For example I have a table called product_list, which holds a list of products:
+----+-------+-----------+-------------+--+
| id | name | weight(g) | type | |
+----+-------+-----------+-------------+--+
| 1 | Shirt | 157 | Clothes | |
+----+-------+-----------+-------------+--+
| 2 | Ring | 53 | Accessories | |
+----+-------+-----------+-------------+--+
| 3 | Pants | 202 | Clothes | |
+----+-------+-----------+-------------+--+
and a table called product_price:
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| price_id | id | name | price | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| 1 | 1 | Shirt | 99.00 | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| 2 | 2 | Ring | 149.00 | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| 3 | 3 | Pants | 119.00 | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
If I insert 1 row of data into product_list, part of the data (such as product_id & product name) should also be inserted in another table like product_price which holds the price for all products (new products would have 0 or NULL values for their price). Eg:
product_list:
+----+--------+-----------+-------------+--+
| id | name | weight(g) | type | |
+----+--------+-----------+-------------+--+
| 1 | Shirt | 157 | Clothes | |
+----+--------+-----------+-------------+--+
| 2 | Ring | 53 | Accessories | |
+----+--------+-----------+-------------+--+
| 3 | Pants | 202 | Clothes | |
+----+--------+-----------+-------------+--+
| 4 | Shirt2 | 175 | Clothes | |
+----+--------+-----------+-------------+--+
product_price:
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| price_id | id | name | price | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| 1 | 1 | Shirt | 99.00 | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| 2 | 2 | Ring | 149.00 | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| 3 | 3 | Pants | 119.00 | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
| 4 | 4 | Shirt2| 0.00 | |
+----------+----+-------+--------+--+
My question here is the method in approaching this. What is the proper way (in a professional manner) would an experienced person approach this matter?
These are 2 approaches I have in mind:
1 - Using triggers to insert into the other tables like product_price,etc whenever I insert a product data into product_list
2 - Using a function (stored procedure) like product_add to add a new product into each tables.
Which method is better? Or if there a better suggestion, then I'd like to know about it. Thanks in advance.
TLDR: Should I use Triggers or instead use Stored Procedures, which is better? Or you have a better suggestion?
In Postgres, you can use CTEs:
with pl as (
insert into product_list(name, weight, type)
select . . .
returning *
)
insert into product_price(id, price)
select id, NULL
from pl;
Note: You shouldn't repeat the name column in the product_list and product_price table. It should only be in the list table.
Related
The example above can be done on a SQL Server. It is a function that performs the calculation on another table while getting the current table field Id to list data from other table, return a single value.
Question: how to do the exact thing with PostgreSQL
SELECT TOP(5) * FROM Artists;
+------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+
| ArtistId | ArtistName | ActiveFrom | CountryId |
|------------+------------------+--------------+-------------|
| 1 | Iron Maiden | 1975-12-25 | 3 |
| 2 | AC/DC | 1973-01-11 | 2 |
| 3 | Allan Holdsworth | 1969-01-01 | 3 |
| 4 | Buddy Rich | 1919-01-01 | 6 |
| 5 | Devin Townsend | 1993-01-01 | 8 |
+------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+
SELECT TOP(5) * FROM Albums;
+-----------+------------------------+---------------+------------+-----------+
| AlbumId | AlbumName | ReleaseDate | ArtistId | GenreId |
|-----------+------------------------+---------------+------------+-----------|
| 1 | Powerslave | 1984-09-03 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | Powerage | 1978-05-05 | 2 | 1 |
| 3 | Singing Down the Lane | 1956-01-01 | 6 | 3 |
| 4 | Ziltoid the Omniscient | 2007-05-21 | 5 | 1 |
| 5 | Casualties of Cool | 2014-05-14 | 5 | 1 |
+-----------+------------------------+---------------+------------+-----------+
The function
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[ufn_AlbumCount] (#ArtistId int)
RETURNS smallint
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #AlbumCount int;
SELECT #AlbumCount = COUNT(AlbumId)
FROM Albums
WHERE ArtistId = #ArtistId;
RETURN #AlbumCount;
END;
GO
Now, (at SQL Server), after update the first table fields with ALTER TABLE Artists ADD AlbumCount AS dbo.ufn_AlbumCount(ArtistId); whe can list and get the following result.
