Avoid putting PostgreSQL function result into one field - postgresql

The end result of what I am after is a query that calls a function and that function returns a set of records that are in their own separate fields. I can do this but the results of the function are all in one field.
ie: http://i.stack.imgur.com/ETLCL.png and the results I am after are: http://i.stack.imgur.com/wqRQ9.png
Here's the code to create the table
CREATE TABLE tbl_1_hm
(
tbl_1_hm_id bigserial NOT NULL,
tbl_1_hm_f1 VARCHAR (250),
tbl_1_hm_f2 INTEGER,
CONSTRAINT tbl_1_hm PRIMARY KEY (tbl_1_hm_id)
)
-- do that for a few times to get some data
INSERT INTO tbl_1_hm (tbl_1_hm_f1, tbl_1_hm_f2)
VALUES ('hello', 1);
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION proc_1_hm(id BIGINT)
RETURNS TABLE(tbl_1_hm_f1 VARCHAR (250), tbl_1_hm_f2 int AS $$
SELECT tbl_1_hm_f1, tbl_1_hm_f2
FROM tbl_1_hm
WHERE tbl_1_hm_id = id
$$ LANGUAGE SQL;
--And here is the current query I am running for my results:
SELECT t1.tbl_1_hm_id, proc_1_hm(t1.tbl_1_hm_id) AS t3
FROM tbl_1_hm AS t1
Thanks for having a read. Please if you want to haggle about the semantics of what I am doing by hitting the same table twice or my naming convention --> this is a simplified test.

When a function returns a set of records, you should treat it as a table source:
SELECT t1.tbl_1_hm_id, t3.*
FROM tbl_1_hm AS t1, proc_1_hm(t1.tbl_1_hm_id) AS t3;
Note that functions are implicitly using a LATERAL join (scroll down to sub-sections 4 and 5) so you can use fields from tables listed previously without having to specify an explicit JOIN condition.

Related

PostgreSQL -- JOIN UNNEST output with CTE INSERT ID -- INSERT many to many

In a PostgreSQL function, is it possible to join the result of UNNEST, which is an integer array from function input, with an ID returned from a CTE INSERT?
I have PostgreSQL tables like:
CREATE TABLE public.message (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
content TEXT
);
CREATE TABLE public.message_tag (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
message_id INTEGER NOT NULL CONSTRAINT message_tag_message_id_fkey REFERENCES public.message(id) ON DELETE CASCADE,
tag_id INTEGER NOT NULL CONSTRAINT message_tag_tag_id_fkey REFERENCES public.tag(id) ON DELETE CASCADE
);
I want to create a PostgreSQL function which takes input of content and an array of tag_id. This is for graphile. I want to do it all in one function, so I get a mutation.
Here's what I got so far. I don't know how to join an UNNEST across an id returned from a CTE.
CREATE FUNCTION public.create_message(content text, tags Int[])
RETURNS public.message
AS $$
-- insert to get primary key of message, for many to many message_id
WITH moved_rows AS (
INSERT INTO public.message (content)
RETURNING *;
)
-- many to many relation
INSERT INTO public.message_tag
SELECT moved_rows.id as message_id, tagInput.tag_id FROM moved_rows, UNNEST(tags) as tagInput;
RETURNING *
$$ LANGUAGE sql VOLATILE STRICT;
You're not that far from your goal:
the semicolon placement in the CTE is wrong
the first INSERT statement lacks a SELECT or VALUES clause to specify what should be inserted
the INSERT into tag_message should specify the columns in which to insert (especially if you have that unnecessary serial id)
you specified a relation alias for the UNNEST call already, but none for the column tag_id
your function was RETURNING a set of message_tag rows but was specified to return a single message row
To fix these:
CREATE FUNCTION public.create_message(content text, tags Int[])
RETURNS public.message
AS $$
-- insert to get primary key of message, for many to many message_id
WITH moved_rows AS (
INSERT INTO public.message (content)
VALUES ($1)
RETURNING *
),
-- many to many relation
_ AS (
INSERT INTO public.message_tag (message_id, tag_id)
SELECT moved_rows.id, tagInput.tag_id
FROM moved_rows, UNNEST($2) as tagInput(tag_id)
)
TABLE moved_rows;
$$ LANGUAGE sql VOLATILE STRICT;
(Online demo)

Run a stored procedure using select columns as input parameters?

