ّ am trying to insert multiple records got from the join table to another table user_to_property. In the user_to_property table user_to_property_id is primary, not null it is not autoincrementing. So I am trying to add user_to_property_id manually by an increment of 1.
WITH selectedData AS
( -- selection of the data that needs to be inserted
SELECT t2.user_id as userId
FROM property_lines t1
INNER JOIN user t2 ON t1.account_id = t2.account_id
)
INSERT INTO user_to_property (user_to_property_id, user_id, property_id, created_date)
VALUES ((SELECT MAX( user_to_property_id )+1 FROM user_to_property),(SELECT
selectedData.userId
FROM selectedData),3,now());
The above query gives me the below error:
ERROR: more than one row returned by a subquery used as an expression
How to insert multiple records to a table from the join of other tables? where the user_to_property table contains a unique record for the same user-id and property_id there should be only 1 record.
Typically for Insert you use either values or select. The structure values( select...) often (generally?) just causes more trouble than it worth, and it is never necessary. You can always select a constant or an expression. In this case convert to just select. For generating your ID get the max value from your table and then just add the row_number that you are inserting: (see demo)
insert into user_to_property(user_to_property_id
, user_id
, property_id
, created
)
with start_with(current_max_id) as
( select max(user_to_property_id) from user_to_property )
select current_max_id + id_incr, user_id, 3, now()
from (
select t2.user_id, row_number() over() id_incr
from property_lines t1
join users t2 on t1.account_id = t2.account_id
) js
join start_with on true;
A couple notes:
DO NOT use user for table name, or any other object name. It is a
documented reserved word by both Postgres and SQL standard (and has
been since Postgres v7.1 and the SQL 92 Standard at lest).
You really should create another column or change the column type
user_to_property_id to auto-generated. Using Max()+1, or
anything based on that idea, is a virtual guarantee you will generate
duplicate keys. Much to the amusement of users and developers alike.
What happens in an MVCC when 2 users run the query concurrently.
Is it possible to add a new column to an existing table from another table using insert or update in conjunction with full outer join .
In my main table i am missing some records in one column in the other table i have all those records i want to take the full record set into the maintable table. Something like this;
UPDATE maintable
SET all_records= othertable.records
FROM
FULL JOIN othertable on maintable.col = othertable.records;
Where maintable.col has same id a othertable.records.
I know i could simply join the tables but i have a lot of comments in the maintable i don't want to have to copy paste back in if possible. As i understand using where is equivalent of a left join so won't show me what i'm missing
EDIT:
What i want is effectively a new maintable.col with all the records i can then pare down based on presence of records in other cols from other tables
Try this:
UPDATE maintable
SET all_records = o.records
FROM othertable o
WHERE maintable.col = o.records;
This is the general syntax to use in postgres when updating via a join.
HTH
EDIT
BTW you will need to change this - I used your example, but you are updating the maintable with the column used for the join! Your set needs to be something like SET missingcol = o.extracol
AMENDED GENERALISED ANSWER (following off-line chat)
To take a simplified example, suppose that you have two tables maintable and subtable, each with the same columns, but where the subtable has extra records. For both tables id is the primary key. To fill maintable with the missing records, for pre 9.5 versions of Postgres you must use the following syntax:
INSERT INTO maintable (SELECT * FROM subtable s WHERE NOT EXISTS
(SELECT 1 FROM maintable m WHERE m.id = s.id));
Since 9.5 there is a (preferred) alternative:
INSERT INTO maintable (SELECT * FROM subtable) ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING;
This is preferred because (apart from being simpler) it avoids the situation that has been known to arise in the former, where a race condition is created between the INSERT and the sub-SELECT.
Obviously when the columns are different, you need to specify in the INSERT statement which columns are inserted from which. Something like:
INSERT INTO maintable (id, ColA, ColB)
(SELECT id, ColE, ColG FROM subtable ....)
Similarly the common field might not be id in both tables. However, the simplified example should be enough to point you in the right direction.
