Is this the right syntax:
INSERT INTO stock (Image)
SELECT Image,
FROM productimages
WHERE stock.Name_of_item = productimages.number;
SQL Server Management Studio's "Import Data" task (right-click on the DB name, then tasks) will do most of this for you. Run it from the database you want to copy the data into.
If the tables don't exist it will create them for you, but you'll probably have to recreate any indexes and such. If the tables do exist, it will append the new data by default but you can adjust that (edit mappings) so it will delete all existing data.
I use this all the time and it works fairly well.
INSERT INTO bar..tblFoobar( *fieldlist* )
SELECT *fieldlist* FROM foo..tblFoobar
This just moves the data. If you want to move the table definition (and other attributes such as permissions and indexes), you'll have to do something else.
The query logic that you are trying appears to be not correct (the query itself is buggy).
Assuming you have the correct query for the above logic and what you are trying is to insert new rows into the table stock by selecting a column from productimages table with a matching record as stock.Name_of_item = productimages.number
The above logic will add redundant data in to the table.
You perhaps looking to update instead of insert, something as -
update stock s
join productimages p on p.number = s.Name_of_item
set s.Image = p.Image
Related
I'm trying to delete records in my target table based on whether records exist in source table. I tried using a 'Delete' step, but I noticed that this step is based on a conditional clause.
My condition is quite simple "if the record/row does NOT exist in table A [source], delete the record/row from table B [destination]".
I also read about using a 'Merge Rows (diff)' step, but it seems to check/compare the entire set of tables for differences.
The table has several million records with many hundreds of columns in a MySQL server, I need to do this in the most efficient way.
I'm doing a search of table A with the Table input object and sql command:
'' ' SELECT I went , user , password , attribute , op FROM viewuserradiusunisulma
Any help would be appreciated.
print - image screen pentaho transformation
Transformation
Delete Pentaho
if your source and target table are in the same database, you can use a SQL query to delete all records in tableB that don't have a corresponding entry in tableA:
delete tableB where not exists (select id from tableA where id = tableB.id)
if source and destination tables are not in the same database, you would have to go through all rows in tableB and check whether the record exists in tableA. If your source tableA has a limited number of rows, loading the key values in memory and then performing a stream lookup instead of a database lookup would be much faster. I'd probably try that even with higher number of rows because of the significant performance impact.
note: I hope I haven't messed up the sql syntax, I'm thinking almost exclusively in abap at the moment and that messes with my memory a bit. So please test this on some backup before firing away.
I found the solution. In this case, I check the records, then report, update and enter the new data
Trasnsformation
I'm experiencing huge performance problem in one legacy application.
There is a search form where user can search records with given value.
A result row contains 10 columns. Then a SP returns any row which contains in any column that value.
This SP uses 8 Tables and some of them have about million records. Every minute I get a new record. This SP conducts paging as well.
Execution of this SP takes sometimes around 40 seconds.
What I did was, I created a new table and put there all records by using a query from this SP, but without conditions.
When there is a new update or update in one of source table I use a trigger and update this new "cache" table.
Now waiting for results from this new table takes only 1-3 seconds.
Has someone experience with something like this?
One of my colleagues said I better use view, but then every time I will be making JOINS.
What do you think? Is there another way?
Often times temporary tables can help you resolve performance issues. One approach might be to collect only the records that you need to consider into temporary tables and then create your final select statement from the temporary tables joined to any other tables that you're not filtering.
As an example, let's say one of the fields you are searching for is field1 in table1. Start by inserting into table #table1 only records that have the value of field1 you are looking for:
select PrimaryKeyTable1, Field1, Field2, Field3, etc...
into #table1
from table1
where Field1 = 'Whatever you are looking for'
This should be pretty fast even for a big tables, especially if you have an index on Field1. You do this for every table with search fields to collect all the records that have relevant records you are searching.
Then you also need to be sure to insert any records into your temporary tables that might have foreign key references to any of your other temporary tables. So let's say you also built a table #table2 with the above method that has a foreign key to table1 called PrimaryKeyTable1. You would insert those records like:
Insert into #table1
(PrimaryKeyTable1, Field1, Field2, Field3, etc...)
select table1.PrimaryKeyTable1, table1.Field1, table1.Field2, table1.Field3, etc...
from table1
join #table2
on table1.PrimaryKeyTable1 = table2.PrimaryKeyTable1
where table1.PrimaryKeyTable1 not in
(Select PrimaryKeyTable1 from #table1)
Now you will also have any records in #table1 that match to a record in #table2 that contain records that match the search criteria. You do this for all your temporary tables that have relevant foreign keys. The order that you do the inserts matters; be sure that you don't reference any temporary tables until after the last insert statement while collecting the foreign key referenced records.
Then you can simply do your final select statement, replacing the actual tables with the temporary tables you have built and eliminating all the filters that search your field data. Depending on the structure of your query there might be other optimizations, but that is the general idea.
