Possibly a duplicate been searching for the specific answer i need but couldnt find it. I have two simple tables
Source :
| Id | companyName | adress |
|----|-------------|---------|
| 1 | aquatics | street1 |
| 2 | rivers | street2 |
target :
| Id | nameCompany | companyAdress |
|----|-------------|----------------|
| 1 | aquatics | street1 |
| 2 | rivers | |
I simplified the matter, I have two sets of data the source table is extern data en i as a dev want to update my table with the extern data.
So we see that in the source everything is filled in.
I miss some info. In this case i miss the adress.
How can i run a query that checks: your row is incomplete. Lemme update this target row with the source data.
Only problem is. Extern data uses a different name voor the same columns as i have.
Been a couple of days with mysql. So pls try to explain noob friendly tried some thing but i couldnt figure it out
Below query updates companyAdress on target table if adress column on Source table is not equal to companyAdress on target table.
If you only need to update the empty values for target.companyAdress you should change the condition where s.adress <> t.companyAdress to where t.companyAdress =''
update target t
inner join `Source` s
on t.nameCompany=s.companyName
set t.companyAdress=s.adress
where s.adress <> t.companyAdress ;
Demo: https://www.db-fiddle.com/f/pB6b5xrgPKCivFWcpQHsyE/0
Related
In short; we are trying to return certain results from one table based on second level criteria of another table.
I have a number of source data tables,
So:
Table DataA:
data_id | columns | stuff....
-----------------------------
1 | here | etc.
2 | here | poop
3 | here | etc.
Table DataB:
data_id | columnz | various....
-----------------------------
1 | there | you
2 | there | get
3 | there | the
4 | there | idea.
Table DataC:
data_id | column_s | others....
-----------------------------
1 | where | you
2 | where | get
3 | where | the
4 | where | idea.
Table DataD: etc. There are more and more will be added ongoing
And a relational table of visits, where there are "visits" to some of these other data rows in these other tables above.
Each of the above tables holds very different sets of data.
The way this is currently structured is like this:
Visits Table:
visit_id | reference | ref_id | visit_data | columns | notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
1 | DataC | 2 | some data | etc. | so this is a reference
| | | | | to a visit to row id
| | | | | 2 on table DataC
2 | DataC | 3 | some data | etc. | ...
3 | DataB | 4 | more data | etc. | so this is a reference
| | | | | to a visit to row id
| | | | | 4 on table DataB
4 | DataA | 1 | more data | etc. | etc. etc.
5 | DataA | 2 | more data | etc. | you get the idea
Now we currently list the visits by various user given criteria, such as visit date.
however the user can also choose which tables (ie data types) they want to view, so a user has to tick a box to show they want data from DataA table, and DataC table but not DataB, for example.
The SQL we currently have works like this; the column list in the IN conditional is dynamically generated from user choices:
SELECT visit_id,columns, visit_data, notes
FROM visits
WHERE visit_date < :maxDate AND visits.reference IN ('DataA','DataC')
The Issue:
Now, we need to go a step beyond this and list the visits by a sub-criteria of one of the "Data" tables,
So for example, DataA table has a reference to something else, so now the client wants to list all visits to numerous reference types, and IF the type is DataA then to only count the visits if the data in that table fits a value.
For example:
List all visits to DataB and all visits to DataA where DataA.stuff = poop
The way we currently work this is a secondary SQL on the results of the first visit listing, exampled above. This works but is always returning the full table of DataA when we only want to return a subset of DataA but we can't be exclusive about it outside of DataA.
We can't use LEFT JOIN because that doesn't trim the results as needed, we can't use exclusionary joins (RIGHT / INNER) because that then removes anything from DataC or any other table,
We can't find a way to add queries to the WHERE because again, that would loose any data from any other table that is not DataA.
What we kind of need is a JOIN within an IF/CASE clause.