+------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+--------------+
| ArtistId | ArtistName | ActiveFrom | CountryId | AlbumCount |
|------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+--------------|
| 1 | Iron Maiden | 1975-12-25 | 3 | 5 |
| 2 | AC/DC | 1973-01-11 | 2 | 3 |
| 3 | Allan Holdsworth | 1969-01-01 | 3 | 2 |
| 4 | Buddy Rich | 1919-01-01 | 6 | 1 |
| 5 | Devin Townsend | 1993-01-01 | 8 | 3 |
| 6 | Jim Reeves | 1948-01-01 | 6 | 1 |
| 7 | Tom Jones | 1963-01-01 | 4 | 3 |
| 8 | Maroon 5 | 1994-01-01 | 6 | 0 |
| 9 | The Script | 2001-01-01 | 5 | 1 |
| 10 | Lit | 1988-06-26 | 6 | 0 |
+------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+--------------+
but how to achieve this on postgresql?
Postgres doesn't support "virtual" computed column (i.e. computed columns that are generated at runtime), so there is no exact equivalent. The most efficient solution is a view that counts this:
create view artists_with_counts
as
select a.*,
coalesce(t.album_count, 0) as album_count
from artists a
left join (
select artist_id, count(*) as album_count
from albums
group by artist_id
) t on a.artist_id = t.artist_id;
Another option is to create a function that can be used as a "virtual column" in a select - but as this is done row-by-row, this will be substantially slower than the view.
create function album_count(p_artist artists)
returns bigint
as
$$
select count(*)
from albums a
where a.artist_id = p_artist.artist_id;
$$
language sql
stable;
Then you can include this as a column:
select a.*, a.album_count
from artists a;
Using the function like that, requires to prefix the function reference with the table alias (alternatively, you can use album_count(a))
Online example
I have a table "Listing" that looks like this:
| listing_id | amenities |
|------------|--------------------------------------------------|
| 5629709 | {"Air conditioning",Heating, Essentials,Shampoo} |
| 4156372 | {"Wireless Internet",Kitchen,"Pets allowed"} |
And another table "Amenity" like this:
| amenity_id | amenities |
|------------|--------------------------------------------------|
| 1 | Air conditioning |
| 2 | Kitchen |
| 3 | Heating |
Is there a way to join the two tables in a new one "Listing_Amenity" like this:
| listing_id | amenities |
|------------|-----------|
| 5629709 | 1 |
| 5629709 | 3 |
| 4156372 | 2 |
You could use unnest:
CREATE TABLE Listing_Amenity
AS
SELECT l.listing_id, a.amenity_id
FROM Listing l
, unnest(l.ammenities) sub(elem)
JOIN Amenity a
ON a.ammenities = sub.elem;
db<>fiddle demo
I am a novice self-teaching Microsoft Access.
I have an MS Access database with a table of students (Table1).
Table1
+----+-----------+----------+------------+------------+
| id | firstname | lastname | Year_Group | Form_Group |
+----+-----------+----------+------------+------------+
| 2 | mnb | nbgfv | 7 | 1 |
| 3 | jhg | uhgf | 8 | 2 |
| 4 | poi | ijuy | 9 | 2 |
| 5 | tgf | tgfd | 10 | 2 |
| 6 | wer | qwes | 11 | 2 |
+----+-----------+----------+------------+------------+
Every day students days are recorded sort of like Table2.
