I know you can combine multiple table-selects using a Join statement but is there a way to combine these two queries into one?
SELECT Statistics.StatisticID
FROM Statistics
ORDER BY `SubmittedTime` DESC
LIMIT 0, 10
And this one?
SELECT COUNT(Votes.StatisticID)
FROM Votes
WHERE Votes.StatisticID = ?
(fluff removed)
At the moment I've achieved something that nearly works.
SELECT Statistics.StatisticID, COUNT(Score.StatisticID) AS Votes
FROM `Statistics`
LEFT JOIN `Votes` AS `Score` ON `Statistics`.`StatisticID` = `Score`.`StatisticID`
ORDER BY `SubmittedTime` DESC
LIMIT 0, 10
The Votes table is a simple StatID, UserID joiner. In my test case it contains 3 rows, two with StatID 5 - 1 with StatID 2.
My query will work if I add a WHERE clause, for example WHERE StatisticID = 5 and correctly return 2 votes. However if I remove the WHERE clause I still get one row returned and 3 votes.
Is it possible to combine these queries or will I have to run the second for each result (obviously not preferable)?
Assuming that you want to count the number of votes per statistics
SELECT StatisticID, COUNT(*) AS CountVotes
FROM `Votes`
GROUP BY Statistics.StatisticsID
I'm not seeing the reason why the tables have to be joined.
[EDIT] Ah...I see you want to order by submittedtime of the statistics table.
SELECT Votes.StatisticID, COUNT(*) AS CountVotes
FROM `Votes` JOIN Statistics ON votes.statisticsID = Statistics.StatisticsID
GROUP BY Statistics.StatisticsID
ORDER BY Statistics.SubmittedTime
Related
I have two tables table_entries and table_images.
table_images holds a series of images for any single item in table_entries
both tables are organized by a vid which is essentially an item id.
Not all items in table_entries will have an image, while others may have multiple images
What I am trying to construct is a query to only select items from table_entries that have an image, specifically 10 entries that have an image, which i've built as follows:
SELECT * FROM table_entries
INNER JOIN table_images ON (table_entries.vid = table_images.vid)
WHERE (model LIKE '%apple%' OR ext LIKE '%apple%')
ORDER BY lastupdated DESC LIMIT 0,10
EDIT: lastupdated, model and ext all belong to table_entries, in fact all sorting, selecting, etc.. is done based on table_entries
The problem with the above query is that it is successfully only picking items with images, but if a single item has 10 images, then it will return the 10 rows as item #1 with each of its images as individual rows. The intention is to have 10 distinct items, and limit the join to only 1 image for each item from table_entries
So I want to somehow limit the join to 1 row for the entire join.
I've searched for the answer here on SO and found so many good answers to this question (MySQL INNER JOIN select only one row from second table, MySQL JOIN with LIMIT 1 on joined table) , however they all use aliases for selecting the tables.
I could use alias and fix my query, but there is a TON of PHP code that I would have to change to deal with the aliased table names.
Is it possible to fix my query to only select 1 row from the joined table without the use of aliases?
You can do:
select *
from (
select *,
row_number() over(partition by i.vid order by i.updated) as rn
from table_entries e
join table_images i on i.vid = e.vid
where e.model like '%apple%' or e.ext like '%apple'
) x
where rn = 1 -- this is the key filter
order by lastupdated desc
limit 0, 10
Please consider this query could be awfully slow due to the use of LIKE '%text%' in the search condition, specially if the table table_entries has millions of rows.
Basically, I have two separate queries, which I need to somehow merge into one set of results.
![This is Table 1, which shows the sum of each group's salary]
1
Here is the queries I wrote to form the tables.
SELECT con_stagename, SUM(p_daily_salary) AS sum_salary
FROM CONTENDER, PARTICIPANT
WHERE p_contender = con_id
GROUP BY con_id;
SELECT MAX(sum_salary) AS max_salary
FROM (SELECT con_stagename, SUM(p_daily_salary) AS sum_salary
FROM CONTENDER, PARTICIPANT
WHERE p_contender = con_id
GROUP BY con_id) T2;
And the question is, if I want the result to be a single row of values, which the name of the group with the highest salary, and the actual amount. How would I do it? I've been trying to use JOIN operations but there was not luck.