Pseudo SQL:
SELECT visit_id,columns, visit_data, notes
FROM visits
IF(visits.reference = 'DataA')
INNER JOIN DataA ON visits.ref_id = DataA.id AND DataA.stuff = 'poop'
ENDIF
WHERE visit_date < 2020-12-06 AND visits.reference IN ('DataA','DataC')
All criteria in the WHERE clause are set by the user, none are static (This includes the DataA.stuff criteria too).
So with the above example the output would be:
visit_id | reference | ref_id | visit_data | columns | notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
1 | DataC | 2 | some data | etc. |
2 | DataC | 3 | some data | etc. |
5 | DataA | 1 | more data | etc. |
We can't use Union because the different Data tables contain lots of different details.
Questions:
There may be a very straightforward answer to this but I can't see it,
How can we approach trying to achieve this sort of partial exclusivity?
I suspect that our overarching architecture structure here could be improved (the system complexity has grown organically over a number of years). If so, what could be a better way of building this?
What we kind of need is a JOIN within an IF/CASE clause.
Well, you should know that's not possible in SQL.
Think of this analogy to function calls in a conventional programming language. You're essentially asking for something like:
What we need is a function call that calls a different function depending on the value you pass as a parameter.
As if you could do this:
call $somefunction(argument);
And which $somefunction you call would be determined by the function called, depending on the value of argument. This doesn't make any sense in any programming language.
It is similar in SQL — the tables and columns are fixed at the time the query is parsed. Rows of data are not read until the query is executed. Therefore one can't change the tables depending on the rows executed.
The simplest answer would be that you must run more than one query:
SELECT visit_id,columns, visit_data, notes
FROM visits
INNER JOIN DataA ON visits.ref_id = DataA.id AND DataA.stuff = 'poop'
WHERE visit_date < 2020-12-06 AND visits.reference = 'DataA';
SELECT visit_id,columns, visit_data, notes
FROM visits
WHERE visit_date < 2020-12-06 AND visits.reference = 'DataC';
Not every task must be done in one SQL query. If it's too complex or difficult to combine two tasks into one query, then leave them separate and write code in the client application to combine the results.
I have a situation in MS Access database that I must prevent duplicate records based on combination of three attributes:
StudentNumber
ColleagueID
TypeOfAttending
So, for one combination (StudentNumber & ColleagueID) I have three types of attending: A, B and C.
Here is an example:
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
| StudentNumber | ColleagueID | AttendingType |
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
| 100 | 10 | A |
| 100 | 10 | B |
| 100 | 10 | C |
| 100 | 11 | A |
| 100 | 11 | B |
| 100 | 11 | C |
| 100 | 11 | C |
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
So last row would not be acceptable.
Does anyone have any idea?
As noted, you could choose all 3 as a PK. Or you can even create a unique index on all 3 columns. These two ideas are thus code free.
Last but least, you could use a Before change macro,and do a search (lookup) in the table to check if the existing record exists. So far, given your information, likely a unique index is the least effort, and does not require you to change the PK to all 3 columns (which as noted is a another solution).
So, you could consider a before change macro. And use this:
Lookup a Record in MyTable
Where Condition = [z].[Field1]=[MyTable].[Field1] And
[z].[Field2]=[MyTable].[Field2] And
[z].[ID]<>[MyTable].[ID]
Alias Z
RaiseError -123
Error Description: There are other rows with this data
So, you can use a data macro, use the before change table macro. Make sure you have the raise error code indented "inside" of the look up code. And note how we use a alias for the look up, since the table name (MyTable) is already in context, and is already the current row of data, so we lookup using "z" as a alias to distinguish between the current row, and that of lookup record.
So, from a learning point of view, the above table macro can be used, but it likely less work and effort to simply setup a uniquie index on all 3 columns.
I am moving an old Mantis table that had a varchar(64) category_id column to a new Mantis table that has a int(10) category_id column.
