i'm a beginner on MYSQL db and i'm trying to play around with the query and relations.
i have created 2 tables, one is 'users' which contain the field staff_ID and the other is 'reports' which also contain the table field staff_ID of the user submitting the reports.
on the relations (see picture) i have connect the 2 staff id field.
every user can submit more than one reports, so i'm try to query and get only the reports of one users(staff_ID).
I understood i have to use the JOIN keyword in order to obtain the data..
i tried the following query but it gave me all the result for all the users.
SELECT u.staff_ID
, u.Name
, r.id_report_show
, r.date_report
FROM users u
JOIN reports r
ON r.staff_ID = u.staff_ID
but I would like to have the report only of one specific user like staff_ID = 04033
probably i understood wrong how this query JOIN work, i'm looking for some help.
Thanks
You are almost there. Your join is perfect. You just need a where clause.
SELECT users.staff_ID, users.Name, reports.id_report_show, reports.date_report
FROM `users` INNER JOIN reports ON reports.staff_ID = users.staff_ID
where users.staff_ID = 04033
Or you can also mention it within on clauses:
SELECT users.staff_ID, users.Name, reports.id_report_show, reports.date_report
FROM `users` INNER JOIN reports
ON reports.staff_ID = users.staff_ID and users.staff_ID = 04033
Since it's inner join both the query will produce same output. But for left join those might produce different result. It's a good practice to use where clause instead of mentioning the condition in on clause.
Related
I've got a problem with MySQL select statement.
I have a table with different Department and statuses, there are 4 statuses for every department, but for each month there are not always every single status but I would like to show it in the analytics graph that there is '0'.
I have a problem with select statement that it shows only existing statuses ( of course :D ).
Is it possible to create temporary table with all of the Departments , Statuses and amount of statuses as 0, then update it by values from other select?
Select statement and screen how it looks in perfect situation, and how it looks in bad situation :
SELECT utd.Departament,uts.statusDef as statusoforder,Count(uts.statusDef) as Ilosc_Statusow
FROM ur_tasks_details utd
INNER JOIN ur_tasks_status uts on utd.StatusOfOrder = uts.statusNR
WHERE month = 'Sierpien'
GROUP BY uts.statusDef,utd.Departament
Perfect scenario, now bad scenario :
I've tried with "union" statements but i don't know if there is a possibility to take only "the highest value" for every department.
example :
I've also heard about
With CTE tables, but I don't really get how to use it. Would love to get some tips on it!
Thanks for your help.
Use a cross join to generate the rows you want. Then use a left join and aggregation to bring in the data:
select d.Departament, uts.statusDef as statusoforder,
Count(uts.statusDef) as Ilosc_Statusow
from (select distinct utd.Departament
from ur_tasks_details utd
) d cross join
ur_tasks_status uts left join
ur_tasks_details utd
on utd.Departament = d.Departament and
utd.StatusOfOrder = uts.statusNR and
utd.month = 'Sierpien'
group by uts.statusDef, d.Departament;
The first subquery should be your source of all the departments.
I also suspect that month is in the details table, so that should be part of the on clause.
Basically, I have a table which contains two fields: [id, other] which have user tokens stored in them. The goal of my query is to select a random user that has not been selected before. Once the user is selected it is stored in the table shown above. So if Jack selects Jim randomly, Jack cannot select Jim again, and on the flip side, Jim cannot select Jack.
Something like this is what comes to mind:
SELECT * FROM users
WHERE (SELECT * FROM selected WHERE (id=? AND other=?) OR (id=? AND other=?));
Well, first of all I've read that uses sub-queries like this is extremely inneficient, and I'm not even sure if I used the correct syntax, the problem is however, that I have numerous tables in my scenario which I need to filter by, so it would look more like this.
SELECT * FROM users u
WHERE (SELECT * FROM selected WHERE (id=? AND other=?) OR (id=? AND other=?))
AND (SELECT * FROM other_table WHERE (id=? AND other=?) OR (id=? AND other=?))
AND (SELECT * FROM diff_table WHERE (id=? AND value=?))
AND u.type = 'BASIC'
LIMIT = 1
I feel like there's a much, much more efficient way of handling this.
Please note: I don't want a row returned at all if the users id is present in any of the nested queries. Returning "null" is not sufficient. The reason I have the OR clause is because the user's id can be stored in either the id or the other field, so we need to check both.
I am using Postgre 9.5.3, but I added the MySQL tag as the code is mostly backwards comptable, Fancy Postgre only solutions are accepted(if any)
You can left join to another table, which produces nulls where no record is found:
Select u.* from users u
left selected s on s.id = u.id or s.other = u.other
where s.id is null
The or in a join is different, but should work. Example is kinda silly...but as long as you understand the logic. Left join first table to second table, where second table column is not null means there was atleast one record found that matched the join conditions. Where second table column is null means no record was found.
And you are right...avoid the where field = (select statement) logic when you can, poor performer there.
Use an outer join filtered on missed joins:
SELECT * FROM users u
LEFT JOIN selected s on u.id in (s.id, s.other) and ? in (s.id, s.other)
WHERE u.id != ?
AND s.id IN NULL
LIMIT 1
I have two tables usersin and usersout(I can not change schema, a lot of system changes must be done in php otherwise). I should get all user records in a query but I should mark them if they are in or out also a user may have an in record and out record I shouldn't show in record if has an out record.
I have created tables with sample data in SQL Fiddle: http://www.sqlfiddle.com/#!9/ac99a/1/0
Can u help me how can I remove duplicates of user records in this union query?