I have a table in a PostgreSQL 8.3.8 database, which has no keys/constraints on it, and has multiple rows with exactly the same values.
I would like to remove all duplicates and keep only 1 copy of each row.
There is one column in particular (named "key") which may be used to identify duplicates, i.e. there should only exist one entry for each distinct "key".
How can I do this? (Ideally, with a single SQL command.)
Speed is not a problem in this case (there are only a few rows).
A faster solution is
DELETE FROM dups a USING (
SELECT MIN(ctid) as ctid, key
FROM dups
GROUP BY key HAVING COUNT(*) > 1
) b
WHERE a.key = b.key
AND a.ctid <> b.ctid
DELETE FROM dupes a
WHERE a.ctid <> (SELECT min(b.ctid)
FROM dupes b
WHERE a.key = b.key);
This is fast and concise:
DELETE FROM dupes T1
USING dupes T2
WHERE T1.ctid < T2.ctid -- delete the older versions
AND T1.key = T2.key; -- add more columns if needed
See also my answer at How to delete duplicate rows without unique identifier which includes more information.
EXISTS is simple and among the fastest for most data distributions:
DELETE FROM dupes d
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT FROM dupes
WHERE key = d.key
AND ctid < d.ctid
);
From each set of duplicate rows (defined by identical key), this keeps the one row with the minimum ctid.
Result is identical to the currently accepted answer by a_horse. Just faster, because EXISTS can stop evaluating as soon as the first offending row is found, while the alternative with min() has to consider all rows per group to compute the minimum. Speed is of no concern to this question, but why not take it?
You may want to add a UNIQUE constraint after cleaning up, to prevent duplicates from creeping back in:
ALTER TABLE dupes ADD CONSTRAINT constraint_name_here UNIQUE (key);
About the system column ctid:
Is the system column “ctid” legitimate for identifying rows to delete?
If there is any other column defined UNIQUE NOT NULL column in the table (like a PRIMARY KEY) then, by all means, use it instead of ctid.
If key can be NULL and you only want one of those, too, use IS NOT DISTINCT FROM instead of =. See:
How do I (or can I) SELECT DISTINCT on multiple columns?
As that's slower, you might instead run the above query as is, and this in addition:
DELETE FROM dupes d
WHERE key IS NULL
AND EXISTS (
SELECT FROM dupes
WHERE key IS NULL
AND ctid < d.ctid
);
And consider:
Create unique constraint with null columns
For small tables, indexes generally do not help performance. And we need not look further.
For big tables and few duplicates, an existing index on (key) can help (a lot).
For mostly duplicates, an index may add more cost than benefit, as it has to be kept up to date concurrently. Finding duplicates without index becomes faster anyway because there are so many and EXISTS only needs to find one. But consider a completely different approach if you can afford it (i.e. concurrent access allows it): Write the few surviving rows to a new table. That also removes table (and index) bloat in the process. See:
How to delete duplicate entries?
I tried this:
DELETE FROM tablename
WHERE id IN (SELECT id
FROM (SELECT id,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (partition BY column1, column2, column3 ORDER BY id) AS rnum
FROM tablename) t
WHERE t.rnum > 1);
provided by Postgres wiki:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Deleting_duplicates
I would use a temporary table:
create table tab_temp as
select distinct f1, f2, f3, fn
from tab;
Then, delete tab and rename tab_temp into tab.
I had to create my own version. Version written by #a_horse_with_no_name is way too slow on my table (21M rows). And #rapimo simply doesn't delete dups.
