I am using this query to update a column with ascending values:
DECLARE #counter NUMERIC(10, 0)
SET #counter = 1400000
UPDATE SomeTable
SET #counter = SomeColumn = #counter + 1
Question is, how can I not put duplicates there? For example the column already has 1400002 as value. Normally it has NULLs, but sometimes it doesnt. I could add
where SomeColumn is null
but this would not avoid duplicates. Any ideas?
Thanks
I am not sure that this will help or not but you can put your existing data into temp table and then use that temp table to remove duplicates like:
WHERE (#counter + 1) not in ( select SomeColumn from #temp)
If above is not correct then please explain your question a little more.
This worked for me in SQL Server 2008:
DECLARE #StartNumber int, #EndNumber int;
SET #StartNumber = 100;
SELECT #EndNumber = #StartNumber + COUNT(*) - 1 FROM SomeTable;
WITH numbers AS (
SELECT #StartNumber AS Value
UNION ALL
SELECT
Value + 1
FROM numbers
WHERE Value < #EndNumber
),
validnumbers AS (
SELECT
n.Value,
rownum = ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY n.Value)
FROM numbers n
LEFT JOIN SomeTable t ON n.Value = t.Value
WHERE t.Value IS NULL
),
RowsToUpdate AS (
SELECT
Value,
rownum = ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY Value)
FROM SomeTable
WHERE Value IS NULL
OR Value NOT IN (SELECT Value FROM numbers)
)
UPDATE r
SET Value = v.Value
FROM RowsToUpdate r
INNER JOIN validnumbers v ON v.rownum = r.rownum;
Basically, it implements the following steps:
Create a number table.
Exclude the numbers present in SomeTable.
Rank the rest of the rows.
Exclude the values from SomeTable that are present in the number table.
Rank the rest of the rows.
Update the ranked rows of SomeTable from the ranked number list.
Not sure how good this solution would be for big tables, though...
Related
I'm currently doing a data conversion project and need to strip all alphabetical characters from a string. Unfortunately I can't create or use a function as we don't own the source machine making the methods I've found from searching for previous posts unusable.
What would be the best way to do this in a select statement? Speed isn't too much of an issue as this will only be running over 30,000 records or so and is a once off statement.
You can do this in a single statement. You're not really creating a statement with 200+ REPLACEs are you?!
update tbl
set S = U.clean
from tbl
cross apply
(
select Substring(tbl.S,v.number,1)
-- this table will cater for strings up to length 2047
from master..spt_values v
where v.type='P' and v.number between 1 and len(tbl.S)
and Substring(tbl.S,v.number,1) like '[0-9]'
order by v.number
for xml path ('')
) U(clean)
Working SQL Fiddle showing this query with sample data
Replicated below for posterity:
create table tbl (ID int identity, S varchar(500))
insert tbl select 'asdlfj;390312hr9fasd9uhf012 3or h239ur ' + char(13) + 'asdfasf'
insert tbl select '123'
insert tbl select ''
insert tbl select null
insert tbl select '123 a 124'
Results
ID S
1 390312990123239
2 123
3 (null)
4 (null)
5 123124
CTE comes for HELP here.
;WITH CTE AS
(
SELECT
[ProductNumber] AS OrigProductNumber
,CAST([ProductNumber] AS VARCHAR(100)) AS [ProductNumber]
FROM [AdventureWorks].[Production].[Product]
UNION ALL
SELECT OrigProductNumber
,CAST(STUFF([ProductNumber], PATINDEX('%[^0-9]%', [ProductNumber]), 1, '') AS VARCHAR(100) ) AS [ProductNumber]
FROM CTE WHERE PATINDEX('%[^0-9]%', [ProductNumber]) > 0
)
SELECT * FROM CTE
WHERE PATINDEX('%[^0-9]%', [ProductNumber]) = 0
OPTION (MAXRECURSION 0)
output:
OrigProductNumber ProductNumber
WB-H098 098
VE-C304-S 304
VE-C304-M 304
VE-C304-L 304
TT-T092 092
RichardTheKiwi's script in a function for use in selects without cross apply,
also added dot because in my case I use it for double and money values within a varchar field
CREATE FUNCTION dbo.ReplaceNonNumericChars (#string VARCHAR(5000))
RETURNS VARCHAR(1000)
AS
BEGIN
SET #string = REPLACE(#string, ',', '.')
SET #string = (SELECT SUBSTRING(#string, v.number, 1)
FROM master..spt_values v
WHERE v.type = 'P'
AND v.number BETWEEN 1 AND LEN(#string)
AND (SUBSTRING(#string, v.number, 1) LIKE '[0-9]'
OR SUBSTRING(#string, v.number, 1) LIKE '[.]')
