I made a mistake when writing the query, I wrote a subquery without a FROM clause:
select * from foo where id in (select id where type 'mm')
I lost half a day to find a mistake because it worked!
I checked the documentation but I did not find any information why ...
It is more interesting:
select * from abc a
inner join abc b on b.id = a.id
where a.id in (select id from (select a.id, row_number () over () lp where b.name = 'abc') x where lp = 1);
http://sqlfiddle.com/#!15/4bb29/12
Can someone explain how it works?
Your first query will certainly not work as it is.
To understand your second query, keep in mind that
A SELECT without a FROM clause is like as if there is a FROM clause with a table that has no column, but one row.
You can reference columns from the outer query in the subquery.
Here is an attempt to explain your query:
SELECT * FROM abc a
/* ok, now we have a table with alias "a" */
INNER JOIN abc b ON b.id = a.id
/* now we also have a table with alias "b" */
WHERE a.id IN
(SELECT id
FROM (SELECT a.id,
/* this will count the one "artificial" row */
row_number() OVER () lp
/* Here you reference the table with alias "b" above.
This is constant as far as the subquery is concerned,
so if it is not TRUE, the subquery will return an
empty result */
WHERE b.name = 'abc') x
/* this is always true, since there is only one line in
the above subquery */
WHERE lp = 1);
Related
I'm relatively new to derived tables when querying in From/Join clause as I always thought that Joins would eliminate the need for these subqueries. However, my question is that when I write a subquery within an inner join, do I need to specify the Joining column field within the subquery select statement to initiate a Join? I know you don't usually have to do this in a normal Join, however I wrote some sql code that won't execute unless I specify the joining column in the subquery select statement (I've bolded this). I've pasted the code below.
select pc.category_name
,product_name
,pp.list_price
,avg(quantity * (oi.list_price * (1-discount))) as Average_Revenue
,sum(quantity) as [products sold]
,sum(quantity * (oi.list_price * (1-discount))) as Revenue
,dt.Average_Category_Revenue
from production.categories as pc
inner join production.products as pp
on pc.category_id = pp.category_id
inner join sales.order_items as oi
on pp.product_id = oi.product_id
inner join (
select
category_name
,**pcc.category_id**
,avg(quantity * (oii.list_price * (1-discount))) as Average_Category_Revenue
from production.categories as pcc
inner join production.products as ppp
on pcc.category_id = ppp.category_id
inner join sales.order_items as oii
on ppp.product_id = oii.product_id
group by category_name, pcc.category_id
) as dt
on pp.category_id = dt.category_id
group by pc.category_name, product_name, pp.list_price, dt.Average_Category_Revenue
order by sum(quantity * (oi.list_price * (1-discount))) DESC
There is an example request in which there are several joins.
SELECT DISTINCT ON(a.id_1) 1, a.name, b.task, c.created_at
FROM a
INNER JOIN b ON a.id_2 = b.id
INNER JOIN c ON a.ID_2 = c.id
WHERE a.deleted_at IS NULL
ORDER BY a.id_1 desc
In this case, the query will work, sorting by unique values of id_1 will take place. But I need to sort by the column a.name. In this case, postresql will swear with the words ERROR: SELECT DISTINCT ON expressions must match initial ORDER BY expressions.
The following query can serve as a solution to the problem:
SELECT *
FROM(
SELECT DISTINCT ON(a.id_1) a.name, b.task, c.created_at
FROM a
INNER JOIN b ON a.id_2 = b.id
INNER JOIN c ON a.ID_2 = c.id
WHERE a.deleted_at IS NULL
)
ORDER_BY a.name desc
But in reality the database is very large and such a query is not optimal. Are there other ways to sort by the selected column while keeping one uniqueness?
We created a view in Postgres and I am getting strange result.
View Name: event_puchase_product_overview
When I try to get records with *, I get the correct result. but when I try to get specific fields, I get wrong values.
I hope the screens attached here can explain the problem well.
