I have two databases in the same sql instance. One is backup2 which is a restored backup of my original database.
Database Table
Original.Payments
Backup2.Payments
I have two fields in each that I need to compare:
PaymentsId - guid
IsProcessed - bit
I need to compare the PaymentsId in each and if the payment exists in Backup2 and is marked Processed, I need to mark the Original.Payments.Backup as true.
I have the first part of the query done but I'm not sure how to link it to the Original database:
SELECT [PaymentId]
,[CorporationId]
,[IsProcessed]
FROM [Backup2].[Web].[Payment]
WHERE CorporationId = '2aa2dfw-20d2-4694-8e01-72288a1e8d4'
and IsProcessed = 'true'
This gives me my list of payments but I need to compare those to the original database and I'm not sure how.
Where do I go from here?
Thank you!
you can use update with join syntax
update OP
set IsProcessed = 'true'
FROM [Original].[Payments].[Backup] OP
JOIN [Backup2].[Web].[Payment] BP
on OP.PaymentId = BP.PaymentId
and BP.corporationId = '2aa2dfw-20d2-4694-8e01-72288a1e8d4'
and BP.IsProcessed ='true'
and OP.corporationId = '2aa2dfw-20d2-4694-8e01-72288a1e8d4'
This should be a start
SELECT [p1].[PaymentId]
,[p1].[CorporationId]
,[p1].[IsProcessed]
FROM [Backup2].[Web].[Payment] as [p1]
JOIN [Original].[Web].[Payment] as [p2]
on [p2].[CorporationId] = [p1].[CorporationId]
AND [p2].[PaymentId] = [p1].[PaymentId]
AND [p1].[CorporationId] = '2aa2dfw-20d2-4694-8e01-72288a1e8d4'
and [p1].[IsProcessed =]'true'
Related
I'm sure this could be a duplicate but I can't seem to find the right search phrase.
Given a table in a named schema (i.e. not dbo) requires you include the schema name in the statement. So previously I'd have simply written it as so:
UPDATE [Schema].[Table1]
SET [AColumn] =
(
SELECT [SomeColumn]
FROM [Schema].[Table2]
WHERE [Schema].[Table2].[SameColumnName] = [Schema].[Table1].[SameColumnName]
);
But since More than two-part column name is deprecated, I need to find a new way to do this which is future proof. I have come up with 2 options, firstly using an alias:
UPDATE [Alias1]
SET [AColumn] =
(
SELECT [SomeColumn]
FROM [Schema].[Table2] [Alias2]
WHERE [Alias2].[SameColumnName] = [Alias1].[SameColumnName]
)
FROM [Schema].[Table1] [Alias1];
The second way is the one I'm really having trouble finding out if it's truly VALID T-Sql:
UPDATE [Schema].[Table1]
SET [AColumn] =
(
SELECT [SomeColumn]
FROM [Schema].[Table2]
WHERE [Table2].[SameColumnName] = [Table1].[SameColumnName]
);
I have tested both and they work, so my question is, is the second completely valid and normal to use just the table name without the Schema in this sense or should I rather opt for the slightly more verbose Alias?
As I said in my comment, alias your objects.
SELECT MT.MyColumn,
YT.MyColumn
FROM dbo.MyTable MT
JOIN so.YourTable YT ON MT.ID = YT.fID
WHERE YT.[name] = N'Jane';
If you're performing an UPDATE, then specify the alias of the object to Update:
UPDATE MT
SET MyColumn = YT.MyColumn --Column on the left side of the SET will always reference the table being updated
FROM dbo.MyTable MT
JOIN so.YourTable YT ON MT.ID = YT.fID
WHERE YT.[name] = N'Jane';
I've two tables. And I need two fields to update.
they are connected to each other with a foreign key. I would like to update the fields found in these two tables by using my inner join.