I have a select query that returns a dataset with "n" records in one column. I would like to use this column as the parameter in a stored procedure. Below a reduced example of my case.
The query:
SELECT code FROM rawproducts
The dataset:
CODE
1
2
3
The stored procedure:
ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[MyInsertSP]
(#code INT)
AS
BEGIN
INSERT INTO PRODUCTS description, price, stock
SELECT description, price, stock
FROM INVENTORY I
WHERE I.icode = #code
END
I already have the actual query and stored procedure done; I just am not sure how to put them both together.
I would appreciate any assistance here! Thank you!
PS: of course the stored procedure is not as simple as above. I just choose to use a very silly example to keep things small here. :)
Here's two methods for you, one using a loop without a cursor:
DECLARE #code_list TABLE (code INT);
INSERT INTO #code_list SELECT code, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY code) AS row_id FROM rawproducts;
DECLARE #count INT;
SELECT #count = COUNT(*) FROM #code_list;
WHILE #count > 0
BEGIN
DECLARE #code INT;
SELECT #code = code FROM #code_list WHERE row_id = #count;
EXEC MyInsertSP #code;
DELETE FROM #code_list WHERE row_id = #count;
SELECT #count = COUNT(*) FROM #code_list;
END;
This works by putting the codes into a table variable, and assigning a number from 1..n to each row. Then we loop through them, one at a time, deleting them as they are processed, until there is nothing left in the table variable.
But here's what I would consider a better method:
CREATE TYPE dbo.code_list AS TABLE (code INT);
GO
CREATE PROCEDURE MyInsertSP (
#code_list dbo.code_list)
AS
BEGIN
INSERT INTO PRODUCTS (
[description],
price,
stock)
SELECT
i.[description],
i.price,
i.stock
FROM
INVENTORY i
INNER JOIN #code_list cl ON cl.code = i.code;
END;
GO
DECLARE #code_list dbo.code_list;
INSERT INTO #code_list SELECT code FROM rawproducts;
EXEC MyInsertSP #code_list = #code_list;
To get this to work I create a user-defined table type, then use this to pass a list of codes into the stored procedure. It means slightly rewriting your stored procedure, but the actual code to do the work is much smaller.
(how to) Run a stored procedure using select columns as input
parameters?
What you are looking for is APPLY; APPLY is how you use columns as input parameters. The only thing unclear is how/where the input column is populated. Let's start with sample data:
IF OBJECT_ID('dbo.Products', 'U') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE dbo.Products;
IF OBJECT_ID('dbo.Inventory','U') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE dbo.Inventory;
IF OBJECT_ID('dbo.Code','U') IS NOT NULL DROP TABLE dbo.Code;
CREATE TABLE dbo.Products
(
[description] VARCHAR(1000) NULL,
price DECIMAL(10,2) NOT NULL,
stock INT NOT NULL
);
CREATE TABLE dbo.Inventory
(
icode INT NOT NULL,
[description] VARCHAR(1000) NULL,
price DECIMAL(10,2) NOT NULL,
stock INT NOT NULL
);
CREATE TABLE dbo.Code(icode INT NOT NULL);
INSERT dbo.Inventory
VALUES (10,'',20.10,3),(11,'',40.10,3),(11,'',25.23,3),(11,'',55.23,3),(12,'',50.23,3),
(15,'',33.10,3),(15,'',19.16,5),(18,'',75.00,3),(21,'',88.00,3),(21,'',100.99,3);
CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX uq_inventory ON dbo.Inventory(icode);
The function:
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.fnInventory(#code INT)
RETURNS TABLE AS RETURN
SELECT i.[description], i.price, i.stock
FROM dbo.Inventory I
WHERE I.icode = #code;
USE:
DECLARE #code TABLE (icode INT);
INSERT #code VALUES (10),(11);
SELECT f.[description], f.price, f.stock
FROM #code AS c
CROSS APPLY dbo.fnInventory(c.icode) AS f;
Results:
description price stock
-------------- -------- -----------
20.10 3
40.10 3
Updated Proc (note my comments):
ALTER PROC dbo.MyInsertSP -- (1) Lose the input param
AS
-- (2) Code that populates the "code" table
INSERT dbo.Code VALUES (10),(11);
-- (3) Use CROSS APPLY to pass the values from dbo.code to your function
INSERT dbo.Products ([description], price, stock)
SELECT f.[description], f.price, f.stock
FROM dbo.code AS c
CROSS APPLY dbo.fnInventory(c.icode) AS f;
This ^^^ is how it's done.

