Should we use DBI bind or place holder for one parameter - perl

I have a sql query like below
select id from table where name like 'somename';
Now there's only one record for this in db. Now with bind, sql query goes as below
my $sth = $dbh->prepare("select id from table where name=?");
$sth->execute('somename');
.... # fetch single row from array
So which one is better? with bind or without for single row?


Yes. Reason is very simple - using placeholders is good idea, and using it even for single argument makes it good practice. After some time, your hands will use placeholders even without thinking about it.

Related

ormlite select count(*) as typeCount group by type

I want to do something like this in OrmLite
SELECT *, COUNT(title) as titleCount from table1 group by title;
Is there any way to do this via QueryBuilder without the need for queryRaw?

The documentation states that the use of COUNT() and the like necessitates the use of selectRaw(). I hoped for a way around this - not having to write my SQL as strings is the main reason I chose to use ORMLite.
http://ormlite.com/docs/query-builder
selectRaw(String... columns):
Add raw columns or aggregate functions
(COUNT, MAX, ...) to the query. This will turn the query into
something only suitable for using as a raw query. This can be called
multiple times to add more columns to select. See section Issuing Raw
Queries.
Further information on the use of selectRaw() as I was attempting much the same thing:
Documentation states that if you use selectRaw() it will "turn the query into" one that is supposed to be called by queryRaw().
What it does not explain is that normally while multiple calls to selectColumns() or selectRaw() are valid (if you exclusively use one or the other),
use of selectRaw() after selectColumns() has a 'hidden' side-effect of wiping out any selectColumns() you called previously.
I believe that the ORMLite documentation for selectRaw() would be improved by a note that its use is not intended to be mixed with selectColumns().
QueryBuilder<EmailMessage, String> qb = emailDao.queryBuilder();
qb.selectColumns("emailAddress"); // This column is not selected due to later use of selectRaw()!
qb.selectRaw("COUNT (emailAddress)");
ORMLite examples are not as plentiful as I'd like, so here is a complete example of something that works:
QueryBuilder<EmailMessage, String> qb = emailDao.queryBuilder();
qb.selectRaw("emailAddress"); // This can also be done with a single call to selectRaw()
qb.selectRaw("COUNT (emailAddress)");
qb.groupBy("emailAddress");
GenericRawResults<String[]> rawResults = qb.queryRaw(); // Returns results with two columns

Is there any way to do this via QueryBuilder without the need for queryRaw(...)?
The short answer is no because ORMLite wouldn't know what to do with the extra count value. If you had a Table1 entity with a DAO definition, what field would the COUNT(title) go into? Raw queries give you the power to select various fields but then you need to process the results.
With the code right now (v5.1), you can define a custom RawRowMapper and then use the dao.getRawRowMapper() method to process the results for Table1 and tack on the titleCount field by hand.
I've got an idea how to accomplish this in a better way in ORMLite. I'll look into it.

Changed property value when selecting in EF4

I need to change the value of a property when I query the database using EF4. I have a company code that gets returned and I need to translate it to another company code, if needed. So, there is a stored procedure that is used to do this currently. Here's the old select statement.
SELECT companyName, TranslateCompanyCode(companyCode) as newCompanyCode FROM companyTable where companyCode = 'AA';
TranslateCompanyCode is the stored proc that does the translation. I'd like to do this in my new code when needed. I think I might need to use a Model-Defined Function. Anyone know how I can do this?

For your scenario, I would use a JOIN. Model-defined functions are cool when you need to perform a quick function on a value (particularly without an additional query). From a performance standpoint, a JOIN will be faster and more efficient than trying to put the sub-query in a model-defined function - particularly if you are selecting more than 1 row at a time.
However, if you do still want to use Model defined functions, then this example should point you in the right direction as to how to run a query within the function. This implementation will also be more complex than just using a join but is an alternative.

TSql Lookup function

I have a bunch of dimension tables that have unique ID and Name fields. I need a T-SQL function that returns an ID when passed a table name and a value for the name field.
I'm guessing the function would build a little query then execute it? Performance isn't an issue since this is a one time ETL thing.