Here is what I use on PostgreSQL 9.5
DELETE FROM your_table
WHERE ctid IN (
SELECT unnest(array_remove(all_ctids, actid))
FROM (
SELECT
min(b.ctid) AS actid,
array_agg(ctid) AS all_ctids
FROM your_table b
GROUP BY key1, key2, key3, key4
HAVING count(*) > 1) c);
Another approach (works only if you have any unique field like id in your table) to find all unique ids by columns and remove other ids that are not in unique list
DELETE
FROM users
WHERE users.id NOT IN (SELECT DISTINCT ON (username, email) id FROM users);
Postgresql has windows function, you can use rank() to archive your goal, sample:
WITH ranked as (
SELECT
id, column1,
"rank" () OVER (
PARTITION BY column1
order by column1 asc
) AS r
FROM
table1
)
delete from table1 t1
using ranked
where t1.id = ranked.id and ranked.r > 1
Here is another solution, that worked for me.
delete from table_name a using table_name b
where a.id < b.id
and a.column1 = b.column1;
How about:
WITH
u AS (SELECT DISTINCT * FROM your_table),
x AS (DELETE FROM your_table)
INSERT INTO your_table SELECT * FROM u;
I had been concerned about execution order, would the DELETE happen before the SELECT DISTINCT, but it works fine for me.
And has the added bonus of not needing any knowledge about the table structure.
Here is a solution using PARTITION BY and the virtual ctid column, which is works like a primary key, at least within a single session:
DELETE FROM dups
USING (
SELECT
ctid,
(
ctid != min(ctid) OVER (PARTITION BY key_column1, key_column2 [...])
) AS is_duplicate
FROM dups
) dups_find_duplicates
WHERE dups.ctid == dups_find_duplicates.ctid
AND dups_find_duplicates.is_duplicate
A subquery is used to mark all rows as duplicates or not, based on whether they share the same "key columns", but not the same ctid, as the "first" one found in the "partition" of rows sharing the same keys.
In other words, "first" is defined as:
min(ctid) OVER (PARTITION BY key_column1, key_column2 [...])
Then, all rows where is_duplicate is true are deleted by their ctid.
From the documentation, ctid represents (emphasis mine):
The physical location of the row version within its table. Note that although the ctid can be used to locate the row version very quickly, a row's ctid will change if it is updated or moved by VACUUM FULL. Therefore ctid is useless as a long-term row identifier. A primary key should be used to identify logical rows.
well, none of this solution would work if the id is duplicated which is my use case, then the solution is simple:
myTable:
id name
0 value
0 value
0 value
1 value1
1 value1
create dedupMyTable as select distinct * from myTable;
delete from myTable;
insert into myTable select * from dedupMyTable;
select * from myTable;
id name
0 value
1 value1
well you shouldn't have duplicates id into your table unless it doesn't have PK constraints or simply doesn't support it such as Hive/data lake tables
Better pay attention when loading your data to avoid dups over ID's
DELETE FROM tracking_order
WHERE
mvd_id IN (---column you need to remove duplicate
SELECT
mvd_id
FROM (
SELECT
mvd_id,thoi_gian_gui,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (
PARTITION BY mvd_id
ORDER BY thoi_gian_gui desc) AS row_num
FROM
tracking_order
) s_alias
WHERE row_num > 1)
AND thoi_gian_gui in ( --column you used to compare to delete duplicates, eg last update time
SELECT
thoi_gian_gui
FROM (
SELECT
thoi_gian_gui,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (
PARTITION BY mvd_id
ORDER BY thoi_gian_gui desc) AS row_num
FROM
tracking_order
) s_alias
WHERE row_num > 1)
My code, I remove all duplicates 7800445 row and keep only 1 copy of each row with 7 min 28 secs.
enter image description here
This worked well for me. I had a table, terms, that contained duplicate values. Ran a query to populate a temp table with all of the duplicate rows. Then I ran the a delete statement with those ids in the temp table. value is the column that contained the duplicates.
CREATE TEMP TABLE dupids AS
select id from (
select value, id, row_number()
over (partition by value order by value)
as rownum from terms
) tmp
where rownum >= 2;
delete from [table] where id in (select id from dupids)
Is there a way in db2 where I can replace the entire table with just selected rows from the same table ?
Something like REPLACE into tableName select * from tableName where col1='a';
(I can export the selected rows, delete the entire table and load/import again, but I want to avoid these steps and use a single query).
Original table
col1 col2
a 0 <-- replace all rows and replace with just col1 = 'a'
a 1 <-- col1='a'
b 2
c 3
Desired resultant table
col1 col2
a 0
a 1
Any help appreciated !