UPDATE cert
SET cert.status = 1, doc.status = 1
FROM certificates cert
INNER JOIN documents doc ON doc.data_id = cert.certificate_id
WHERE cert.status = 0 AND cert.user_id = _expert_id AND doc.data_type = 'CERTIFICATE';
The code I mentioned above allows me to update the status field in the certificates table only. In addition, I would like to update the field in the documents table
Maybe this helps:
demo:db<>fiddle
WITH cert_update AS (
UPDATE certificates cert
SET status = 1
FROM documents doc
WHERE doc.data_id = cert.certificate_id
AND cert.status = 0
AND cert.user_id = '2' -- your "_expert_id"
AND doc.data_type = 'CERTIFICATE'
RETURNING certificate_id
)
UPDATE documents doc
SET status = 1
FROM cert_update cert
WHERE doc.data_id = cert.certificate_id
AND doc.data_type = 'CERTIFICATE';
Using the WITH clause (CTE) you are able to do several updates in one query. The first one gives back the updated certificate_id which can be used in the second query.
I have the following code in Postgres
select op.url from identity.legal_entity le
join identity.profile op on le.legal_entity_id =op.legal_entity_id
where op.global_id = '8wyvr9wkd7kpg1n0q4klhkc4g'
which returns 1 row.
Then I try to update the url field with the following:
update identity.profile
set url = 'htpp:sam'
where identity.profile.url in (
select op.url from identity.legal_entity le
join identity.profile op on le.legal_entity_id =op.legal_entity_id
where global_id = '8wyvr9wkd7kpg1n0q4klhkc4g'
);
But the above ends up updating more than 1 row, actually all of the rows of the identity table.
I would assume since the first postgres statement returns one row, only one row at most can be updated, but I am getting the wrong effect where all of the rows are being updated. Why ?? Please help a nubie fix the above update statement.
Instead of using profile.url to identify the row you want to update, use the primary key. That is what it is there for.
So if the primary key column is called id, the statement could be modified to:
UPDATE identity.profile
SET ...
WHERE identity.profile.id IN (SELECT op.id FROM ...);
But you can do this much simpler in PostgreSQL with
UPDATE identity.profile op
SET url = 'htpp:sam'
FROM identity.legal_entity le
WHERE le.legal_entity_id = op.legal_entity_id
AND le.global_id = '8wyvr9wkd7kpg1n0q4klhkc4g';
I'm using Flask-SQLAlchemy with PostgreSQL. I have the following two models:
class Course(db.Model):
id = db.Column(db.Integer, primary_key = True )
course_name =db.Column(db.String(120))
course_description = db.Column(db.Text)
course_reviews = db.relationship('Review', backref ='course', lazy ='dynamic')
class Review(db.Model):
__table_args__ = ( db.UniqueConstraint('course_id', 'user_id'), { } )
id = db.Column(db.Integer, primary_key = True )
review_date = db.Column(db.DateTime)#default=db.func.now()
review_comment = db.Column(db.Text)
rating = db.Column(db.SmallInteger)
course_id = db.Column(db.Integer, db.ForeignKey('course.id') )
user_id = db.Column(db.Integer, db.ForeignKey('user.id') )
I want to select the courses that are most reviewed starting with at least two reviews. The following SQLAlchemy query worked fine with SQlite:
most_rated_courses = db.session.query(models.Review, func.count(models.Review.course_id)).group_by(models.Review.course_id).\
having(func.count(models.Review.course_id) >1) \ .order_by(func.count(models.Review.course_id).desc()).all()
But when I switched to PostgreSQL in production it gives me the following error:
ProgrammingError: (ProgrammingError) column "review.id" must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used in an aggregate function
LINE 1: SELECT review.id AS review_id, review.review_date AS review_...