Table2
+----------+----+-----------+----------+------------+--------+-----------+----------+
| Date | id | firstname | lastname | Year_Group | Effort | Behaviour | Homework |
+----------+----+-----------+----------+------------+--------+-----------+----------+
| 28/02/19 | 2 | mnb | nbgfv | 7 | Good | Good | Y |
| 28/02/19 | 3 | jhg | uhgf | 8 | OK | OK | Y |
| 28/02/19 | 4 | poi | ijuy | 9 | Bad | Bad | N |
| 01/03/19 | 5 | tgf | tgfd | 10 | Good | OK | Y |
| 01/03/19 | 6 | wer | qwes | 11 | Good | Good | Y |
+----------+----+-----------+----------+------------+--------+-----------+----------+
Is there a way (when using a list box or combo box) to select a student from Table1 so that their information is used for the corresponding columns in Table2?
Or is there a more efficient way to do this?
Firstly, you should normalise your data.
Currently, you are repeating the firstname, lastname, and Year_Group data in two separate tables, which not only bloats your database, but also means that such data must be maintained in two separate places, potentially leading to inconsistencies and then uncertainty as to which is the master.
Instead, I would suggest that your Students table should contain all information pertaining to the characteristics of a student:
Students
+----+-----------+----------+------------+------------+
| id | firstname | lastname | Year_Group | Form_Group |
+----+-----------+----------+------------+------------+
| 2 | mnb | nbgfv | 7 | 1 |
| 3 | jhg | uhgf | 8 | 2 |
| 4 | poi | ijuy | 9 | 2 |
| 5 | tgf | tgfd | 10 | 2 |
| 6 | wer | qwes | 11 | 2 |
+----+-----------+----------+------------+------------+
And the information pertaining to each school day should only reference the student ID in the Students table:
SchoolDays
+----------+----+--------+-----------+----------+
| Date | id | Effort | Behaviour | Homework |
+----------+----+--------+-----------+----------+
| 28/02/19 | 2 | Good | Good | Y |
| 28/02/19 | 3 | OK | OK | Y |
| 28/02/19 | 4 | Bad | Bad | N |
| 01/03/19 | 5 | Good | OK | Y |
| 01/03/19 | 6 | Good | Good | Y |
+----------+----+--------+-----------+----------+
Then, if you want to display the data in its entirety, you would use a query which joins the two tables, e.g.:
select
t2.date,
t1.firstname,
t1.lastname,
t1.year_group,
t2.effort,
t2.behaviour,
t2.homework
from
students t1 inner join schooldays t2 on t1.id = t2.id
I'm relatively new to PostgreSQL and trying to figure out how to solve the following scenario. Let's say I have three tables:
stores
| store_id |
|----------|
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
products
| product_id |
|------------|
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
store_has_product
| store_id | product_id |
|----------|------------|
| 1 | 3 |
| 1 | 2 |
| 2 | 1 |
| 3 | 3 |
| 1 | 1 |
| 3 | 1 |
| 3 | 2 |
And now I'm trying to build a query to join all products to the stores table and group them in an array, so that I have an output like this:
| store_id | products |
|----------|-----------|
| 1 | {3, 2, 1} |
| 2 | {2} |
| 3 | {3, 1, 2} |
I know that Arrays are possible with PostgreSQL, but I don't get how to write such a query and probably already spent too much time thinking about a solution.
Thanks for your help!
If you are using version 8.4 or later you can use array_agg:
SELECT store_id, array_agg(product_id::text) as products
FROM store_has_product
GROUP BY store_id
I have three tables.
table a
| uid | name | number |
|-----+---------+--------|
| 1 | table | 1 |
| 2 | chair | 2 |
table b
| uid | name | number |
|-----+---------+--------|
| 1 | john | 1 |
| 2 | billy | 0 |
| 3 | bob | 2 |
| 4 | sally | 1 |
table c
| uid | table a | john | billy | bob | sally |
|-----+---------+--------+--------+-------|-------|
| 1 | table | T | | | T |
| 2 | chair | | | C | |
What I need to be able to do is look at the column names in table c, find the corresponding row entry in table b and if the numbers are the same as the numbers from table a, then set the table c value to T. Otherwise set it to C. This needs to be triggered whenever either table a or table b are updated.
How can I write an update the table using if or case statement.
Thanks.