If you've already explored all of your indexing options and this still doesn't help, MS SQL Server has "Change Tracking" features that maybe be of use to you in building your cache table. You enable the database for change tracking and configure which tables you wish to track. SQL Server then creates change records on every update, insert, delete on a table and then lets you query for changes to records that have been made since the last time you checked. This is very useful for syncing changes and is more efficient than using triggers. It's also easier to manage than making your own tracking tables. This has been a feature since SQL Server 2005.
How to: Use SQL Server Change Tracking
Change tracking only captures the primary keys of the tables and let's you query which fields might have been modified. Then you can query the tables join on those keys to get the current data. If you want it to capture the data also you can use Change Capture, but it requires more overhead and at least SQL Server 2008 enterprise edition.
Change Data Capture
Your solution is a robust way of doing what is called in Microsoft SQL Server "an indexed view" or "materialized view" in Oracle.
Basically you are correct - it's faster to navigate single indexed table then a dozen ones which are updated constantly.
You should really try creating an indexed view (some start here https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd171921(v=sql.100).aspx) and it will probably solve all your performance issues.
You can use schema binding View and create cluster index on view.it will store your view data physically.but after creating schema binding view you can not alter your table.
I have created a system using PHP/MySQL that downloads a large XML dataset, parses it and then inserts the parsed data into a MySQL database every week.
This system is made up of two databases with the same structure. One is a production database and one is a temporary database where the data is parsed and inserted into first.
When the data has been inserted into the temporary database I perform a merge by inserting/replacing the data in the production database. I have done all of the above so far. I then realised, data that might have been removed in a new dataset will be left to linger in the production database.
I need to perform a check to see if the new data is still in the production database, if it is then leave it, if it isn't delete the row from the production database so that the rows aren't left to linger.
For arguments sake, let's say the two databases are called database_temporary and database_production.
How can I go about doing this?
If you are using SQL to merge, a simple SQL can do the delete as well:
delete from database_production.table
where pk not in (select pk from database_temporary.table)
Notes:
This assumes that there is a a row can be uniquely identified. This may be based on a single column, multiple columns or another mechanism.
If your dataset is large, a not exists mey perform better than not in. See What's the difference between NOT EXISTS vs. NOT IN vs. LEFT JOIN WHERE IS NULL? and NOT IN vs. NOT EXISTS vs. LEFT JOIN / IS NULL: SQL Server
An example not exists:
delete from database_production.table p
where not exists (select 1 from database_temporary.table t where t.pk = p.pk)
Performance Notes:
As pointed out by #mgonzalez in the comments on the question, you may want to use a timestamp column (something like last modified) for comparing/merging in general so that you vompare only changed rows. This does not apply to the delete specifically, you cannot use timestamp for the delete because, well, the row would not exist.
I have the following query which pulls 1000 rows of data:
select barcode, type from collections where user = 'myusername'
I need to move this data to my new collectors_collections table. The user column is now labeled username.
What is the quickest way to do this? A query of some kind or some other way? I am using the latest MySQL Workbench.
You could try running this query:
INSERT INTO
collectors_collections(barcode, type, username)
SELECT
barcode,
type,
`user`
FROM
collections
WHERE
`user` = 'myusername';
Well, a simplistic approach which I would use it to just cut and paste the results of your selection into a text editor. And perform some simple search/replaces to create insert statements for your new table. Then just paste the new insert statements into your mysql client.
I assume you are not wanting this functionality with a running program.
I have two SQL Server databases, and I need to write a script to migrate data from database A to database B. Both databases have the same schema.
I must loop through the tables and for each table I must follow those rules:
If the item I'm migrating does not exist in the target table (for example, the comparison is made on a column Name) then I insert it directly.
If the item I'm migrating exists in the target table then I need to only update certain columns (for example, only update Age and Address but do not touch other columns)
Can anyone help me with that script? Any example would suffice. Thanks a lot
EDIT:
I just need an example for one table. No need to loop, I can handle each table separately (because each table has its own comparison column and update columns)
The MERGE statement looks like it can help you here. An Example:
MERGE StudentTotalMarks AS stm
USING (SELECT StudentID,StudentName FROM StudentDetails) AS sd
ON stm.StudentID = sd.StudentID
WHEN MATCHED AND stm.StudentMarks > 250 THEN DELETE
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET stm.StudentMarks = stm.StudentMarks + 25
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
INSERT(StudentID,StudentMarks)
VALUES(sd.StudentID,25);
The merge statement is available as of SQL Server 2008 so you are in luck
Instead of creating a script why don't you copy the source table under a different name into the target server (update needs to take place).
Then just do a simple insert where name does not exist.
Here is the SQL for step 1 only.
INSERT INTO [TableA]
SELECT Name,
XX,
XXXX
FROM TableB
WHERE NOT NAME IN(SELECT NAME
FROM TableA)