I want to optimize these SQL queries using if-else but how I should use it? .
if this query result contain 'ALL'
SELECT
bdsubcategory.subcategoryID as ID,
bdsubcategory.subcategoryName as Name
FROM
phonebook.newsms_subscription
INNER JOIN bdsubcategory ON bdsubcategory.subcategoryID = newsms_subscription.subcategoryID
INNER JOIN newsms_client ON newsms_subscription.clientID =newsms_client.clientID
INNER JOIN newsms_person ON newsms_subscription.personID = newsms_person.personID
WHERE
newsms_subscription.isActive = 1 AND
newsms_person.personID = '856'
Then i want to query this
SELECT
bdsubcategory.subcategoryID as ID,
bdsubcategory.subcategoryName as Name
FROM
phonebook.newsms_subscription
INNER JOIN bdsubcategory ON bdsubcategory.subcategoryID = newsms_subscription.subcategoryID
INNER JOIN newsms_person ON newsms_subscription.personID = newsms_person.personID
WHERE
newsms_subscription.isActive = 1
GROUP BY subcategoryName
ORDER BY subcategoryName
otherwise take query1 result .
The problem is that if we do not refactor your project, then you always have to evaluate query1 and see whether it contains All or not. If it does not contain All, then you need to evaluate query2 as well. This can hardly be optimized, let's see a few approaches:
Quickening query1
Since All might be not be the very last evaluated element, adding it to the filter and limiting it is a good idea to quicken query1:
SELECT
COUNT(*)
FROM
phonebook.newsms_subscription
INNER JOIN bdsubcategory ON bdsubcategory.subcategoryID = newsms_subscription.subcategoryID
INNER JOIN newsms_client ON newsms_subscription.clientID =newsms_client.clientID
INNER JOIN newsms_person ON newsms_subscription.personID = newsms_person.personID
WHERE
newsms_subscription.isActive = 1 AND
newsms_person.personID = '856' AND
bdsubcategory.subcategoryName = 'ALL'
LIMIT 0, 1
So, you could create a stored procedure which evaluates query1' (query1' is the quickened version of query1, as seen above) and if there is a result, then we need to execute query1. Otherwise we need to execute query2. This way you still execute two queries, but the first query is optimized.
Refactoring
Note that the second query does not change. You could create a table where you could cache its results, using a periodic job. Then, you could skip the second table to
SELECT ID, Name
FROM MyNewTable;
without the many joins. You would also cache the results of the first query into a table where the items having ALL would be stored and query that table.
One option would be to use a CASE.
Change this:
newsms_person.personID = '856'
To this:
'Y' = CASE WHEN UPPER('856') = 'ALL' THEN 'Y'
WHEN newsms_person.personID = '856' THEN 'Y'
ELSE 'N' END
Alternatively, a stored procedure could be used to first validate whether the personID seems valid, then returns the appropriate data.
Related
I have the following query:
SELECT games_atp.ID1_G, odds_atp.K1
FROM games_atp LEFT JOIN odds_atp ON (games_atp.ID1_G = odds_atp.ID1_O) AND (games_atp.ID2_G = odds_atp.ID2_O) AND (games_atp.ID_T_G = odds_atp.ID_T_O) AND (games_atp.ID_R_G = odds_atp.ID_R_O)
I know the joining is convoluted but the original db is built without a primary key. The above works fine and importantly pulls all the records from games_atp. I now want to add a criteria into this to pull only certain K1 records from odds_atp. I added a WHERE clause as follows:
SELECT games_atp.ID1_G, odds_atp.K1
FROM games_atp LEFT JOIN odds_atp ON (games_atp.ID1_G = odds_atp.ID1_O) AND (games_atp.ID2_G = odds_atp.ID2_O) AND (games_atp.ID_T_G = odds_atp.ID_T_O) AND (games_atp.ID_R_G = odds_atp.ID_R_O)
WHERE (((odds_atp.ID_B_O)=2));
However, this overides the left join and only pulls records from games_atp where there is a corresponding record in odds_atp with ID_B_O = 2. How do I keep the criteria and all the records in games_atp? Thanks in advance.