Join 2 sets based on default order

How do I join 2 sets of records solely based on the default order?
So if I have a table x(col(1,2,3,4,5,6,7)) and another table z(col(a,b,c,d,e,f,g))
it will return
c1 c2
-- --
1 a
2 b
3 c
4 d
5 e
6 f
7 g
Actually, I wanted to join a pair of one dimensional arrays from parameters and treat them like columns from a table.
Sample code:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION "Test"(timestamp without time zone[],
timestamp without time zone[])
RETURNS refcursor AS
$BODY$
DECLARE
curr refcursor;
BEGIN
OPEN curr FOR
SELECT DISTINCT "Start" AS x, "End" AS y, COUNT("A"."id")
FROM UNNEST($1) "Start"
INNER JOIN
(
SELECT "End", ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY ("End")) rn
FROM UNNEST($2) "End" ORDER BY ("End")
) "End" ON ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY ("Start")) = "End".rn
LEFT JOIN "A" ON ("A"."date" BETWEEN x AND y)
GROUP BY 1,2
ORDER BY "Start";
return curr;
END
$BODY$
Now, to answer the real question that was revealed in comments, which appears to be something like:
Given two arrays 'a' and 'b', how do I pair up their elements so I can get the element pairs as column aliases in a query?
There are a couple of ways to tackle this:
If and only if the arrays are of equal length, use multiple unnest functions in the SELECT clause (a deprecated approach that should only be used for backward compatibility);
Use generate_subscripts to loop over the arrays;
Use generate_series over subqueries against array_lower and array_upper to emulate generate_subscripts if you need to support versions too old to have generate_subscripts;
Relying on the order that unnest returns tuples in and hoping - like in my other answer and as shown below. It'll work, but it's not guaranteed to work in future versions.
Use the WITH ORDINALITY functionality added in PostgreSQL 9.4 (see also its first posting) to get a row number for unnest when 9.4 comes out.
Use multiple-array UNNEST, which is SQL-standard but which PostgreSQL doesn't support yet.
So, say we have function arraypair with array parameters a and b:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION arraypair (a integer[], b text[])
RETURNS TABLE (col_a integer, col_b text) AS $$
-- blah code here blah
$$ LANGUAGE whatever IMMUTABLE;
and it's invoked as:
SELECT * FROM arraypair( ARRAY[1,2,3,4,5,6,7], ARRAY['a','b','c','d','e','f','g'] );
possible function definitions would be:
SRF-in-SELECT (deprecated)
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION arraypair (a integer[], b text[])
RETURNS TABLE (col_a integer, col_b text) AS $$
SELECT unnest(a), unnest(b);
$$ LANGUAGE sql IMMUTABLE;
Will produce bizarre and unexpected results if the arrays aren't equal in length; see the documentation on set returning functions and their non-standard use in the SELECT list to learn why, and what exactly happens.
generate_subscripts
This is likely the safest option:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION arraypair (a integer[], b text[])
RETURNS TABLE (col_a integer, col_b text) AS $$
SELECT
a[i], b[i]
FROM generate_subscripts(CASE WHEN array_length(a,1) >= array_length(b,1) THEN a::text[] ELSE b::text[] END, 1) i;
$$ LANGUAGE sql IMMUTABLE;
If the arrays are of unequal length, as written it'll return null elements for the shorter, so it works like a full outer join. Reverse the sense of the case to get an inner-join like effect. The function assumes the arrays are one-dimensional and that they start at index 1. If an entire array argument is NULL then the function returns NULL.
A more generalized version would be written in PL/PgSQL and would check array_ndims(a) = 1, check array_lower(a, 1) = 1, test for null arrays, etc. I'll leave that to you.
Hoping for pair-wise returns:
This isn't guaranteed to work, but does with PostgreSQL's current query executor:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION arraypair (a integer[], b text[])
RETURNS TABLE (col_a integer, col_b text) AS $$
WITH
rn_c1(rn, col) AS (
SELECT row_number() OVER (), c1.col
FROM unnest(a) c1(col)
),
rn_c2(rn, col) AS (
SELECT row_number() OVER (), c2.col
FROM unnest(b) c2(col)
)
SELECT
rn_c1.col AS c1,
rn_c2.col AS c2
FROM rn_c1
INNER JOIN rn_c2 ON (rn_c1.rn = rn_c2.rn);
$$ LANGUAGE sql IMMUTABLE;
I would consider using generate_subscripts much safer.
Multi-argument unnest:
This should work, but doesn't because PostgreSQL's unnest doesn't accept multiple input arrays (yet):
SELECT * FROM unnest(a,b);
select x.c1, z.c2
from
x
inner join
(
select
c2,
row_number() over(order by c2) rn
from z
order by c2
) z on x.c1 = z.rn
order by x.c1
If x.c1 is not 1,2,3... you can do the same that was done with z
The middle order by is not necessary as pointed by Erwin. I tested it like this:
create table t (i integer);
insert into t
select ceil(random() * 100000)
from generate_series(1, 100000);
select
i,
row_number() over(order by i) rn
from t
;
And i comes out ordered. Before this simple test which I never executed I though it would be possible that the rows would be numbered in any order.
By "default order" it sounds like you probably mean the order in which the rows are returned by select * from tablename without an ORDER BY.
If so, this ordering is undefined. The database can return rows in any order that it feels like. You'll find that if you UPDATE a row, it probably moves to a different position in the table.
If you're stuck in a situation where you assumed tables had an order and they don't, you can as a recovery option add a row number based on the on-disk ordering of the tuples within the table:
select row_number() OVER (), *
from the_table
order by ctid
If the output looks right, I recommend that you CREATE TABLE a new table with an extra field, then do an INSERT INTO ... SELECT to insert the data ordered by ctid, then ALTER TABLE ... RENAME the tables and finally fix any foreign key references so they point to the new table.
ctid can be changed by autovacuum, UPDATE, CLUSTER, etc, so it is not something you should ever be using in applications. I'm using it here only because it sounds like you don't have any real ordering or identifier key.
If you need to pair up rows based on their on-disk ordering (an unreliable and unsafe thing to do as noted above), you could per this SQLFiddle try:
WITH
rn_c1(rn, col) AS (
SELECT row_number() OVER (ORDER BY ctid), c1.col
FROM c1
),
rn_c2(rn, col) AS (
SELECT row_number() OVER (ORDER BY ctid), c2.col
FROM c2
)
SELECT
rn_c1.col AS c1,
rn_c2.col AS c2
FROM rn_c1
INNER JOIN rn_c2 ON (rn_c1.rn = rn_c2.rn);
but never rely on this in a production app. If you're really stuck you can use this with CREATE TABLE AS to construct a new table that you can start with when you're working on recovering data from a DB that lacks a required key, but that's about it.
The same approach given above might work with an empty window clause () instead of (ORDER BY ctid) when using sets that lack a ctid, like interim results from functions. It's even less safe then though, and should be a matter of last resort only.
(See also this newer related answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/17762282/398670)