Thanks.
This is a duplicate of my answer to your duplicate question:
You can't do this in a single step. The locking required to truncate the table precludes you querying the table at the same time.
The best option you would have is to declare a global temporary table (DGTT) and insert the rows you want into it, truncate the source table, and then insert the rows from the DGTT back into the source table. Something like:
declare global temporary table t1
as (select * from schema.tableName where ...)
with no data
on commit preserve rows
not logged;
insert into session.t1 select * from schema.tableName;
truncate table schema.tableName immediate;
insert into schema.tableName select * from session.t1;
I know of no way to do what you're asking in one step...
You'd have to select out to a temporary table then copy back.
But I don't understand why you'd need to do this in the first place. Lets assume there was a REPLACE TABLE command...
REPLACE TABLE mytbl WITH (
SELECT * FROM mytbl
WHERE col1 = 'a' AND <...>
)
Why not simply delete the inverse set of rows...
DELETE FROM mytbl
WHERE NOT (col1 = 'a' AND <...>)
Note the comparisons done in the WHERE clause are the exact same. You just wrap them in a NOT ( ) to delete the ones you don't want to keep.
I've got two SQL2008 tables, one is a "Import" table containing new data and the other a "Destination" table with the live data. Both tables are similar but not identical (there's more columns in the Destination table updated by a CRM system), but both tables have three "phone number" fields - Tel1, Tel2 and Tel3. I need to remove all records from the Import table where any of the phone numbers already exist in the destination table.
I've tried knocking together a simple query (just a SELECT to test with just now):
select t2.account_id
from ImportData t2, Destination t1
where
(t2.Tel1!='' AND (t2.Tel1 IN (t1.Tel1,t1.Tel2,t1.Tel3)))
or
(t2.Tel2!='' AND (t2.Tel2 IN (t1.Tel1,t1.Tel2,t1.Tel3)))
or
(t2.Tel3!='' AND (t2.Tel3 IN (t1.Tel1,t1.Tel2,t1.Tel3)))
... but I'm aware this is almost certainly Not The Way To Do Things, especially as it's very slow. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
this query requires a little more that this information. If You want to write it in the efficient way we need to know whether there is more duplicates each load or more new records. I assume that account_id is the primary key and has a clustered index.
I would use the temporary table approach that is create a normalized table #r with an index on phone_no and account_id like
SELECT Phone, Account into #tmp
FROM
(SELECT account_id, tel1, tel2, tel3
FROM destination) p
UNPIVOT
(Phone FOR Account IN
(Tel1, tel2, tel3)
)AS unpvt;
create unclustered index on this table with the first column on the phone number and the second part the account number. You can't escape one full table scan so I assume You can scan the import(probably smaller). then just join with this table and use the not exists qualifier as explained. Then of course drop the table after the processing
luke
I am not sure on the perforamance of this query, but since I made the effort of writing it I will post it anyway...
;with aaa(tel)
as
(
select Tel1
from Destination
union
select Tel2
from Destination
union
select Tel3
from Destination
)
,bbb(tel, id)
as
(
select Tel1, account_id
from ImportData
union
select Tel2, account_id
from ImportData
union
select Tel3, account_id
from ImportData
)
select distinct b.id
from bbb b
where b.tel in
(
select a.tel
from aaa a
intersect
select b2.tel
from bbb b2
)
Exists will short-circuit the query and not do a full traversal of the table like a join. You could refactor the where clause as well, if this still doesn't perform the way you want.
SELECT *
FROM ImportData t2
WHERE NOT EXISTS (
select 1
from Destination t1
where (t2.Tel1!='' AND (t2.Tel1 IN (t1.Tel1,t1.Tel2,t1.Tel3)))
or
(t2.Tel2!='' AND (t2.Tel2 IN (t1.Tel1,t1.Tel2,t1.Tel3)))
or
(t2.Tel3!='' AND (t2.Tel3 IN (t1.Tel1,t1.Tel2,t1.Tel3)))
)