ORDER BY v.number
FOR
XML PATH('')
)
RETURN #string
END
GO
Thanks RichardTheKiwi +1
Well if you really can't use a function, I suppose you could do something like this:
SELECT REPLACE(REPLACE(REPLACE(LOWER(col),'a',''),'b',''),'c','')
FROM dbo.table...
Obviously it would be a lot uglier than that, since I only handled the first three letters, but it should give the idea.
How to update table fields from array to avoid temp table using?
User passes array to reorder table.
create TABLE items
(
id serial primary key,
name text,
select_order int
)
insert into items(name, select_order)
values
('cucumber',0),
('milk',1),
('coffee',2),
('water',3)
select * from items order by select_order;
DO
$body$
DECLARE var_array int[]:='{3,0,2,1}';
BEGIN
update items ??
END;
$body$
The final result in this example should be
select * from items order by select_order;
name select_order
------------------------
water 0
cucumber 1
coffee 2
milk 3
Assuming the index in the array corresponds to the value in select_order the following query returns the new and old value:
select i.id, i.select_order, t.new_sort
from items i
join lateral unnest(array[3,0,2,1]) with ordinality as t(new_sort, idx) on t.idx - 1 = i.select_order
Now this can be used to update the target table:
update items
set select_order = r.new_sort
from (
select i.id, i.select_order, t.new_sort
from items i
join lateral unnest(array[3,0,2,1]) with ordinality as t(new_sort, idx) on t.idx - 1 = i.select_order
) r
where r.id = items.id;
This also assumes that select_order starts a 0 and has no gaps.
I made two queries that I thought should have the same result:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM (
SELECT DISTINCT ON (id1) id1, value
FROM (
SELECT table1.id1, table2.value
FROM table1
JOIN table2 ON table1.id1=table2.id
WHERE table2.value = '1')
AS result1 ORDER BY id1)
AS result2;
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM (
SELECT DISTINCT ON (id1) id1, value
FROM (
SELECT table1.id1, table2.value
FROM table1
JOIN table2 ON table1.id1=table2.id
)
AS result1 ORDER BY id1)
AS result2
WHERE value = '1';
The only difference being that one had the WHERE clause inside SELECT DISTINCT ON, and the other outside that, but inside SELECT COUNT. But the results were not the same. I don't understand why the position of the WHERE clause should make a difference in this case. Can anyone explain? Or is there a better way to phrase this question?
here's a good way to look at this:
SELECT DISTINCT ON (id) id, value
FROM (select 1 as id, 1 as value
union
select 1 as id, 2 as value) a;
SELECT DISTINCT ON (id) id, value
FROM (select 1 as id, 1 as value
union
select 1 as id, 2 as value) a
WHERE value = 2;
The problem has to do with the unique conditions and what is visible where. It is behavior by design.
Lets say I have table with ID int, VALUE string:
ID | VALUE
1 abc
2 abc
3 def
4 abc
5 abc
6 abc
If I do select value, count(*) group by value I should get
VALUE | COUNT
abc 5
def 1
Now the tricky part, if there is count == 1 I need to get that ID from first table. Should I be using CTE? creating resultset where I will add ID string == null and run update b.ID = a.ID where count == 1 ?
Or is there another easier way?
EDIT:
I want to have result table like this:
ID VALUE count
null abc 5
3 def 1
If your ID values are unique, you can simply check to see if the max(id) = min(id). If so, then use either one, otherwise you can return null. Like this:
Select Case When Min(id) = Max(id) Then Min(id) Else Null End As Id,
Value, Count(*) As [Count]
From YourTable
Group By Value
Since you are already performing an aggregate, including the MIN and Max function is not likely to take any extra (noticeable) time. I encourage you to give this a try.
The way I would do it would indeed be a CTE:
using #group AS (SELECT value, Count(*) as count from MyTable GROUP BY value HAVING count = 1)
SELECT MyTable.ID, #group.value, #group.count from MyTable
JOIN #group ON #group.value = MyTable.value
When using group by, after the group by statement you can use a having clause.