SELECT con_stagename, SUM(p_daily_salary) AS sum_salary
FROM CONTENDER, PARTICIPANT
WHERE p_contender = con_id
GROUP BY con_id
ORDER BY 2 DESC
LIMIT 1
I have 4 queries I need to excecute in order to suggest items to users based on items they've already expressed an interest in:
Select 5 random items the user already likes
SELECT item_id
FROM user_items
WHERE user_id = :user_person
ORDER BY RAND()
LIMIT 5
Select 50 people who like the same items
SELECT user_id
FROM user_items
WHERE user_id != :user_person
AND item_id = :selected_item_list
LIMIT 50
SELECT all items that the original user likes
SELECT item_id
FROM user_items
WHERE user_id = :user_person
SELECT 5 items the user doesn't already like to suggest to the user
SELECT item_id
FROM user_items
WHERE user_id = :user_id_list
AND item_id != :item_id_list
LIMIT 5
What I would like to know is how would I excecute this as one query?
There are a few reasons for me wanting to do this:
at the moment, I have to excecute the 'select 50 people' query 5 times and pick the top 50 people from it
I then have to excecute the 'select 5 items' query 50 * (number of items initial user likes)
Once the query has been excecuted, I intend to store the query result in a cookie (if the user gives consent to me using cookies, otherwise they don't get the 'item suggestion' at all) with the key being a hash of the query, meaning it will only fire once a day / once a week (that's why I return 5 suggestions and select a key at random to display)
Basically, if anybody knows how to write these queries as one query, could you show me and explain what is going on in the query?
This will select all items you need:
SELECT DISTINCT ui_items.item_id
FROM user_items AS ui_own
JOIN user_items AS ui_others ON ui_own.item_id = ui_others.item_id
JOIN user_items AS ui_items ON ui_others.user_id = ui_items.user_id
WHERE ui_own.user_id = :user_person
AND ui_others.user_id <> :user_person
AND ui_items.item_id <> ui_own.item_id
(please, check if result are exact same with you version - I tested it on a very small fake data set)
Next you just cache this list and show 5 items randomly, because ORDER BY RAND() is VERY inefficient (non-deterministic query => no caching)
EDIT: Added the DISTINCT to not show duplicate rows.
You can also return a most popular suggestions in descending popularity order by removing DISTINCT and adding the following code to the end of the query:
GROUP BY ui_items.item_id
ORDER BY COUNT(*) DESC
LIMIT 20
To the end of the query which will return the 20 most popular items.
I'm a MySQL query noobie so I'm sure this is a question with an obvious answer.
But, I was looking at these two queries. Will they return different result sets? I understand that the sorting process would commence differently, but I believe they will return the same results with the first query being slightly more efficient?
Query 1: HAVING, then AND
SELECT user_id
FROM forum_posts
GROUP BY user_id
HAVING COUNT(id) >= 100
AND user_id NOT IN (SELECT user_id FROM banned_users)
Query 2: WHERE, then HAVING
SELECT user_id
FROM forum_posts
WHERE user_id NOT IN(SELECT user_id FROM banned_users)
GROUP BY user_id
HAVING COUNT(id) >= 100
Actually the first query will be less efficient (HAVING applied after WHERE).
UPDATE
Some pseudo code to illustrate how your queries are executed ([very] simplified version).
First query:
1. SELECT user_id FROM forum_posts
2. SELECT user_id FROM banned_user
3. Group, count, etc.
4. Exclude records from the first result set if they are presented in the second
Second query
1. SELECT user_id FROM forum_posts
2. SELECT user_id FROM banned_user
3. Exclude records from the first result set if they are presented in the second
4. Group, count, etc.
The order of steps 1,2 is not important, mysql can choose whatever it thinks is better. The important difference is in steps 3,4. Having is applied after GROUP BY. Grouping is usually more expensive than joining (excluding records can be considering as join operation in this case), so the fewer records it has to group, the better performance.
