I am using Eclipse, Java and a Derby database. I want to experiment with changing values that rewrite one of the tables in the db. Before starting the change I would like to copy the particular table (not in code) so that I can restore the original data if necessary. Sof ar googling and searching this site hasnt produced an answer. In Eclipse there is an option to export the db but it calls it a connection so I am not usre what would happen.
If you're not sure about how to connect to the database and issue sql statements, you will need to learn about JDBC. This is a good place to start.
If you're asking about the SQL, it's pretty straight forward. You can create a table based on a select statement.
e.g.
create table table2 as select * from table1 with no data;
Derby is a little strange in this area. You must specify the with no data, and the created table will be empty. You can then issue an insert that will populate the new table if you wish.
insert into table2 select * from table1;
The new table will not have indexes. You will need to create them if you want them. It might retain the primary key. You should check that if you're testing against it. If it doesn't retain the primary key, you should create the primary key before inserting data into the table.
In Eclipse there is an option to export the db but it calls it a connection so I am not sure what would happen.
If what Eclipse does isn't clear for you, you can just as well zip your entire database directory (content of DERBY_HOME env. variable) into an archive. The database must not be running while you make the backup.
Related
I have a data anonymization process that takes a production copy of a database and turns it into an anonymized copy by UPDATE-ing some columns.
Some of the tables contain several million rows so instead of UPDATE-ing the columns, which is very log intensive, I went down the way of
SELECT
Id,
CAST('Redacted' AS NVARCHAR(255)) [ColumnRequiringAnonymization]
INTO MyTable_New
FROM MyTable
EXEC sp_rename MyTable, MyTable_old
EXEC sp_rename MyTable_new, MyTable
DROP TABLE MyTable_old
The problem with this approach is that the "new" table no longer has any of the keys, indices and other dependent objects. I have figured out the keys and indices using SPs to generate the DROP and CREATE scripts. The SPs are based on manually written SQL as can be seen e.g. in this answer.
The next problem is that we have a schemabound view on top of this table, which has indices and a full-text index on its own. The number of SPs to generate scripts is growing and I am sure there will be mistakes.
Is there a way to completely script a table/view by using SQL commands only? ie. just like SSMS does when you click "Script table as - CREATE to" but within a stored procedure?
Right-click on the database, select Tasks; there is Generate Scripts there. Just follow prompts or Google for additional information.
I am about to model a PostgreSQL database, based on an Oracle database. The latter is old and its tables have been named after a 3-letter-scheme.
E.g. a table that holds parameters for tasks would be named TSK_PAR.
As I model the new database, I'd like to rename those tables to a more descriptive name using actual words. My problem is, that some parts of the software might rely on these old names until they're rewritten and adapted to the new scheme.
Is it possible to create something like an alias that's being used for the whole database?
E.g. I create a new task_parameters database, but add a TSK_PAR alias to it, so if a SELECT * FROM TSK_PAR is being used, it automatically refers to the new name?
Postgres has no synonyms like Oracle.
But for your intended use case, views should do just fine. A view that simply does select * from taks_parameters is automatically updateable (see here for an online example).
If you don't want to clutter your default schema (usually public) with all those views, you can create them in a different schema, and then adjust the user's search path to include that "synonym schema".
For example:
create schema synonyms;
create table public.task_parameters (
id integer primary key,
....
);
create view synonyms.task_par
as
select *
from public.task_parameters;
However, that approach has one annoying drawback: if a table is used by a view, the allowed DDL statements on it are limited, e.g. you can't drop a column or rename it.
As we manage our schema migrations using Liquibase, we always drop all views before applying "normal" migrations, then once everything is done, we simply re-create all views (by running the SQL scripts stored in Git). With that approach, ALTER TABLE statements never fail because there are not views using the tables. As creating a view is really quick, it doesn't add overhead when deploying a migration.
I have a problem encountered lately in our Postgres database, when I query: select * from myTable,
it results to, 'could not open relation with OID 892600370'. And it's front end application can't run properly anymore. Base on my research, I determined the column that has an error but I want exactly to locate the rows OID of the column so that I can modify it. Please help.
Thank you in advance.
You've got a corrupted database. Might be a bug, but more likely bad hardware. If you have a recent backup, just use that. I'm guessing you don't though.
Make sure you locate any backups of either the database or its file tree and keep them safe.
Stop the PostgreSQL server and take a file backup of the entire database tree (base, global, pg_xlog - everything at that level). It is now safe to start fiddling...
Now, start the database server again and dump tables one at a time. If a table won't dump, try dropping any indexes and foreign-key constraints and give it another go.
For a table that won't dump, it might be just certain rows. Drop any indexes and dump a range of rows using COPY ... SELECT. That should let you narrow down any corrupted rows and get the rest.
Now you have a mostly-recovered database, restore it on another machine and take whatever steps are needed to establish what is damaged/lost and what needs to be done.
Run a full set of tests on the old machine and see if anything needs replacement. Consider whether your monitoring needs improvement.
