I have table with primary key "id" (in test table id from 2 to 5). If I using query like
select * from sometable order by id DESC
result sorted as expected from 5 to 2. But if I add FOR BROWSE like
select * from sometable order by id DESC FOR BROWSE
result sorted from 2 to 5. I checked that also in Interactive SQL.
Is it possible to get proper DESC order with FOR BROWSE? Because FOR BROWSE crucial for me: with direct access to server without drivers it sends TDS_COLINFO (table names by fields, also can be retrieved from TDS_ROWFMT2) token and proper flags for key fields (also can be retrieved as meta table info, but requires additional requests from server I'm trying to avoid).
From SAP support:
This is a known defect, CR 710333, no estimate for when it will be fixed.
It seems bug reported since ASE 15.7.
Related
This can be done a number of ways, which I will explain at the end. For now, I have been given a work assignment that includes the following (simplified):
"Create a record each week to track the current status that has the following: account numbers (unique within each report), a random number (provided), their status (Green, Orange, or Blue), and make sure the record also has a column which tells me how many records their are this week."
I do not need code to generate a random number.
Columns: Account, RanNum, Status, NumberOfRowsThisWeek
How do I handle adding a column that determines the number of rows in my query and produces that number, static, within each row of that column?
I may try to tweak the request and apply a rising number. How would I go about doing it in this case?
Edit: SQL Server 2014
You are not telling us which database you are using.
In SQL Server, the newer versions at least, you have windowing function or analytical functions available, and they are also available in most other popular RDBMS
You could do what you want in SQL Server by adding this to your select
,count(*) over (partition by 1) as [NrOfRows]
An analytical function does the "standard" query, and then performs the windowing function on the result set.
The count above, counts the rows in the result set, partitioned by the constant 1, which is of course stable across all rows, so it gives the full rowcount.
It is perhaps not standard in all databases to allow a constant in that way, perhaps this would give a better result in some, I know it works in SQL Server:
,count(*) over (partition by (select 1 n)) as [NrOfRows]
it sounds like you want to do some kind of simple count() / group by query
select Account, RanNum, Status, count(*) as NumberOfRowsThisWeek
from tablename
group by Account, RanNum, Status
you my need to do
select Account, RanNum, Status, NumberOfRowsThisWeek
from (
select Account, Status, count(*) as NumberOfRowsThisWeek
from tablename
group by Account, Status
)
because the random number will confuse the group by by making every row unique.
I have to fetch list of records from database by passing 2 parameters namely
1st parameter is Object type and 2nd parameter is Collection.
#Query("select cnt from Content cnt where cnt.studio=?1 and cnt.id IN ?2")
public List getUpdatePlaylistTypeContent(Studio studio,List contentids);
So, in my above mentioned code, the IN clause is automatically implementing order by id asc though i have not mentioned.I want to stop the implicit order by clause.
I want the result list in the same manner as i am passing in the list object (2nd method paramater)
It is not related with JPA, try your sql in your database. It would shou you the same order.
Check your database type for forbidding the in auto sort;
Oracle
SELECT * FROM table where id IN (3,2,5,1,4) ORDER BY DECODE(id, 3,1,2,2,5,3,1,4)
//you need the *,1,*,2,*,3,*,*
Mysql
select * from table where id IN (3,9,6) order by field(id,3,9,6)
I did not test the mysql one, but it should work well
Check the generated SQL (with eg. show_sql=true) and I'm sure you won't see any ORDER BY clause.
But, if you run the same SQL on the database, results will be ordered by ID if there is an index (eg. primary key) with default settings on the id column.
Eg. https://www.postgresql.org/docs/11/indexes-ordering.html
From a database point of view, the result is more like a set than a list, so you need to order it explicitly (or be happy with index ordering). You can't rely on anything you're putting in the where clause to sort the results, so you'll need further processing.
I have a table contains columns 'employeename' and 'id', how can I sort the 'employeename' column following alphabetical order of the names initial?
Say the table is like this now:
employeename rid eid
Dave 1 1
Ben 4 2
Chloe 6 6
I tried the command ORDER BY, it shows what I want but when I query the data again by SELECT, the showed table data is the same as original, indicting ORDER BY does not modify the data, is this correct?