Get row to swap tables on a certain condition

I currently have a parent table:
CREATE TABLE members (
member_id SERIAL NOT NULL, UNIQUE, PRIMARY KEY
first_name varchar(20)
last_name varchar(20)
address address (composite type)
contact_numbers varchar(11)[3]
date_joined date
type varchar(5)
);
and two related tables:
CREATE TABLE basic_member (
activities varchar[3])
INHERITS (members)
);
CREATE TABLE full_member (
activities varchar[])
INHERITS (members)
);
If the type is full the details are entered to the full_member table or if type is basic into the basic_member table. What I want is that if I run an update and change the type to basic or full the tuple goes into the corresponding table.
I was wondering if I could do this with a rule like:
CREATE RULE tuple_swap_full
AS ON UPDATE TO full_member
WHERE new.type = 'basic'
INSERT INTO basic_member VALUES (old.member_id, old.first_name, old.last_name,
old.address, old.contact_numbers, old.date_joined, new.type, old.activities);
... then delete the record from the full_member
Just wondering if my rule is anywhere near or if there is a better way.
You don't need
member_id SERIAL NOT NULL, UNIQUE, PRIMARY KEY
A PRIMARY KEY implies UNIQUE NOT NULL automatically:
member_id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY
I wouldn't use hard coded max length of varchar(20). Just use text and add a check constraint if you really must enforce a maximum length. Easier to change around.
Syntax for INHERITS is mangled. The key word goes outside the parens around columns.
CREATE TABLE full_member (
activities text[]
) INHERITS (members);
Table names are inconsistent (members <-> member). I use the singular form everywhere in my test case.
Finally, I would not use a RULE for the task. A trigger AFTER UPDATE seems preferable.
Consider the following
Test case:
Tables:
CREATE SCHEMA x; -- I put everything in a test schema named "x".
-- DROP TABLE x.members CASCADE;
CREATE TABLE x.member (
member_id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY
,first_name text
-- more columns ...
,type text);
CREATE TABLE x.basic_member (
activities text[3]
) INHERITS (x.member);
CREATE TABLE x.full_member (
activities text[]
) INHERITS (x.member);
Trigger function:
Data-modifying CTEs (WITH x AS ( DELETE ..) are the best tool for the purpose. Requires PostgreSQL 9.1 or later.
For older versions, first INSERT then DELETE.
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION x.trg_move_member()
RETURNS trigger AS
$BODY$
BEGIN
CASE NEW.type
WHEN 'basic' THEN
WITH x AS (
DELETE FROM x.member
WHERE member_id = NEW.member_id
RETURNING *
)
INSERT INTO x.basic_member (member_id, first_name, type) -- more columns
SELECT member_id, first_name, type -- more columns
FROM x;
WHEN 'full' THEN
WITH x AS (
DELETE FROM x.member
WHERE member_id = NEW.member_id
RETURNING *
)
INSERT INTO x.full_member (member_id, first_name, type) -- more columns
SELECT member_id, first_name, type -- more columns
FROM x;
END CASE;
RETURN NULL;
END;
$BODY$
LANGUAGE plpgsql VOLATILE;
Trigger:
Note that it is an AFTER trigger and has a WHEN condition.
WHEN condition requires PostgreSQL 9.0 or later. For earlier versions, you can just leave it away, the CASE statement in the trigger itself takes care of it.
CREATE TRIGGER up_aft
AFTER UPDATE
ON x.member
FOR EACH ROW
WHEN (NEW.type IN ('basic ','full')) -- OLD.type cannot be IN ('basic ','full')
EXECUTE PROCEDURE x.trg_move_member();
Test:
INSERT INTO x.member (first_name, type) VALUES ('peter', NULL);
UPDATE x.member SET type = 'full' WHERE first_name = 'peter';
SELECT * FROM ONLY x.member;
SELECT * FROM x.basic_member;
SELECT * FROM x.full_member;