The simplified structure is as follows
bug_table (Old DB)
+----+-------------+-------------+--------+
| id | project_id | category_id | report |
+----+-------------+-------------+--------+
| 1 | 0 | Server | crash |
| 2 | 0 | Database | error |
| 3 | 1 | Server | bug |
| 4 | 1 | Server | crash |
+----+-------------+-------------+--------+
category_table (New DB)
+----+------------+----------+
| id | project_id | name |
+----+------------+----------+
| 0 | 1 | Server |
| 1 | 1 | Database |
| 2 | 2 | Server |
| 3 | 2 | Database |
+----+------------+----------+
I need a magical query that will replace category_id in the bug_table with the numerical category_id in the category_table. Thankfully I am able to match rows by project_id and categories by name.
Here is the query I am working on but have gotten stuck in the complexity
UPDATE bug_table b SET b.category_id = c.id USING category_table WHERE b.category_id = c.name
I like to approach such a task a little differently than you do for a new lookup/reference table.
To me, the new category table would only have id and name columns. There are only two rows based on the sample data: Server and Database. Yes, I realize there could be other names, but those can easily be added, and should be added, before proceeding to maximize the id matching that follows.
Next I would add a new column to the bug table that could be called 'category_new' with the data type that will store the new category id. Alternatively, you could rename the existing category_id column to category, and the new column for the id's could then be column_id.
After all that is done then you can update the new column by joining the category on names and set the id that matches: (note this assumes the non-alternative approach mentioned in step 2)
UPDATE bug_table JOIN category_table ON bug_table.category_id = category_table.name
SET bug_table.category_new = category_table.id
After that runs, check the new column to verify the updated id's.
Finally, after successful update, now the old category_id column (with the names) from the bugs_table can be dropped, and the category_new column can be renamed as the category_id.
=====
Note that if you decide to go with the alternative column approach mentioned, of course the query will be similar but differ slightly. Then only a column drop is needed at the end
If there are other tables to apply the same category changes, the operation (basically steps 2 through 5) would be similar for those tables too.
I've got multiple entries in table A and would like to display the number of entries in a coloumn of table B. Is there a way to create a dynamic cell-content displaying the number of entries in a table?
I'm a beginner in MySQL and did not find a way to do it so far.
Example table A:
+----+------+------------+
| id | name | birthday |
+----+------+------------+
| 1 | john | 1976-11-18 |
| 2 | bill | 1983-12-21 |
| 3 | abby | 1991-03-11 |
| 4 | lynn | 1969-08-02 |
| 5 | jake | 1989-07-29 |
+----+------+------------+
What I'd like in table B:
+----+------+----------+
| id | name | numusers |
| 1 | tblA | 5 |
+----+------+----------+
In my actual database there is no incrementing ID so just taking the last value would not work - if this would've been a solution.
If MySQL can't handle this the option would be to create some kind of cronjob on my server reading the number of rows and writing them into that cell. I know how to do this - just checking if there's another way.
I'm not looking for a command to run on the mysql-console. What I'm trying to figure out is if there's some option which dynamically changes the cell's value to what I've described above.
You can create a view that will give you this information. The SQL for this view is inspired by an answer to a similar question:
CREATE VIEW table_counts AS
SELECT table_name, table_rows
FROM information_schema.tables
WHERE table_schema = '{your_db}';
The view will have the cells you speak of. As you can see, it is just a filter on an already existing table, so you might consider that this table information_schema.tables is the answer to your question.
You can do that directly with COUNT() for example SELECT COUNT(*) FROM TblA The you get all rows from that table. If you IDXs are ok then its very fast. If you write it to another table you have to make an request too to get the result of the second table. So i think your can do it directly.
If you have some performance problems there are some other possibilities like Triggers or Stored Procedures to calculate that result and save them in a memory table to get a better performance.
I'd like to know how can I make a unique query to find which values exist and which values do not. I explain.
What I have
I've got a database table with a structure as follows:
+----+--------+-----------+-----------+
| id | action | button_id | type |
+----+--------+-----------+-----------+
| 1 | 1 | 1 | button |
| 2 | 2 | 4 | button |
| 3 | 1 | 2 | attribute |
+----+--------+-----------+-----------+
As you can see, an action can have multiple button_id values. For your knowledge, a button_id can be assigned to multiple action, too, but a button_id can only have a type for an action.