Your current where condition will filter your final result, hence you are only seeing id_B_O = 2.
However, you could also add the wehre condition directly into your left join.
something like this.
SELECT
games_atp.ID1_G, odds_atp.K1
FROM
games_atp
LEFT JOIN odds_atp ON
(
(odds_atp.ID_B_O =2)
AND
(
(games_atp.ID1_G = odds_atp.ID1_O)
AND (games_atp.ID2_G = odds_atp.ID2_O)
AND (games_atp.ID_T_G = odds_atp.ID_T_O)
AND (games_atp.ID_R_G = odds_atp.ID_R_O)
)
);
or you could also take advantage of sub-queries
I have a table with exchange rate like below
And I am using the maxofdate to pick all these values based on currency code. But the query is giving blank.
Select USDAMOUNT * dbo.EXCHANGERATEAMT
from dbo.Amount_monthly
Left Join dbo.EXCHANGERATE on dbo.Amount_monthly.Currencycode=dbo.EXCHANGERATE.fromcurrencycode
WHERE ValidToDateTime = (Select MAX(ValidToDateTime) from dbo.EXCHANGERATE)
AND dbo.EXCHANGERATE.EXCHANGERATETYPECODE = 'DAY'
Using this statement
CONVERT(DATE,ValidToDateTime) = CONVERT(DATE,GETDATE()-1)
instead of subquery is giving me expected result.
Can someone correct this.
thanks in advance.
If I understand correctly, you need two things. First, the condition for the max() needs to match the condition in the outer query. Second, if you really want a left join, then conditions on the second table need to go in the on clause.
The resulting query looks like:
Select . . .
from dbo.Amount_monthly am Left Join
dbo.EXCHANGERATE er
on am.Currencycode = er.fromcurrencycode and
er.ValidToDateTime = (Select max(er2.ValidToDateTime)
from dbo.EXCHANGERATE er2
where er2.EXCHANGERATETYPECODE = 'DAY'
) and
er.EXCHANGERATETYPECODE = 'DAY';
I would write this using window functions, but that is a separate issue.
Try removing WHERE clause for ValidToDateTime and include it in the JOIN as AND condition
SELECT USDAMOUNT * dbo.EXCHANGERATEAMT
FROM dbo.Amount_monthly
LEFT JOIN dbo.EXCHANGERATE
ON dbo.Amount_monthly.Currencycode = dbo.EXCHANGERATE.fromcurrencycode
AND ValidToDateTime = (SELECT MAX(ValidToDateTime) --remove WHERE clause
FROM dbo.EXCHANGERATE)
AND dbo.EXCHANGERATE.EXCHANGERATETYPECODE = 'DAY';
I cleaned up your query a bit: as the other folks mentioned you needed to close the parentheses around the MAX(Date) sub-query, and if you reference a LEFT JOINed table in the WHERE clause, it behaves like an INNER JOIN, so I changed to in INNER. You also had "dbo" sprinkled in as a field prefix, but that (the namespace) only prefixes a database, not a field. I added the IS NOT NULL check just to avoid SQL giving the "null values were eliminated" SQL warning. I used the aliases "am" for the first table and "er" for the 2nd, which makes it more readable:
SELECT am.USDAMOUNT * er.EXCHANGERATEAMT
FROM dbo.Amount_monthly am
JOIN dbo.EXCHANGERATE er
ON am.Currencycode = er.fromcurrencycode
WHERE er.ValidToDateTime = (SELECT MAX(ValidToDateTime) FROM dbo.EXCHANGERATE WHERE ValidToDateTime IS NOT NULL)
AND er.EXCHANGERATETYPECODE = 'DAY'
If you're paranoid like I am, you might also want to make sure the exchange rate is not zero to avoid a divide-by-zero error.
I am working on a query for a datatable and I can't seem to get it to display how I want, I don't know if this is even possible in SQL What I am looking to do is get a query to respond with ideally an extra column of Boolean type.
Currently I can run two queries and they both work perfectly but I can't work out how to join them together bellow is the code from my first query what this does is return beers a user has tried this works fine and as expected and returns as expected.