^
'SELECT review.id AS review_id, review.review_date AS review_review_date, review.review_comment AS review_review_comment, review.rating AS review_rating, review.course_id AS review_course_id, review.user_id AS review_user_id, count(review.course_id) AS count_1 \nFROM review GROUP BY review.course_id \nHAVING count(review.course_id) > %(count_2)s ORDER BY count(review.course_id) DESC' {'count_2': 1}
I tried to fix the query by adding models.Review in the GROUP BY clause but it did not work:
most_rated_courses = db.session.query(models.Review, func.count(models.Review.course_id)).group_by(models.Review.course_id).\
having(func.count(models.Review.course_id) >1) \.order_by(func.count(models.Review.course_id).desc()).all()
Can anyone please help me with this issue. Thanks a lot
SQLite and MySQL both have the behavior that they allow a query that has aggregates (like count()) without applying GROUP BY to all other columns - which in terms of standard SQL is invalid, because if more than one row is present in that aggregated group, it has to pick the first one it sees for return, which is essentially random.
So your query for Review basically returns to you the first "Review" row for each distinct course id - like for course id 3, if you had seven "Review" rows, it's just choosing an essentially random "Review" row within the group of "course_id=3". I gather the answer you really want, "Course", is available here because you can take that semi-randomly selected Review object and just call ".course" on it, giving you the correct Course, but this is a backwards way to go.
But once you get on a proper database like Postgresql you need to use correct SQL. The data you need from the "review" table is just the course_id and the count, nothing else, so query just for that (first assume we don't actually need to display the counts, that's in a minute):
most_rated_course_ids = session.query(
Review.course_id,
).\
group_by(Review.course_id).\
having(func.count(Review.course_id) > 1).\
order_by(func.count(Review.course_id).desc()).\
all()
but that's not your Course object - you want to take that list of ids and apply it to the course table. We first need to keep our list of course ids as a SQL construct, instead of loading the data - that is, turn it into a derived table by converting the query into a subquery (change the word .all() to .subquery()):
most_rated_course_id_subquery = session.query(
Review.course_id,
).\
group_by(Review.course_id).\
having(func.count(Review.course_id) > 1).\
order_by(func.count(Review.course_id).desc()).\
subquery()
one simple way to link that to Course is to use an IN:
courses = session.query(Course).filter(
Course.id.in_(most_rated_course_id_subquery)).all()
but that's essentially going to throw away the "ORDER BY" you're looking for and also doesn't give us any nice way of actually reporting on those counts along with the course results. We need to have that count along with our Course so that we can report it and also order by it. For this we use a JOIN from the "course" table to our derived table. SQLAlchemy is smart enough to know to join on the "course_id" foreign key if we just call join():
courses = session.query(Course).join(most_rated_course_id_subquery).all()
then to get at the count, we need to add that to the columns returned by our subquery along with a label so we can refer to it:
most_rated_course_id_subquery = session.query(
Review.course_id,
func.count(Review.course_id).label("count")
).\
group_by(Review.course_id).\
having(func.count(Review.course_id) > 1).\
subquery()
courses = session.query(
Course, most_rated_course_id_subquery.c.count
).join(
most_rated_course_id_subquery
).order_by(
most_rated_course_id_subquery.c.count.desc()
).all()
A great article I like to point out to people about GROUP BY and this kind of query is SQL GROUP BY techniques which points out the common need for the "select from A join to (subquery of B with aggregate/GROUP BY)" pattern.
I am attempting to update a boolean column in one table based upon the values in a second.
UPDATE channels
SET contains_photos = TRUE
WHERE id IN (SELECT unnest(ancestors)
FROM channel_tree WHERE id = 11329);
The channel_tree.ancestors column contains an array of channel IDs. The above is failing with the following error:
ERROR: cannot TRUNCATE "channel_tree" because it is being used by active queries in this session
The overriding goal is to set the contains_photos column to true for all ancestors of a given channel. Any one know how best to alleviate this error, or even an alternative solution?
No idea why your error says TRUNCATE. It sounds like you have a trigger or rule that is doing a truncate that we can't see.
Here's some alternative ways of doing that same query:
UPDATE channels
SET contains_photos = TRUE
WHERE id = ANY (SELECT ancestors
FROM channel_tree WHERE id = 11329);
Or with a join:
UPDATE channels
SET contains_photos = TRUE
FROM channel_tree
WHERE channels.id = ANY (channel_tree.ancestors)
AND channel_tree.id = 11329;