MySQL developer here -- Nesting with select * finicky in Oracle 10g? - mysql

I'm writing a simple diagnostic query then attempting to execute it in the Oracle 10g SQL Scratchpad. EDIT: It will not be used in code. I'm nesting a simple "Select *" and it's giving me errors.
In the SQL Scratchpad for Oracle 10g Enterprise Manager Console, this statement runs fine.
SELECT * FROM v$session sess, v$sql sql WHERE sql.sql_id(+) = sess.sql_id and sql.sql_text <> ' '
If I try to wrap that up in Select * from () tb2 I get an error, "ORA-00918: Column Ambiguously Defined". I didn't think that could ever happen with this kind of statement so I am a bit confused.
select * from
(SELECT * FROM v$session sess, v$sql sql WHERE sql.sql_id(+) = sess.sql_id and sql.sql_text <> ' ')
tb2
You should always be able to select * from the result set of another select * statement using this structure as far as I'm aware... right?
Is Oracle/10g/the scratchpad trying to force me to accept a certain syntactic structure to prevent excessive nesting? Is this a bug in scratchpad or something about how oracle works?

When Oracle parses a SELECT *, it expands it out to an actual list of the columns to be selected. Since your inline view contains two columns named SQL_ID, this results in an ambiguous reference.
Interestingly, using ANSI join syntax seems to cause it to alias the duplicate column names automatically, and therefore avoids the error.
select * from
(select * from v$session sess left outer join v$sql sql on sql.sql_id=sess.sql_id and sql.sql_text <> ' ')
Incidentally, it's not clear to me why you chose that condition on sql_text. I don't expect that column would ever contain a single space. Are you really trying to filter out NULLs? If so, why use an outer join at all?

One of the general rules of thumbs at my place of employment is that SELECT * is never allowed. Explicitly define what columns you need; not only is it more readable, but less likely to have issues down the road

Related

SQL Query Differences between MS Access and MySQL

I'm having trouble converting a MS Access Query into a MySQL view. It seems that in Access, you're able to use a field that's created within the same select statement later on in the select statement. Whereas, in MySQL, that seems to not be the case.
e.g. Access Generated Code
SELECT IIf([Bonus]>0,[Base Salary],0) AS [BE Base], [BE Base]+[Bonus] AS [BE TC]
FROM titles_tbl INNER JOIN wage_tbl ON titles_tbl.Job_Title = wage_tbl.[Standard Title]
WHERE (((titles_tbl.Mod_Code)="3B") AND ((wage_tbl.Bonus)>0));
vs MySQL Converted Code
select if(`bonus`>0,`base salary`,0) as `be base`, `be base`+`bonus` as `be tc`
from titles_tbl inner join wage_tbl on titles_tbl.job_title = wage_tbl.`standard title`
where (((titles_tbl.mod_code)="3b") and ((wage_tbl.bonus)>0));
When I put this Access-generated SQL code into MySQL (after converting it appropriately), I get an error saying
10:17:07 Error Code: 1054. Unknown column 'be base' in 'field list' 0.062 sec
To me, it seems like MySQL can't use a new column in the same select statement that it's generated in.
Does anyone know whether that's the case, or what the real problem might be (as well as a solution)? Thank you in advance!
Your MySQL code should be
select if(`bonus`>0,`base salary`,0) as `be base`,
((SELECT `be base`) + `bonus`) as `be tc`
from ...
Firstly, if you use spaces in aliases you should surround the alias with ' (quote) or ` (backticks)
Secondly, if you want to refer, in a SELECT, to an alias of the same SELECT, you have to (SELECT `the_alias`)
And thirdly, in the subselect it is mandatory to wrap the aliased column with ` (backticks), simple quotes won't work there.

Change order of MySQL query keywords?

