the third column, and I am equally at a loss as to what that does as well.
MysteryColumn = gives the expression a name also called a column alias. The fact that a column in the table#2 also has the same name is besides the point.
Since it uses INTO syntax it also gives the column its name in the resulting temporary table. See the SELECT CLAUSE and note | column_alias = expression and the INTO CLAUSE

postgres `order by` argument type

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.

PostgreSQL regexp_matches only returning rows that match it?

This is my first time using regexp_matches and I find that using it will only return rows that match all regexp_matches in the SELECT clause.
For example:
SELECT parameters,
regexp_matches(parameters, 'a=(\d+)'),
regexp_matches(parameters, 'b=(\d+)')
FROM table;
Will return result with row where parameters is a=1&b=1 but not a=1 or b=1
It's acting as if it was a where clause. Why is this?
This is because regexp_matches() returns set of rows.
With no matches it returns no rows.
Use search by one regexp, e.g.:
SELECT
parameters,
regexp_matches(parameters, '[a|b]=(\d+)')
FROM a_table;
or, if you want to get two columns for aand b:
SELECT parameters, a, b
FROM (
SELECT
parameters,
regexp_matches(parameters, 'a=(\d+)') a,
null b
FROM a_table
UNION
SELECT
parameters,
null,
regexp_matches(parameters, 'b=(\d+)')
FROM a_table
) s;
Another way around this is to match on the end of the string in addition to the pattern you want to find.
SELECT parameters,
regexp_matches(parameters, '(a=(\d+))|$'),
regexp_matches(parameters, '(b=(\d+))|$')
FROM table;
Then you might want to do some other processing since any string missing the pattern will show up in results as {NULL} (or {NULL,NULL<,...>}, one per match group).

Prepare dynamic case statement using PostgreSQL 9.3

I have the following case statement to prepare as a dynamic as shown below:
Example:
I have the case statement:
case cola
when cola between '2001-01-01' and '2001-01-05' then 'G1'
when cola between '2001-01-10' and '2001-01-15' then 'G2'
when cola between '2001-01-20' and '2001-01-25' then 'G3'
when cola between '2001-02-01' and '2001-02-05' then 'G4'
when cola between '2001-02-10' and '2001-02-15' then 'G5'
else ''
end
Note: Now I want to create dynamic case statement because of the values dates and name passing as a parameter and it may change.
Declare
dates varchar = '2001-01-01to2001-01-05,2001-01-10to2001-01-15,
2001-01-20to2001-01-25,2001-02-01to2001-02-05,
2001-02-10to2001-02-15';
names varchar = 'G1,G2,G3,G4,G5';
The values in the variables may change as per the requirements, it will be dynamic. So the case statement should be dynamic without using loop.
You may not need any function for this, just join to a mapping data-set:
with cola_map(low, high, value) as (
values(date '2001-01-01', date '2001-01-05', 'G1'),
('2001-01-10', '2001-01-15', 'G2'),
('2001-01-20', '2001-01-25', 'G3'),
('2001-02-01', '2001-02-05', 'G4'),
('2001-02-10', '2001-02-15', 'G5')
-- you can include as many rows, as you want
)
select table_name.*,
coalesce(cola_map.value, '') -- else branch from case expression
from table_name
left join cola_map on table_name.cola between cola_map.low and cola_map.high
If your date ranges could collide, you can use DISTINCT ON or GROUP BY to avoid row duplication.
Note: you can use a simple sub-select too, I used a CTE, because it's more readable.
Edit: passing these data (as a single parameter) can be achieved by passing a multi-dimensional array (or an array of row-values, but that requires you to have a distinct, predefined composite type).
Passing arrays as parameters can depend on the actual client (& driver) you use, but in general, you can use the array's input representation:
-- sql
with cola_map(low, high, value) as (
select d[1]::date, d[2]::date, d[3]
from unnest(?::text[][]) d
)
select table_name.*,
coalesce(cola_map.value, '') -- else branch from case expression
from table_name
left join cola_map on table_name.cola between cola_map.low and cola_map.high
// client pseudo code
query = db.prepare(sql);
query.bind(1, "{{2001-01-10,2001-01-15,G2},{2001-01-20,2001-01-25,G3}}");
query.execute();
Passing each chunk of data separately is also possible with some clients (or with some abstractions), but this is highly depends on your driver/orm/etc. you use.