Then - make sure you keep proper backups next time, that way you won't have to do all this, you'll just use them instead.
could not open relation with OID 892600370
A relation is a table or index. A relation's OID is the OID of the row in pg_class where this relation is defined.
Try select relname from pg_class where oid=892600370;
Often it's immediately obvious from relname what this relation is, otherwise you want to look at the other fields in pg_class: relnamespace, relkind,...
I have two tables that have a column named id_user in common. These two tables are created in my Drupal webpage at some point (that I don't know because I didn't created the Netbeans project).
I checked on the internet and found that probably by adding REFERENCES 1sttable (id_user) to the second table, it should copy the value of the 1sttable (that is always created when a new user arrives) to the id_user value of the 2ndtable (that I don't know at which point is created). Is it correct?
If it's not correct I would like to know a way in pgAdmin that could make me synchronize those tables, or at least create both of them in the same moment.
The problem I have is that the new user has a new row on 1sttable automatically as soon as he registers, while to get a new row on 2ndtable it needs some kind of "activation" like inserting all of the data. What I'm looking for is a way that as soon as there is a new row in the 1sttable, it automatically creates the new row on the other table too. I don't know how to make it more clear (English is not my native language).
The solution you gave me seems clear for the question, but the problem is a little bigger: the two tables presents different kinds of variables, and it should be that they are, one in mySQL, with the user data (drupal default for users), then i have 2 in postgresql, both with the same primary key (id_user):
the first has 118 columns, most of them real integer;
the second has 50 columns, with mixed types.
the web application i'm using needs both this column with all the values NOT EMPTY (otherwise i get a NullPointerException) to work, so what i'm searching for is (i think):
when the user register -inserting his email- in drupal, automatically it creates the two fulfilled columns, to make the web automatically works as soon as the email is stored in mysql. Is it possible? Is it well explained?
My environment is:
windows server 2008 enterprise edition
glassfish 2.1
netbeans 6.7.1
drupal 6.17
postgresql 8.4
mysql 5.1.48
pgAdmin is just the GUI. You mean PostgreSQL, the RDBMS.
A foreign key constraint, like you have only enforces that no value can be used, that isn't present in the referenced column. You can use ON UPDATE CASCADE or ON DELETE CASCADE to propagate changes from the referenced column, but you cannot create new rows with it like you describe. You got the wrong tool.
What you describe could be achieved with a trigger. Another, more complex way would be a RULE. Go with a trigger here.
In PostgreSQL you need a trigger function, mostly using plpgsql, and a trigger on a table that makes use of it.
Something like:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION trg_insert_row_in_tbl2()
RETURNS trigger AS
$func$
BEGIN
INSERT INTO tbl2 (my_id, col1)
VALUES (NEW.my_id, NEW.col1) -- more columns?
RETURN NEW; -- doesn't matter much for AFTER trigger
END
$func$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
And a trigger AFTER INSERT on tbl1:
CREATE TRIGGER insaft
AFTER INSERT ON tbl1
FOR EACH ROW EXECUTE PROCEDURE trg_insert_row_in_tbl2();
You might want to read about using Drupal hooks to add extra code to be run when a user is registered. Once you know how to use hooks, you can write code (in a module) to insert a corresponding record in the 2nd table. A good candidate hook to use here would be hook_user for Drupal 6 or hook_user_insert for Drupal 7.
The REFERENCES you read about is part of an SQL command to define a foreign key constraint from the second table to the first. This is not strictly necessary to solve your problem, but it can help in keeping your database consistent. I suggest you read up on database structures and constraints if you want to learn more on this topic.
I need to use the same Stored Procedures against many tables all with the same structure in my DB. This is data loaded from customers,with one table/customer and the data needs calculations/checks run before it's loaded to our DataWarehouse.
So far these are the options and issues I've found and I'm looking for a better pattern/approach.
Create a view that points to the
table I want to process, the SPs
then talk to that view. This works
well (especially once I'd worked out
how to create views 'automagically'
based on their columns). But the
view can only be used with one table
at a time, forcing the system to
deal with one customer at a time.
Use dynamic sql within each SP -
makes the SPs much harder to
read/debug and for those reasons has
been ruled out
Create a partitioned view across
all the tables and then use a
paramatised table function to return
just the data we're interested in -
ah but then I can't update the data
as the function returns a table that
can be only used for select
Use dynamic sql inside a function
(can't be done) to create a view
(which also can't be done) .... give
up
Within the SP create a temp table
with over the target table using
dynamic sql, but then the temp table
only exists in the session that runs
the dynamic sql not the 'parent'
session that's running the SP ...
give up
Create a global temp table using
dynamic SQL to avoid the scope issue
of 5, then run the SP against the
global temp table. Still run into
the single customer issue.
Create the view as in 1 within a
transaction and then run all the SPs
and then commit - works fine for one
user, but any others are now blocked
trying to create a new view of the
same name
Use a temporary view ... can't in
T/Sql
Move all the code into .Net - but
we have environment issues where
tsql is much easier to host/run
I know I'm not the only person who has this problem, have any of you good people solved it, please help.