So, button_id 1 can be also present in action 4 with the type "attribute" set to it, but it cannot be duplicated to the same action with another type.
The problem
The problem comes when I want to update the buttons in an action. I receive an action object with an array of the buttons it have (in PHP) with the structure below (I write it in JSON structure):
"buttons":
[
{
"id":"1",
"type":"button"
},
{
"id":"3",
"type":"attribute"
}
]
As you can see, the button with ID 1 remains the same, but I've got a new button to deal with (the button with ID 3) and the button with ID 2 is not present anymore.
What I'd want
I'd want to be able to make a unique MySQL query that returns me which values from those I receive exists and which do not, and which may be present in the database but not in that array.
To sum up: I want to know the differences between the buttons in the array received and those present in the database.
So, as an example with the received data described before and the database as we have it right now, I expect to receive something like this:
+--------+-----------+--------+------------+
| action | button_id | exists | is_present |
+--------+-----------+--------+------------+
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 |
+--------+-----------+--------+------------+
With this information, I'd be able to know that button with ID 2 does not exist anymore (because it's not present in the new array) and button with ID 3 is a new button because it does not exists previously but it's present in the new array.
What I've tried
There are some tests I've tried, but none of them gives me what I need, and not only tested with MySQL pure queries.
For example, I've tried to check the existence for each button I receive but that would leave me without being able to find if a button is deleted (so it's not present in the received array).
Checking that but taking as reference the buttons in the database has the same effect, as I will be able to check which have been updated or deleted, but it would skip those that are new and not present in the database.
I've tried to write some queries making COUNT queries and GROUP BY button_id, and so, but no luck neither.
(I won't write the queries because none of them have given me the expected results, so they won't be of any help for you).
Any combination of those explained before I think will be much slower than doing it purely by database queries, and that's why I'm asking for it.
The question
Is there a query that would return to me something like the response explained before in "What I'd want" section, so it would make only a call to the MySQL server?
Thank you all for your time, your responses and your patience for any lack of information you may find by my part.
Of course, any doubts, questions you have or information you may need, comment it and I'll try to explain it better or to add it.
Kind regards.
To do that in a single query would be very cubersome. Here is a solution that is not exactly what you are looking for but should do the job.
Let's say your table looks like this :
CREATE TABLE htmlComponent
(
id int auto_increment primary key,
action int,
button_id int not null,
type varchar(20),
dtInserted datetime,
dtUpdated datetime
);
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX buttonType ON htmlComponent(button_id, type);
Now we need to update the table according to the buttons / atributes you have for a specific action.
-- Reset dtInserted and dtUpdated for action 1
UPDATE htmlComponent SET dtInserted = null, dtUpdated = null WHERE action=1;
-- INSERT or UPDATE according to the data inside the json structure
INSERT INTO htmlComponent (action, button_id, type, dtInserted)
VALUES
(1, 1, 'button', NOW()),
(1, 3, 'attribute', NOW())
ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE
button_id = VALUES(button_id),
type = VALUES(type),
dtInserted = null,
dtUpdated = NOW();
-- Getting the result
SELECT * FROM htmlComponent where action=1;
Your should end up with this result which will make it easy to figure out what doesn't exists anymore, what is new and what was updated.
+----+--------+-----------+-----------+----------------------------+----------------------------+
| ID | ACTION | BUTTON_ID | TYPE | DTINSERTED | DTUPDATED |
+----+--------+-----------+-----------+----------------------------+----------------------------+
| 1 | 1 | 1 | button | (null) | February, 09 2015 16:21:49 |
| 3 | 1 | 2 | attribute | (null) | (null) |
| 4 | 1 | 3 | attribute | February, 09 2015 16:21:49 | (null) |
+----+--------+-----------+-----------+----------------------------+----------------------------+
Here is a fiddle. Please note I had to put the UPDATE and the INSERT in the left panel because DML are not allowed in the query panel.