SELECT *
FROM keg.beer
JOIN keg.userbeer
ON beer.id = userbeer.beer_id
WHERE userbeer.username_id = 1;
The second query is even simpler and is just a select getting the list of beers.
SELECT * FROM keg.beer
What I want to do is run a query and have it return a list of beers with a Boolean value if the user has tried it or not.
You're not going to run into too many scenarios for "Desired Results" that can't be produced with plain 'ol SQL. In this case you'll use a CASE statement to determine if the person has tried a beer. You'll also want a LEFT OUTER JOIN so you don't drop records coming from your beer table when your filtered userid doesn't have a userbeer record for that beer:
SELECT
beer.name,
beer.id,
beer.country,
CASE WHEN userbeer.username_id IS NULL THEN 0 ELSE 1 END AS user_tried_beer_boolean
FROM keg.beer
LEFT OUTER JOIN keg.userbeer
ON beer.id = userbeer.beer_id
AND userbeer.username_id = 1;
As #SeanLange mentioned in the comments here, the restriction of the WHERE statement for the userid would cause records to be dropped that you want in your result set, so we move the restriction of username_id = 1 to the ON portion of the LEFT OUTER JOIN so that the userbeer table results are restricted to just that user before it's joined to the beer table.
Now I need a drink.
SELECT b.id,
b.name,
CASE WHEN u.username_id IS NOT NULL THEN TRUE ELSE FALSE END AS userdrankbeer
FROM keg.beer b
LEFT JOIN ( SELECT * FROM keg.userbeer WHERE username_id = 1 ) u
ON beer.id = userbeer.beer_id
;
So, this query is currently used in a webshop to retrieve technical data about articles.
It has served its purpose fine except the amount of products shown have increased lately resulting in unacceptable long loading times for some categories.
For one of the worst pages this (and some other queries) get requested about 80 times.
I only recently learned that MySQL does not optimize sub-queries that don't have a depending parameter to only run once.
So if someone could help me with one of the queries and explain how you can replace the in's and exists's to joins, i will probably be able to change the other ones myself.
select distinct criteria.cri_id, des_texts.tex_text, article_criteria.acr_value, article_criteria.acr_kv_des_id
from article_criteria, designations, des_texts, criteria, articles
where article_criteria.acr_cri_id = criteria.cri_id
and article_criteria.acr_art_id = articles.art_id
and articles.art_deliverystatus = 1
and criteria.cri_des_id = designations.des_id
and designations.des_lng_id = 9
and designations.des_tex_id = des_texts.tex_id
and criteria.cri_id = 328
and article_criteria.acr_art_id IN (Select distinct link_art.la_art_id
from link_art, link_la_typ
where link_art.la_id = link_la_typ.lat_la_id
and link_la_typ.lat_typ_id = 17484
and link_art.la_ga_id IN (Select distinct link_ga_str.lgs_ga_id
from link_ga_str, search_tree
where link_ga_str.lgs_str_id = search_tree.str_id
and search_tree.str_type = 1
and search_tree.str_id = 10132
and EXISTS (Select *
from link_la_typ
where link_la_typ.lat_typ_id = 17484
and link_ga_str.lgs_ga_id = link_la_typ.lat_ga_id)))
order by article_criteria.acr_value
I think this one is the main badguy with sub-sub-sub-queries
I just noticed i can remove the last exist and still get the same results but with no increase in speed, not part of the question though ;) i'll figure out myself whether i still need that part.
Any help or pointers are appreciated, if i left out some useful information tell me as well.