You have already answers that the two queries will show same results and various opinions for which one is more efficient.
My opininion is that there will be a difference in efficiency (speed), only if the optimizer yields with different plans for the 2 queries. I think that for the latest MySQL versions the optimizers are smart enough to find the same plan for either query so there will be no difference at all but off course one can test and see either the excution plans with EXPLAIN or running the 2 queries against some test tables.
I would use the second version in any case, just to play safe.
Let me add that:
COUNT(*) is usually more efficient than COUNT(notNullableField) in MySQL. Until that is fixed in future MySQL versions, use COUNT(*) where applicable.
Therefore, you can also use:
SELECT user_id
FROM forum_posts
WHERE user_id NOT IN
( SELECT user_id FROM banned_users )
GROUP BY user_id
HAVING COUNT(*) >= 100
There are also other ways to achieve same (to NOT IN) sub-results before applying GROUP BY.
Using LEFT JOIN / NULL :
SELECT fp.user_id
FROM forum_posts AS fp
LEFT JOIN banned_users AS bu
ON bu.user_id = fp.user_id
WHERE bu.user_id IS NULL
GROUP BY fp.user_id
HAVING COUNT(*) >= 100
Using NOT EXISTS :
SELECT fp.user_id
FROM forum_posts AS fp
WHERE NOT EXISTS
( SELECT *
FROM banned_users AS bu
WHERE bu.user_id = fp.user_id
)
GROUP BY fp.user_id
HAVING COUNT(*) >= 100
Which of the 3 methods is faster depends on your table sizes and a lot of other factors, so best is to test with your data.
HAVING conditions are applied to the grouped by results, and since you group by user_id, all of their possible values will be present in the grouped result, so the placing of the user_id condition is not important.
To me, second query is more efficient because it lowers the number of records for GROUP BY and HAVING.
Alternatively, you may try the following query to avoid using IN:
SELECT `fp`.`user_id`
FROM `forum_posts` `fp`
LEFT JOIN `banned_users` `bu` ON `fp`.`user_id` = `bu`.`user_id`
WHERE `bu`.`user_id` IS NULL
GROUP BY `fp`.`user_id`
HAVING COUNT(`fp`.`id`) >= 100
Hope this helps.
No it does not gives same results.
Because first query will filter records from count(id) condition
Another query filter records and then apply having clause.
Second Query is correctly written
I'm trying to compare two set of resutls aving hard time to undesrtand how subqueries work and if they are efficient. I'm not gonna explain all my tables, but just think i have apair of arrays...i might do it in php but i wonder if i can do it in mysql right away...
this is my query to check how many items user 1 has in lists he owns
SELECT DISTINCT *
FROM list_tb
INNER JOIN item_to_list_tb
ON list_tb.list_id = item_to_list_tb.list_id
WHERE list_tb.user_id = 1
ORDER BY item_to_list_tb.item_id DESC
this is my query to check how many items user 2 has in lists he owns
SELECT DISTINCT *
FROM list_tb
INNER JOIN item_to_list_tb
ON list_tb.list_id = item_to_list_tb.list_id
WHERE list_tb.user_id = 1
ORDER BY item_to_list_tb.item_id DESC
now the problem is that i would intersect those results to check how many item_id they have in common...
thanks!!!
Unfortunately, MySQL does not support the Intersect predicate. However, one way to accomplish that goal would be to exclude List_Tb.UserId from your Select and Group By and then count by distinct User_Id:
Select ... -- everything except List_Tb.UserId
From List_Tb
Inner Join Item_To_List_Tb
On List_Tb.List_Id = Item_To_List_Tb.List_Id
Where List_Tb.User_Id In(1,2)
Group By ... -- everything except List_Tb.UserId
Having Count( Distinct List_Tb.User_Id ) = 2
Order By item_to_list_tb.item_id Desc
Obviously you would replace the ellipses with the actual columns you want to return and on which you wish to group.