Sounds like you want a scalar user defined function
There's a lot of other ways to do it though, and udf's certainly can have some perfomance issues.

Using table names as parameters in t-sql (eg from #tblname)

Is it possible to use the name of a table as a parameter in t-sql?
I want to insert data into a table, but I want one method in C# which has a parameter for the table.
Is this a good approach? I think if I have one form and I am choosing the table and fields to insert data into, I am essentially looking to write my own dynamic sql query built on the fly. This is another thing altogether which I am sure has its catches?
Thanks

Not directly. The only way to do this is through dynamic SQL - either EXEC or sp_ExecuteSQL. The latter has the advantage of query cache/re-use, and avoiding injection via parameters for the values - but you will have to concatenate the table-name itself into the query (you can't parameterise it), so be sure to white-list it against a list of known-good table names.

Parameterized SQL Columns?

I have some code which utilizes parameterized queries to prevent against injection, but I also need to be able to dynamically construct the query regardless of the structure of the table. What is the proper way to do this?
Here's an example, say I have a table with columns Name, Address, Telephone. I have a web page where I run Show Columns and populate a select drop-down with them as options.
Next, I have a textbox called Search. This textbox is used as the parameter.
Currently my code looks something like this:
result = pquery('SELECT * FROM contacts WHERE `' + escape(column) + '`=?', search);
I get an icky feeling from it though. The reason I'm using parameterized queries is to avoid using escape. Also, escape is likely not designed for escaping column names.
How can I make sure this works the way I intend?
Edit:
The reason I require dynamic queries is that the schema is user-configurable, and I will not be around to fix anything hard-coded.

Instead of passing the column names, just pass an identifier that you code will translate to a column name using a hardcoded table. This means you don't need to worry about malicious data being passed, since all the data is either translated legally, or is known to be invalid. Psudoish code:
#columns = qw/Name Address Telephone/;
if ($columns[$param]) {
$query = "select * from contacts where $columns[$param] = ?";
} else {
die "Invalid column!";
}
run_sql($query, $search);

The trick is to be confident in your escaping and validating routines. I use my own SQL escape function that is overloaded for literals of different types. Nowhere do I insert expressions (as opposed to quoted literal values) directly from user input.
Still, it can be done, I recommend a separate — and strict — function for validating the column name. Allow it to accept only a single identifier, something like
/^\w[\w\d_]*$/
You'll have to rely on assumptions you can make about your own column names.

I use ADO.NET and the use of SQL Commands and SQLParameters to those commands which take care of the Escape problem. So if you are in a Microsoft-tool environment as well, I can say that I use this very sucesfully to build dynamic SQL and yet protect my parameters
best of luck

Make the column based on the results of another query to a table that enumerates the possible schema values. In that second query you can hardcode the select to the column name that is used to define the schema. if no rows are returned then the entered column is invalid.

In standard SQL, you enclose delimited identifiers in double quotes. This means that:
SELECT * FROM "SomeTable" WHERE "SomeColumn" = ?
will select from a table called SomeTable with the shown capitalization (not a case-converted version of the name), and will apply a condition to a column called SomeColumn with the shown capitalization.
Of itself, that's not very helpful, but...if you can apply the escape() technique with double quotes to the names entered via your web form, then you can build up your query reasonably confidently.
Of course, you said you wanted to avoid using escape - and indeed you don't have to use it on the parameters where you provide the ? place-holders. But where you are putting user-provided data into the query, you need to protect yourself from malicious people.
Different DBMS have different ways of providing delimited identifiers. MS SQL Server, for instance, seems to use square brackets [SomeTable] instead of double quotes.

Column names in some databases can contain spaces, which mean you'd have to quote the column name, but if your database contains no such columns, just run the column name through a regular expression or some sort of check before splicing into the SQL:
if ( $column !~ /^\w+$/ ) {
die "Bad column name [$column]";
}