SELECT *
FROM employee
ORDER BY employeename ASC;
I expect the table data to be modified (sorted by names alphabetical order) like this:
employeename rid eid
Ben 4 2
Chloe 6 6
Dave 1 1
the showed table data is the same as original, indicting ORDER BY does not modify the data, is this correct?
Yes, this is correct. A SELECT statement does not change the data in a table. Only UPDATE, DELETE, INSERT or TRUNCATE statements will change the data.
However, your question shows a misconception on how a relational database works.
Rows in a table (of a relational database) are not sorted in any way. You can picture them as balls in a basket.
If you want to display data in a specific sort order, the only (really: the only) way to do that is to use an ORDER BY in your SELECT statement. There is no alternative to that.
Postgres allows to define a VIEW that includes an ORDER BY which might be an acceptable workaround for you:
CREATE VIEW sorted_employee;
AS
SELECT *
FROM employee
ORDER BY employeename ASC;
Then you can simply use
select *
from sorted_employees;
But be aware of the drawbacks. If you run select * from sorted_employees order by id then the data will be sorted twice. Postgres is not smart enough to remove the (useless) order by from the view's definition.
Some related questions:
Default row order in SELECT query - SQL Server 2008 vs SQL 2012
What is the default SQL result sort order with 'select *'?
Is PostgreSQL order fully guaranteed if sorting on a non-unique attribute?
Why do results from a SQL query not come back in the order I expect?
I am getting this error in the pg production mode, but its working fine in sqlite3 development mode.
ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid in ManagementController#index
PG::Error: ERROR: column "estates.id" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used in an aggregate function
LINE 1: SELECT "estates".* FROM "estates" WHERE "estates"."Mgmt" = ...
^
: SELECT "estates".* FROM "estates" WHERE "estates"."Mgmt" = 'Mazzey' GROUP BY user_id
#myestate = Estate.where(:Mgmt => current_user.Company).group(:user_id).all
If user_id is the PRIMARY KEY then you need to upgrade PostgreSQL; newer versions will correctly handle grouping by the primary key.
If user_id is neither unique nor the primary key for the 'estates' relation in question, then this query doesn't make much sense, since PostgreSQL has no way to know which value to return for each column of estates where multiple rows share the same user_id. You must use an aggregate function that expresses what you want, like min, max, avg, string_agg, array_agg, etc or add the column(s) of interest to the GROUP BY.
Alternately you can rephrase the query to use DISTINCT ON and an ORDER BY if you really do want to pick a somewhat arbitrary row, though I really doubt it's possible to express that via ActiveRecord.
Some databases - including SQLite and MySQL - will just pick an arbitrary row. This is considered incorrect and unsafe by the PostgreSQL team, so PostgreSQL follows the SQL standard and considers such queries to be errors.
If you have:
col1 col2
fred 42
bob 9
fred 44
fred 99
and you do:
SELECT col1, col2 FROM mytable GROUP BY col1;
then it's obvious that you should get the row:
bob 9
but what about the result for fred? There is no single correct answer to pick, so the database will refuse to execute such unsafe queries. If you wanted the greatest col2 for any col1 you'd use the max aggregate:
SELECT col1, max(col2) AS max_col2 FROM mytable GROUP BY col1;
I recently moved from MySQL to PostgreSQL and encountered the same issue. Just for reference, the best approach I've found is to use DISTINCT ON as suggested in this SO answer:
Elegant PostgreSQL Group by for Ruby on Rails / ActiveRecord
This will let you get one record for each unique value in your chosen column that matches the other query conditions:
MyModel.where(:some_col => value).select("DISTINCT ON (unique_col) *")
I prefer DISTINCT ON because I can still get all the other column values in the row. DISTINCT alone will only return the value of that specific column.
After often receiving the error myself I realised that Rails (I am using rails 4) automatically adds an 'order by id' at the end of your grouping query. This often results in the error above. So make sure you append your own .order(:group_by_column) at the end of your Rails query. Hence you will have something like this:
#problems = Problem.select('problems.username, sum(problems.weight) as weight_sum').group('problems.username').order('problems.username')
#myestate1 = Estate.where(:Mgmt => current_user.Company)
#myestate = #myestate1.select("DISTINCT(user_id)")
this is what I did.
I'm getting the following error in SSRS:
An error occurred while the query design method was being saved.