Maybe your approach is wrong, I will go deep in details in a while but it seems that your problem can be solved using SSIS
-- Updated answer:
First, the big picture:
The most affordable way to process the tables dynamically is using a script instead of a stored procedure. If you want to make table access randomly chosen, you certainly will not use any of the performance advantages of stored procedures, i.e. execution plans. A SQL Script can be easily upgraded to point one table at runtime using placeholders and replacing it before executing.
The script can be loaded from the filesystem, a variable, a text column in a table, etc. The loading process consists in read the script content to a string variable. This step occurs once.
The next step is the preparation stage. This step will be executed for each table to be processed. The main business of this step is to replace the table placeholders with the current table being processed. Also is possible to set parameter values like any parameter you can need to pass into the sp that you already wrote.
The last step is the execution of the script. As is already loaded into a variable and the placeholders were set to the current table name, you can safely call a ExecuteSQLTask with the sql variable as the input. This process of course happens for each table you want to process.
Ok. Now let's see this in action.
This is a sample database model:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[t_n](
[id] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
[name] [varchar](50) NOT NULL,
[start] [datetime] NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_t_n] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([id] ASC)
) ON [PRIMARY]
where t_n represents any table (t_1, t_2, t_3, etc).
This is your current stored procedure:
CREATE PROCEDURE SpProcessT_n
AS
BEGIN
SET NOCOUNT ON;
SELECT * FROM [t1];
END
GO
Now, transform this stored procedure to a Sql script, placing a placeholder instead of the table name
SET NOCOUNT ON;
SELECT * FROM [$table_name];
I choose to save this in a .sql file in the filesystem to keep the POC as simple as possible.
Next, create a SSIS Package like this:
These are the settings I choose to set up the loop:
And this is the way you can assign the table name to a variable called appropriately _table_name_
This is the setup of the script task, here you find that the variable _table_name_ has read only access, while a new variable called SqlExec has read/write access:
And this is it's Main function:
public void Main()
{
String Table_Name = Dts.Variables["table_name"].Value.ToString();
String SqlScript;
Regex reg = new Regex(#"\$table_name", RegexOptions.Compiled);
using (var f = File.OpenText(#"c:\sqlscript.sql")) {
SqlScript = f.ReadToEnd();
f.Close();
}
SqlScript = reg.Replace(SqlScript, Table_Name);
Dts.Variables["SqlExec"].Value = SqlScript;
Dts.TaskResult = (int)ScriptResults.Success;
}
You can notice that the Dts Variable SqlExec contains the sql script that will be executed. Now you can set the following options in your ExecuteSqlTask:
Successfully tested in MSSQL 2008, if you put a insert inside the script file you will notice new rows in each table.
Hope this helps!
If your application can afford to have one cut-off day late, then you can have a nightly scheduled job to run an SSIS package that will consolidate all 150+ tables into one single huge table. Since the freshness of the results of the queries against that huge table will then be 1 'date' late, this solution will not include any rows that recently been loaded.
You can actually time the running of this package. If it is still amazingly fast, say within 30 minutes, then you can bet to run it in every few hours, like during: the start of work day, lunch break, and end of day. This way you can have a nearly fresh data to query with.
Write a partitioned view including table names?
SELECT 'TableName', t.* FROM TableName t
UNION ALL
SELECT 'TableName2', t.* FROM TableName2 t
Then write a single instead of trigger which uses dynamic SQL for writing (less testing involved with that use of dynamic SQL because you'd just write the simple CRUD operations once for all tables I'd think)
I would not do this with SQL. What you are describing sounds like a traditional ETL situation.
Since all of the customer tables are the same, I would create a table in the data warehouse with all the columns from the client table, a surrogate key column, and a type identifier. You have an option to create a "staging" table here that will only have data in it during the ETL process, or just working on a single "live" table. I would create the staging table.
Then within SSIS package (don't worry you can still schedule from SQL Server agent, it hasn't totally left the DB server), start the ETL process...
E(xtract): copy the data from your source into the staging table in the data warehouse. You most likely want to use a sub-package within a foreach loop and changing the name of the table that you want to process from an external store (most people would say put this in the warehouse, but its up to you).
T(ransform): run the calculations/checks you were talking about, but do it on the whole set...
L(oad): Copy it to your real within the data warehouse.
There are a couple things I would NOT do.
1. Modify the data in the source table.
2. Try to do this in t-sql. Its just not what tsql is good at.
If you need more detail on this approach, I would probably ask the question with some Business Intelligence tags. I'll be traveling for the next week or so, but I will try to look at the comments to clear anything up if you need me to.
I am fairly certain that the standard way to solve this is using dynamic SQL in each sp (your option 2), which has already been ruled out.
Your goal is to make generic, multi-table SQL. I don't see how you intend to accomplish that without sacrificing some efficiency and readability.