I'm using this 3rd party report generating software. It has the following steps:
1) insert your SQL statement into a webpage.
2) invoke an API to send the a set of primary keys to the Query
3) A Report is generated.
Unfortunately, the software is dumb, and simply appends the WHERE clause after the SQL statement. However with MySQL the WHERE statement is supposed to be before the GROUP BY. So when the API appends a WHERE it fails because its invalid SQL. Is there some way to tell MySQL to expect the WHERE statement at the end?
select incident.incidentID,
GROUP_CONCAT(moccode2.Description) as MOC2Description
from incident
join incidentmoc on incident.IncidentID = incidentmoc.IncidentID
inner join moccode2 on moccode2.id = incidentmoc.moccodeid
/* WHERE should go here */
group by incident.incidentID
/* I want the WHERE to go here */
Derek Kromm is basically correct in what I asked for, unfortunately I have additional constraints. It's still going to append the WHERE.
So I tried this:
select incident.incidentID,
GROUP_CONCAT(moccode2.Description) as MOC2Description
from incident
join incidentmoc on incident.IncidentID = incidentmoc.IncidentID
inner join moccode2 on moccode2.id = incidentmoc.moccodeid
group by incident.incidentID
HAVING incident.IncidentID > 1
////////////////////////////////////////
now software appends WHERE invalid SQL
Use the HAVING keyword
This link has some details around using it: http://www.mysqltutorial.org/mysql-having.aspx

How to stop Access from "correcting" my queries?

When I have subqueries in Access, it tries to 'correct' them without asking and breaks the query in the process. For example,
Select * from TblA LEFT JOIN (Select * from [TblB] union Select * from [TblC]) as SubQry On TblA.Whatever = SubQry.Whatever
This works fine when I run it the first time. However, after I save it and try to reopen it, Access tries to be 'helpful' and changes the parens to brackets:
Select * from TblA LEFT JOIN [Select * from [TblB] union Select * from [TblC]]. as SubQry On TblA.Whatever = SubQry.Whatever
Of course, this throws an error. Is there an option somewhere in the options menu I can toggle to make Access stop trying to 'help' me?
(Footnote: The actual table names are more complex than "TblB" and need to be in brackets to be recognized).
AFAIK, you can't. Parentheses aroud your subqueries are always changed to square brackets, and you have to revert this if you want to re-save.
All you could do is save the sub query as a separate query and use that one until you application is really stable, and then integrate the sub query in the main one.

What is dynamic SQL?