So
SELECT [ID]
FROM table
GROUP BY [VALUE]
HAVING COUNT(*) = 1
Edit: with regards to your edited question: this uses some fun joins and unions
CREATE TABLE #table
(ID int IDENTITY,
VALUE varchar(3))
INSERT INTO #table (VALUE)
VALUES('abc'),('abc'),('def'),('abc'),('abc'),('abc')
SELECT * FROM (
SELECT Null as ID,VALUE, COUNT(*) as [Count]
FROM #table
GROUP BY VALUE
HAVING COUNT(*) > 1
UNION ALL
SELECT t.ID,t.VALUE,p.Count FROM
#table t
JOIN
(SELECT VALUE, COUNT(*) as [Count]
FROM #table
GROUP BY VALUE
HAVING COUNT(*) = 1) p
ON t.VALUE=p.VALUE
) a
DROP TABLE #table
maybe not the most efficient but something like this works:
SELECT MAX(Id) as ID,Value FROM Table WHERE COUNT(*) = 1 GROUP BY Value
A UI (before the report shows) shows a look up (Combo) that has
(ID = 0).All Organization Units
(ID =4).HR
(ID = 5).DEV
I need to:
Be able to show data of (4) + (5) if
(0) is selected.
Only (4) OR (5) if either HR or DEV is selected.
Lookup combo code (Selected Feeds the parameter in the below query.)
Select 0 AS ID,'All Org' AS Name from DP_ORG_OrganizationUnit
where DP_ORG_OrganizationUnit.Code IN {AccessData}
Union
SELECT
DP_ORG_OrganizationUnit.ID,
DP_ORG_OrganizationUnit.Name
FROM DP_ORG_OrganizationUnit where DP_ORG_OrganizationUnit.Code IN ('HR','DEV')
Report data row query
SET CONCAT_NULL_YIELDS_NULL OFF
DECLARE #EmpID as int;
DECLARE #OrganizationUnit as int;
DECLARE #StartDate as datetime;
DECLARE #EndDate as datetime;
SET #EmpID = ?;
SET #StartDate = ?;
SET #EndDate = ?;
SET #OrganizationUnit = ?;
SELECT
Employee.Code,
Employee.Name1+' '+Employee.Name2+' '+Employee.Name3+' '+Employee.Name4+' '+Employee.Name5 AS FullName,
Employee.OrganizationUnit,
ContractType.Name,
EmployeeContract.StartDate,
EmployeeContract.EndDate
FROM Employee INNER JOIN (ContractType INNER JOIN EmployeeContract
ON ContractType.ID = EmployeeContract.ContractType)
ON Employee.ID = EmployeeContract.Employee
WHERE (Employee.ID = #EmpID OR #EmpID=0)
AND
(Employee.OrganizationUnit = #OrganizationUnit OR #OrganizationUnit=0)
AND NOT((EndDate < #StartDate or StartDate > #EndDate));
Any way I can achieve it from the looks of it? 0=0 would show all the data from other
departments too..
Anybody :-o?
First off, your lookup combo code could be tightened up a bit:
-- the FROM clause was superfluous
SELECT 0 AS ID,'All Org' AS Name
UNION ALL
-- the two-part identifiers were superfluous (only one table)
SELECT ID, Name
FROM DP_ORG_OrganizationUnit
WHERE Code IN ('HR','DEV')
For the report query, the simplest form would be:
WHERE
((#OrganizationUnit > 0 AND Employee.OrganizationUnit = #OrganizationUnit) OR
(#OrganizationUnit = 0 AND Employee.OrganizationUnit IN (4,5)))
something like this should work
Where (Employee.OrganizationUnit = case when #OrganizationUnit=0 then 4 else #OrganizationUnit end OR case when #OrganizationUnit=0 then 5 else #OrganizationUnit end)
Try this, which should use indexes on your query...
DECALRE #FilterValues (FilterValue int not null primary key)
IF #Param=0
BEGIN
INSERT INTO #FilterValues VALUES (4)
INSERT INTO #FilterValues VALUES (5)
END
ELSE ID #PAram IS NOT NULL
BEGIN
INSERT INTO #FilterValues VALUES (#Param)
END
SELECT
....
FROM YourTable y
INNER JOIN #FilterValues f ON y.Value=f.Value
WHERE .....
KM's version will work, but this query does not need a temp table...
SELECT *
FROM Employee
WHERE (
#OrganizationUnit = 0
OR
(
#OrganizationUnit <> 0
AND
Employee.OrganizationUnit = #OrganizationUnit
)
)
How about
WHERE (Employee.ID = #EmpID OR #EmpID=0)
AND
(Employee.OrganizationUnit BETWEEN ISNULL(NULLIF(#OrganizationUnit,0),0) AND ISNULL(NULLIF(#OrganizationUnit,0),99))
AND NOT((EndDate < #StartDate or StartDate > #EndDate));