Ordering a query on a field in a return record

I've got a query that calls a function in its select clause. The function returns a record type. In the calling query, I want to order by one of the fields in the returned record and if possible I'd also like to return the fields of the record as fields of the calling query. To make this clear, here's a simplified version of the code:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION getStatus(lastContact timestamptz, lastAlTime timestamptz, lastGps timestamptz, out status varchar, out toelichting varchar, out colorLevel integer)
RETURNS record AS
$BODY$
BEGIN
status := 'controle_status_ok';
toelichting := '';
colorLevel := 3;
END
$BODY$
LANGUAGE 'plpgsql' VOLATILE
COST 100;
ALTER FUNCTION DMI_Controle_getStatus(timestamptz, timestamptz, timestamptz, out varchar, out varchar, out integer) OWNER TO xyz;
Using this function, I want to have a query like this one:
SELECT
id,
name,
getStatus(tabel3.lastcontact, tabel4.lastchanged, tabel5.lastfound) as status
FROM
tabel1
left join tabel2 on ...
left join tabel3 on ...
left join tabel4 on ...
left join tabel5 on ...
ORDER BY
status
Postgres comes with the following error:
ERROR: could not identify an ordering operator for type record
HINT: Use an explicit ordering operator or modify the query.
The question: how should I order by the value of colorLevel that's been returned by getStatus?
Additional question: can I return the three fields of the getStatus function at fields of the query that calls the getStatus function?
Use
ORDER BY (status).colorlevel
to reference a column of your record type.
As an aside: I used lower case(colorlevel instead of colorLevel) because identifiers are cast to lower case if not double-quoted anyway, and using mixed case identifiers is generally a bad idea in PostgreSQL.
As to your additional question, similar syntax requirement. I also use a subquery to optimize the query:
SELECT id
, name
, (x.status).status
, (x.status).toelichting
, (x.status).colorLevel
FROM tabel
, (SELECT getStatus(now(), now(), now()) as status) x
ORDER BY (x.status).colorlevel
Read about accessing composite types in the manual.
Answer after additional input
To use columns from your tables, put it all in the a subquery. I am trying to avoid to call the function multiple times, because that may be expensive.
SELECT
id,
name,
(status).status,
(status).toelichting,
(status).colorLevel
FROM (
SELECT
id,
name,
getStatus(tabel3.lastcontact, tabel4.lastchanged, tabel5.lastfound) as status
FROM
tabel1
left join tabel2 on ...
left join tabel3 on ...
left join tabel4 on ...
left join tabel5 on ...
) x
ORDER BY
(status).colorlevel

Categories