select *
from event_purchase_product_overview
where id = 15065;
select id, departure_id
from event_puchase_product_overview
where id = 15065;
VIEW definition:
CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW public.event_puchase_product_overview AS
SELECT row_number() OVER () AS id,
e.id AS departure_id,
e.type AS event_type,
e.name,
p.id AS product_id,
pc.name AS product_type,
product_date.attribute AS option,
p.upcomming_date AS supply_date,
pr.date_end AS bid_deadline,
CASE
WHEN (pt.categ_id IN ( SELECT unnest(tt.category_ids) AS unnest
FROM ( SELECT string_to_array(btrim(ir_config_parameter.value, '[]'::text), ', '::text)::integer[] AS category_ids
FROM ir_config_parameter
WHERE ir_config_parameter.key::text = 'trip_product_flight.product_category_hotel'::text) tt)) THEN e.maximum_rooms
WHEN (pt.categ_id IN ( SELECT unnest(tt.category_ids) AS unnest
FROM ( SELECT string_to_array(btrim(ir_config_parameter.value, '[]'::text), ', '::text)::integer[] AS category_ids
FROM ir_config_parameter
WHERE ir_config_parameter.key::text = 'trip_product_flight.product_category_flight'::text) tt)) THEN e.maximum_seats
WHEN (pt.categ_id IN ( SELECT unnest(tt.category_ids) AS unnest
FROM ( SELECT string_to_array(btrim(ir_config_parameter.value, '[]'::text), ', '::text)::integer[] AS category_ids
FROM ir_config_parameter
WHERE ir_config_parameter.key::text = 'trip_product_flight.product_category_bike'::text) tt)) THEN e.maximum_bikes
ELSE e.maximum_seats
END AS departure_qty,
CASE
WHEN now()::date > pr.date_end AND po.state::text = 'draft'::text THEN true
ELSE false
END AS is_deadline,
pl.product_qty::integer AS purchased_qty,
pl.comments,
pl.price_unit AS unit_price,
rp.id AS supplier,
po.id AS po_ref,
po.state AS po_state,
po.date_order AS po_date,
po.user_id AS operator,
pl.po_state_line AS line_status
FROM event_event e
LEFT JOIN product_product p ON p.related_departure = e.id
LEFT JOIN product_template pt ON pt.id = p.product_tmpl_id
LEFT JOIN product_category pc ON pc.id = pt.categ_id
LEFT JOIN purchase_order_line pl ON pl.product_id = p.id
LEFT JOIN purchase_order po ON po.id = pl.order_id
LEFT JOIN purchase_order_purchase_requisition_rel prr ON prr.purchase_order_id = po.id
LEFT JOIN purchase_requisition pr ON pr.id = prr.purchase_requisition_id
LEFT JOIN res_partner rp ON rp.id = po.partner_id
LEFT JOIN ( SELECT p_1.id AS product_id,
pav.name AS attribute
FROM product_product p_1
LEFT JOIN product_attribute_value_product_product_rel pa ON pa.prod_id = p_1.id
LEFT JOIN product_attribute_value pav ON pav.id = pa.att_id
LEFT JOIN product_attribute pat ON pat.id = pav.attribute_id
WHERE pat.name::text <> ALL (ARRAY['Date'::character varying, 'Departure'::character varying]::text[])) product_date ON product_date.product_id = p.id
WHERE (p.id IN ( SELECT DISTINCT mrp_bom_line.product_id
FROM mrp_bom_line)) AND p.active
ORDER BY e.id, pt.categ_id, p.id;
If I add new event_event or new product_product I'll get a new definition of row_number in my view, then the column ID of my view is not stable.
at least you can't use row_number as Id of the view,
If you insist to use row_number, you can use the Order By "creation DATE" by this way all new records will be as last lines in the view and this will not change the correspondency between ID (row_number) and other columns.
Hope that helps !
Very likely the execution plan of your query depends on the columns you select. Compare the execution plans!
Your id is generated using the row_number window function. Now window functions are executed before the ORDER BY clause, so the order will depend on the execution plan and hence on the columns you select.
Using row_number without an explicit ordering doesn't make any sense.
To fix that, don't use
row_number() OVER ()
but
row_number() OVER (ORDER BY e.id, pt.categ_id, p.id)
so that you have a reliable ordering.
In addition, you should omit the ORDER BY clause at the end.
I am trying to join a table on a subquery, but I don't know how to express it using Sequelize ORM. This is the raw SQL I want to run:
SELECT *
FROM table_a a
LEFT OUTER JOIN (SELECT * FROM table_b b WHERE col = VAL) ON a.id = b.id;
I tried
A.findAll({
include: [
{
model: B,
where: { col: val },
}
]
}).then(...);
but that doesn't get me the query I want. Instead it changes the join to an INNER JOIN, and joins on col = VALUE instead. Is there a way to do a join on the result of a subquery? I am using Postgres if it matters.
Update: After making the following change, the resulting query now uses a LEFT OUTER JOIN as expected:
include: [
{
model: B,
where: { col: val },
required: false,
}
]
However, it is still joining on col = VALUE, the generated query looks like:
SELECT * FROM table_a a
LEFT OUTER JOIN table_b b ON a.id = b.id AND b.col = VALUE;
These 2 queries ARE functionally equivalent:
SELECT * FROM table_a a
LEFT OUTER JOIN (SELECT * FROM table_b b WHERE col = VAL) ON a.id = b.id;
SELECT * FROM table_a a
LEFT OUTER JOIN table_b b ON a.id = b.id AND b.col = VALUE;
There is NO ADVANTAGE from the first one whatsoever. So, if the first one provides the wanted results, so should the second one.
I have a simple query:
SELECT * FROM Products p
LEFT JOIN SomeTable st ON st.SomeId = p.SomeId AND st.SomeOtherId = p.SomeOtherId
So far so good.
But the first join to SomeId can be NULL, In that case the check should be IS NULL, and that's where the join fails. I tried to use a CASE, but can't get that to work also.
Am I missing something simple here?
From Undocumented Query Plans: Equality Comparisons.
SELECT *
FROM Products p
LEFT JOIN SomeTable st
ON st.SomeOtherId = p.SomeOtherId
AND EXISTS (SELECT st.SomeId INTERSECT SELECT p.SomeId)