I just asked an SQL related question, and the first answer was: "This is a situation where dynamic SQL is the way to go."
As I had never heard of dynamic SQL before, I immediately searched this site and the web for what it was. Wikipedia has no article with this title. The first Google results all point to user forums where people ask more or less related questions.
However, I didn't find a clear definition of what a 'dynamic SQL' is. Is it something vendor specific? I work with MySQL and I didn't find a reference in the MySQL handbook (only questions, mostly unanswered, in the MySQL user forums).
On the other hand, I found many references to stored procedures. I have a slightly better grasp of what stored procedures are, although I have never used any. How are the two concepts related? Are they the same thing or does one uses the other?
Basically, what is needed is a simple introduction to dynamic SQL for someone who is new to the concept.
P.S.: If you feel like it, you may have a go at answering my previous question that prompted this one: SQL: How can we make a table1 JOIN table2 ON a table given in a field in table1?
Dynamic SQL is merely where the query has been built on the fly - with some vendors, you can build up the text of the dynamic query within one stored procedure, and then execute the generated SQL. In other cases, the term merely refers to a decision made by code on the client (this is at least vendor neutral)
Other answers have defined what dynamic SQL is, but I didn't see any other answers that attempted to describe why we sometimes need to use it. (My experience is SQL Server, but I think other products are generally similar in this respect.)
Dynamic SQL is useful when you are replacing parts of a query that can't be replaced using other methods.
For example, every time you call a query like:
SELECT OrderID, OrderDate, TotalPrice FROM Orders WHERE CustomerID = ??
you will be passing in a different value for CustomerID. This is the simplest case, and one that can by solved using a parameterized query, or a stored procedure that accepts a parameter, etc.
Generally speaking, dynamic SQL should be avoided in favor of parameterized queries, for performance and security reasons. (Although the performance difference probably varies quite a bit between vendors, and perhaps even between product versions, or even server configuration).
Other queries are possible to do using parameters, but might be simpler as dynamic SQL:
SELECT OrderID, OrderDate, TotalPrice FROM Orders
WHERE CustomerID IN (??,??,??)
If you always had 3 values, this is as easy as the first one. But what if this is a variable-length list? Its possible to do with parameters, but can be very difficult. How about:
SELECT OrderID, OrderDate, TotalPrice FROM Orders WHERE CustomerID = ??
ORDER BY ??
This can't be substituted directly, you can do it with a huge complicated CASE statement in the ORDER BY explicitly listing all possible fields, which may or may not be practical, depending on the number of fields available to sort by.
Finally, some queries simply CAN'T be done using any other method.
Let's say you have a bunch of Orders tables (not saying this is great design), but you might find yourself hoping you can do something like:
SELECT OrderID, OrderDate, TotalPrice FROM ?? WHERE CustomerID = ??
This can't be done using any other methods. In my environment, I frequently encounter queries like:
SELECT (programatically built list of fields)
FROM table1 INNER JOIN table2
(Optional INNER JOIN to table3)
WHERE (condition1)
AND (long list of other optional WHERE clauses)
Again, not saying that this is necessarily great design, but dynamic SQL is pretty much required for these types of queries.
Hope this helps.
Dynamic SQL is simply a SQL statement that is composed on the fly before being executed. For example, the following C# (using a parameterized query):
var command = new SqlCommand("select * from myTable where id = #someId");
command.Parameters.Add(new SqlParameter("#someId", idValue));
Could be re-written using dynamic sql as:
var command = new SqlCommand("select * from myTable where id = " + idValue);
Keep in mind, though, that Dynamic SQL is dangerous since it readily allows for SQL Injection attacks.
Dynamic SQL is a SQL built from strings at runtime. It is useful to dynamically set filters or other stuff.
An example:
declare #sql_clause varchar(1000)
declare #sql varchar(5000)
set #sql_clause = ' and '
set #sql = ' insert into #tmp
select
*
from Table
where propA = 1 '
if #param1 <> ''
begin
set #sql = #sql + #sql_clause + ' prop1 in (' + #param1 + ')'
end
if #param2 <> ''
begin
set #sql = #sql + #sql_clause + ' prop2 in (' + #param2 + ')'
end
exec(#sql)
It is exactly what Rowland mentioned. To elaborate on that a bit, take the following SQL:
Select * from table1 where id = 1
I am not sure which language you are using to connect to the database, but if I were to use C#, an example of a dynamic SQL query would be something like this:
string sqlCmd = "Select * from table1 where id = " + userid;
You want to avoid using dynamic SQL, because it becomes a bit cumbersome to keep integrity of the code if the query get too big. Also, very important, dynamic SQL is susceptible to SQL injection attacks.
A better way of writing the above statement would be to use parameters, if you are using SQL Server.
Rowland is correct, and as an addendum, unless you're properly using parameters (versus just concatonating parameter values inline from provided text, etc.) it can also be a security risk. It's also a bear to debug, etc.
Lastly, whenever you use dynamic SQL unwisely, things are unleashed and children are eaten.
To most databases, every SQL query is "dynamic" meaning that it is a program that is interpreted by the query optimiser given the input SQL string and possibly the parameter bindings ("bind variables").
Static SQL
However, most of the time, that SQL string is not constructed dynamically but statically, either in procedural languages like PL/SQL:
FOR rec IN (SELECT * FROM foo WHERE x = 1) LOOP
-- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "static SQL"
..
END LOOP;
Or in client / host languages like Java, using JDBC:
try (ResultSet rs = stmt.executeQuery("SELECT * FROM foo WHERE x = 1")) {
// "static SQL" ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
..
}
In both cases, the SQL string is "static" in the language that embeds it. Technically, it will still be "dynamic" to the SQL engine, which doesn't know how the SQL string is constructed, nor that it was a static SQL string.
Dynamic SQL
Sometimes, the SQL string needs to be constructed dynamically, given some input parameters. E.g. the above query might not need any predicate at all in some cases.
You might then choose to proceed to constructing the string dynamically, e.g. in PL/SQL:
DECLARE
TYPE foo_c IS REF CURSOR;
v_foo_c foo_c;
v_foo foo%ROWTYPE;
sql VARCHAR2(1000);
BEGIN
sql := 'SELECT * FROM foo';
IF something THEN
sql := sql || ' WHERE x = 1'; -- Beware of syntax errors and SQL injection!
END IF;
OPEN v_foo_c FOR sql;
LOOP
FETCH v_foo_c INTO v_foo;
EXIT WHEN v_foo_c%NOTFOUND;
END LOOP;
END;
Or in Java / JDBC:
String sql = "SELECT * FROM foo";
if (something)
sql += " WHERE x = 1"; // Beware of syntax errors and SQL injection!
try (ResultSet rs = stmt.executeQuery(sql)) {
..
}
Or in Java using a SQL builder like jOOQ
// No syntax error / SQL injection risk here
Condition condition = something ? FOO.X.eq(1) : DSL.trueCondition();
for (FooRecord foo : DSL.using(configuration)
.selectFrom(FOO)
.where(condition)) {
..
}
Many languages have query builder libraries like the above, which shine most when doing dynamic SQL.
(Disclaimer: I work for the company behind jOOQ)
Is it something vendor specific?
The SQL-92 Standard has a whole chapter on dynamic SQL (chapter 17) but it only applies to FULL SQL-92 and I know of no vendor that has implemented it.
I think what's meant is that you should build the query dynamically before executing it. For your other questions this means that you should select the table name you need first and the use your programming language to build a second query for doing what you want (what you want to do in the other question isn't possible directly like you want).