I think this is equivalent:
SELECT DISTINCT c.cri_id, dt.tex_text, ac.acr_value, ac.acr_kv_des_id
FROM article_criteria AS ac
JOIN criteria AS c ON ac.acr_cri_id = c.cri_id
JOIN articles AS a ON ac.acr_art_id = a.art_id
JOIN designations AS d ON c.cri_des_id = d.des_id
JOIN des_texts AS dt ON dt.tex_id = d.des_tex_id
JOIN (SELECT distinct la.la_art_id
FROM link_art AS la
JOIN link_la_typ AS llt ON la.la_id = llt.lat_la_id
JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT lgs.lgs_ga_id
FROM link_ga_str AS lgs
JOIN search_tree AS st ON lgs.lgs_str_id = st.str_id
JOIN link_la_typ AS llt ON lgs.lgs_ga_id = llt.lat_ga_id
WHERE st.str_type = 1
AND st.str_id = 10132
AND llt.lat_typ_id = 17484) AS lgs
ON la.la_ga_id = lgs.lgs_ga_id
WHERE llt.lat_typ_id = 17484) AS la
ON ac.acr_art_id = la.la_art_id
WHERE a.art_deliverystatus = 1
AND d.des_lng_id = 9
AND c.cri_id = 328
ORDER BY ac.acr_value
All the IN <subquery> clauses can be replaced with JOIN <subquery>, where you then JOIN on the column being tested equaling the column returned by the subquery. And the EXISTS test is converted to a join with the table, moving the comparison in the subquery's WHERE clause into the ON clause of the JOIN.
It's probably possible to flatten the whole thing, instead of joining with subqueries. But I suspect performance will be poor, because this won't reduce the temporary tables using DISTINCT. So you'll get combinatorial explosion in the resulting cross product, which will then have to be reduced at the end with the DISTINCT at the top.
I've converted all the implicit joins to ANSI JOIN clauses, to make the structure clearer, and added table aliases to make things more readable.
In general, you can convert a FROM tab1 WHERE ... val IN (SELECT blah) to a join like this.
FROM tab1
JOIN (
SELECT tab1_id
FROM tab2
JOIN tab3 ON whatever = whatever
WHERE whatever
) AS sub1 ON tab1.id = sub1.tab1_id
The JOIN (an inner join) will drop the rows that don't match the ON condition from your query.
If your tab1_id values can come up duplicate from your inner query, use SELECT DISTINCT. But don't use SELECT DISTINCT unless you need to; it is costly to evaluate.
I have the following query (and it works fine):
SELECT cd.id AS card_id,
ct.id AS category_id,
COUNT(cc.user_id) AS cnt
FROM uiCards AS cd
JOIN uiCardCategories AS ct USING (project_id)
LEFT JOIN uiCategories2Cards AS cc ON (cc.card_id = cd.id AND cc.stack_id = ct.id)
WHERE cd.project_id = $projID
GROUP BY cd.id, ct.id
ORDER BY cd.id, ct.id
I also have a sting of numbers:
$exclude = '100,122,345';
I need to modify the string too exclude results found in the string. So I added:
AND cc.user_id NOT IN ($exclude)
below WHERE
WHERE cd.project_id = $projID
AND cc.user_id NOT IN ($exclude)
It did not seem to work, so I tried to modify more, and the whole query collapsed on me.
UPDATE:
I got it! I added quotes:
AND (FIND_IN_SET(cc.user_id, '$exclude') = 0 OR FIND_IN_SET(cc.user_id, '$exclude') IS NULL)
The SQL IN clause doesn't allow a single variable to represent a list of values. The query, as-is, can only be run as dynamic SQL -- on any database. Even run dynamically, SQL will only interpret this example as a single string.
Secondly, because of using an OUTER JOIN (LEFT in this example), placement of criteria can drastically affect the results returned. Specifying criteria in the JOIN's ON clause will apply the criteria before the JOIN is made; using the WHERE clause means the criteria is applied after the JOIN, which could mean additional records you did not want included.
You could use the FIND_IN_SET function instead:
WHERE cd.project_id = $projID
AND (FIND_IN_SET(cc.user_id, $excluded) = 0 OR
FIND_IN_SET(cc.user_id, $excluded) IS NULL)
..vs in the LEFT JOIN criteria:
LEFT JOIN uiCategories2Cards AS cc ON cc.card_id = cd.id
AND cc.stack_id = ct.id
AND FIND_IN_SET(cc.user_id, $excluded) = 0
IN() requires a row set, but you are providing a string, so this won't work.
Use the function FIND_IN_SET() instead.