An item with the same key has already been added
What does an "item" denote, though? I even tried editing the RDL and deleting all references to the Stored Procedure I need to use called prc_RPT_Select_BI_Completes_Data_View.
Could this possibly have to do with the fact that the Stored Procedure uses Dynamic SQL (the N' notation)?
In the stored procedure I have:
SET #SQL += N'
SELECT bi.SupplierID as ''Supplier ID''
,bi.SupplierName as ''Supplier Name''
,bi.PID as ''PID''
,bi.RespondentID as ''Respondent ID''
,lk_slt.Name as ''Entry Link Type''
,ts.SurveyNumber as ''Initial Survey ID'''
It appears that SSRS has an issue(at leastin version 2008) - I'm studying this website that explains it
Where it says if you have two columns(from 2 diff. tables) with the same name, then it'll cause that problem.
From source:
SELECT a.Field1, a.Field2, a.Field3, b.Field1, b.field99 FROM TableA a
JOIN TableB b on a.Field1 = b.Field1
SQL handled it just fine, since I had prefixed each with an alias
(table) name. But SSRS uses only the column name as the key, not table
+ column, so it was choking.
The fix was easy, either rename the second column, i.e. b.Field1 AS
Field01 or just omit the field all together, which is what I did.
I face the same issue. After debug I fixed the same. if the column name in your SQL query has multiple times then this issue occur. Hence use alias in SQL query to differ the column name.
Ex:
The below query will work proper in sql query but create issue in SSRS report:
Select P.ID, P.FirstName, P.LastName, D.ID, D.City, D.Area, D.Address
From PersonalDetails P
Left Join CommunicationDetails D On P.ID = D.PersonalDetailsID
Reason : ID has mentioned twice (Multiple Times)
Correct Query:
Select P.ID As PersonalDetailsID, P.FirstName, P.LastName, D.ID, D.City, D.Area, D.Address
From PersonalDetails P
Left Join CommunicationDetails D On P.ID = D.PersonalDetailsID
I have experience this issue in past. Based on that I can say that generally we get this issue if your dataset has multiple fieldnames that points to same field source.
Take a look into following posts for detail error description
https://bi-rootdata.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-error-occurred-during-report.html
https://bi-rootdata.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-item-with-same-key-has-already-been.html
In your case, you should check your all field names returned by Sp prc_RPT_Select_BI_Completes_Data_View and make sure that all fields has unique name.
I had the same error in a report query. I had columns from different tables with the same name and the prefix for each table (eg: select a.description, b.description, c.description) that runs ok in Oracle, but for the report you must have an unique alias for each column so simply add alias to the fields with the same name (select a.description a_description, b.description b_description and so on)
Sorry, it is a response to an old thread, but might still be useful.
In addition to above responses,
This generally happens when two columns with same name, even from different tables are included in the same query.
for example if we joining two tables city and state where tables have column name
e.g. city.name and state.name.
when such a query is added to the dataset, SSRS removes the table name or the table alias and only keeps the name, whih eventually appears twice in the query and errors as duplicate key.
The best way to avoid it is to use alias such as calling the column names
city.name as c_name
state.name as s_name.
This will resolve the issue.
I got this error message with vs2015 enterprise, ssdt 14.1.xxx, ssrs. For me I think it was something different than described above with a 2 column, same name problem. I added this report, then deleted the report, then when I tried to add the query back in the ssrs wizard I got this message, " An error occurred while the query design method was being saved :invalid object name: tablename" . where tablename was the table on the query the wizard was reading. I tried cleaning the project, I tried rebuilding the project. In my opinion Microsoft isn't completing cleaning out the report when you delete it and as long as you try to add the original query back it won't add. The way I was able to fix it was to create the ssrs report in a whole new project (obviously nothing wrong with the query) and save it off to the side. Then I reopened my original ssrs project, right clicked on Reports, then Add, then add Existing Item. The report added back in just fine with no name conflict.
I just got this error and i came to know that it is about the local variable alias
at the end of the stored procedure i had like
select #localvariable1,#localvariable2
it was working fine in sql but when i ran this in ssrs
it was always throwing error but after I gave alias it is fixed
select #localvariable1 as A,#localvariable2 as B
SSRS will not accept duplicated columns so ensure that your query or store procedure is returning unique column names.
If you are using SPs and if the sps have multiple Select statements (within if conditions) all those selects needs to be handled with unique field names.