Combine 'like' and 'in' in a SqlServer Reporting Services query?

The following doesn't work, but something like this is what I'm looking for.
select *
from Products
where Description like (#SearchedDescription + %)
SSRS uses the # operator in-front of a parameter to simulate an 'in', and I'm not finding a way to match up a string to a list of strings.
There are a few options on how to use a LIKE operator with a parameter.
OPTION 1
If you add the % to the parameter value, then you can customize how the LIKE filter will be processed. For instance, your query could be:
SELECT name
FROM master.dbo.sysobjects
WHERE name LIKE #ReportParameter1
For the data set to use the LIKE statement properly, then you could use a parameter value like sysa%. When I tested a sample report in SSRS 2008 using this code, I returned the following four tables:
sysallocunits
sysaudacts
sysasymkeys
sysaltfiles
OPTION 2
Another way to do this that doesn't require the user to add any '%' symbol is to generate a variable that has the code and exceute the variable.
DECLARE #DynamicSQL NVARCHAR(MAX)
SET #DynamicSQL =
'SELECT name, id, xtype
FROM dbo.sysobjects
WHERE name LIKE ''' + #ReportParameter1 + '%''
'
EXEC (#DynamicSQL)
This will give you finer controller over how the LIKE statement will be used. If you don't want users to inject any additional operators, then you can always add code to strip out non alpha-numeric characters before merging it into the final query.
OPTION 3
You can create a stored procedure that controls this functionality. I generally prefer to use stored procedures as data sources for SSRS and never allow dynamically generated SQL, but that's just a preference of mine. This helps with discoverability when performing dependency analysis checks and also allows you to ensure optimal query performance.
OPTION 4
Create a .NET code assembly that helps dynamically generate the SQL code. I think this is overkill and a poor choice at best, but it could work conceivably.
Have you tried to do:
select * from Products where Description like (#SearchedDescription + '%')
(Putting single quotes around the % sign?)
Dano, which version of SSRS are you using? If it's RS2000, the multi-parameter list is
not officially supported, but there is a workaround....
put like this:
select *
from tsStudent
where studentName like #SName+'%'
I know this is super old, but this came up in my search to solve the same problem, and I wound up using a solution not described here. I'm adding a new potential solution to help whomever else might follow.
As written, this solution only works in SQL Server 2016 and later, but can be adapted for older versions by writing a custom string_split UDF, and by using a subquery instead of a CTE.
First, map your #SearchedDescription into your Dataset as a single string using JOIN:
=JOIN(#SearchedDedscription, ",")
Then use STRING_SPLIT to map your "A,B,C,D" kind of string into a tabular structure.
;with
SearchTerms as (
select distinct
Value
from
string_split(#SearchedDescription, ',')
)
select distinct
*
from
Products
inner join SearchTerms on
Products.Description like SearchTerms.Value + '%'
If someone adds the same search term multiple times, this would duplicate rows in the result set. Similarly, a single product could match multiple search terms. I've added distinct to both the SearchTerms CTE and the main query to try to suppress this inappropriate row duplication.
If your query is more complex (including results from other joins) then this could become an increasingly big problem. Just be aware of it, it's the main drawback of this method.