If you want to have all entries with an entry in either the in or out table, but not in both of them, then a full outer join would be your friend.
Since MySQL does not know that kind of join, you can emulate it with a left outer join and a right outer join combined like so:
SELECT
ui.id, ui.user, 'i'
FROM
usersIN ui
LEFT OUTER JOIN
usersOUT uo ON ui.user = uo.user
WHERE uo.id IS NULL
UNION
SELECT
uo.id, uo.user, 'o'
FROM
usersIN ui
RIGHT OUTER JOIN
usersOUT uo ON ui.user = uo.user
WHERE ui.id IS NULL;
This should give you the right output.
A good visual explanation of joins can be found here
SELECT cf.FK_collection, c.collectionName,
uf.FK_userMe, uf.FK_userYou,
u.userId, u.username
FROM userFollows as uf
INNER JOIN collectionFollows as cf ON uf.FK_userMe = cf.FK_user
INNER JOIN collections as c ON cf.FK_collection = c.collectionId
INNER JOIN users as u ON uf.FK_userYou = u.userId
WHERE uf.FK_userMe = 2
Hey guys.
I'm trying to make this query, and it of course won't do as I want it to, since it's returning multiple rows which is in some way what I want, and yet it's not. Let me try to explain:
I trying to get both collectionFollows and userFollows, for showing a users activity on the site. But when doing this, I will have multiple rows from userFollows even tho a user only follows 1. This occurs because I'm following multiple collectionFollows.
So when I show my result it will return like this:
John is following 'webdesign'
John is following 'Lisa'
John is following 'programming'
John is following 'Lisa'
I would like to know if I have to make multiple queries or use an subquery? What would be best practice? And how would I write the query then?
You are actually combining two quite unrelated queries. I would keep them as separate queries, especially since you report them like that too. You could, if you like, use UNION ALL to combine those queries. This way, you have just a list of names of items you follow, regardless of the type of item it is. If you want, you can specify that too.
SELECT
cf.user,
cf.FK_collection as followItem,
c.collectionName as followName,
'collection' as followType
FROM collectionFollows as cf
INNER JOIN collections as c ON cf.FK_collection = c.collectionId
WHERE cf.user = 2
UNION ALL
SELECT
uf.FK_userMe,
u.userId,
u.username
'user' as followType
FROM userFollows as uf
INNER JOIN users as u ON uf.FK_userYou = u.userId
WHERE uf.FK_userMe = 2
An alternative would be to filter unique values in PHP, but even then your query will fail. Because of the inner joins, you will not get any results if a user only follows other users or only follows collections. You need at least one of both to get any results.
You could change INNER JOIN to LEFT JOIN, but then you would still have to post-process the query to filter doubles and filter out the NULL values.
UNION ALL is fast. It just sticks two query results together without furthes processing. This is different from UNION, which will filter double as well (like DISTINCT). In this case, it is not needed, because I assume a user can only follow a collection or other user once, so these queries will never return duplicate records. If that is indeed the case, UNION ALL will do just fine and will be faster than UNION.
Apart from UNION ALL, two separate queries is fine too.
I have a database with customer information, orders, etc. I need to run a query that returns all customers who have not placed an order at all.
Relevant tables: login and orders
Relevant Columns: login.loginID, login.loginFirstName, login.loginLastName, login.loginEmailAddress AND orders.OrderuserID
So essentially - in psuedocode: compare table login, column loginID for matches in the orders table under orders.OrderUserID. If no match exists (as in no orders placed) then output the users First Name, Last Name and Email address.
I have been racking my brain but having some real issues with the language. I'm a big time N00B when it comes to SQL.
Basically it'll look like that:
SELECT l.login_id
FROM login l
LEFT JOIN orders o
ON l.login_id = o.login_id
WHERE o.login_id IS NULL
The key is using LEFT JOIN with WHERE ... IS NULL condition. In other words, you specifically look for the rows in login table that don't have any information 'extended' within orders table.
That's just a general description, but I hope it should be helpful in your process of constructing the big query specific to your case. )
select loginFirstName, loginLastName, loginEmailAddress
from login
where loginID not in
(select distinct OrderuserID from orders)
You can also do it with a left join:
select loginFirstName, loginLastName, loginEmailAddress
from login left join orders on loginID = OrderuserID
where OrderuserID is null
Not sure which will execute faster; give it a try. The first is easier to understand, IMHO.
EDIT: "select distinct" means "return me the set of unique values of the field". So, the subquery in the first SQL returns the set of users (their IDs) who do have orders. If a user has multiple orders, DISTINCT makes sure her ID is returned only once.
This should do it:
select *
from login l
left join orders o on l.loginId = o.OrderuserID
where o.OrderuserID is null
Try:
select login.loginFirstName, login.loginLastName, login.loginEmailAddress
FROM login
LEFT OUTER JOIN orders ON login.loginID = orders.OrderuserID
WHERE orders.OrderuserID IS NULL;
or something like that. I suspect the trick for a newer SQL user is the LEFT OUTER join. Without that specifier, a join will only return rows from the first table IF there are matches in the second. This way you get them all (and then filter out matches with the IS NULL phrase).
Though you should try first yourself and you could search on google first :):) .
Anyways you can use it in this way,
SELECT l.loginFirstName,l.loginLastName,
l.loginEmailAddress FROM login AS l LEFT JOIN orders as o
ON l.loginID = o.OrderuserID where OrderuserID is NULL