This is a pretty straightforward update statement that works on SQL Server DB and I have re-written it in Databricks which is not working, Can you provide your suggestions?
update
a
set
composite_account_key=nvl(e.account_key,0)
edw.account_fact a
join edw.account_dim b on (a.account_key=b.account_key)
join vw_account_hier c on (b.accountcode=c.accountcode)
join edw.analysis_codes_dim d on (d.anlys_code_dimkey=a.anlys_code_dimkey and c.atomic_anlys_appl_cde=d.anlys_appl_cde)
join vw_composite e on (c.edw_c_account_code=e.edw_c_account_code)
where
a.timekey='95'
ParseException:[PARSE_SYNTAX_ERROR] Syntax error at or near 'from'(line 5, pos 0)
The syntax of update statement in Databricks SQL does not support using from parameter.
You can create a temporary view from the result of all the join operations and use this view in the update statement directly instead.
The following is the demonstration of the same. I have the result of my join query as shown below:
When I try to use from parameter directly in update statement (update id value to 10 wherever it is 1 from join result), I get the same error.
So, I have created a view first and then used it in update query to get the result.
%sql
--CREATE TEMPORARY VIEW for_updt as (select a.id,a.gname,b.team from demo as a join demo1 as b on a.id=b.id );
update demo set id=10 where id in(select id from for_updt where) and (demo.id=1)
Related
So I'm trying to inner join multiple tables in order to bind jsonb with a name. But I'm getting this error.
ERROR: invalid reference to FROM-clause entry for table "mt"
Find the recreational fiddle of the problem below.
SELECT test,jsonb_build_object(
'myData_updated',
json_agg(elems || jsonb_build_object('product_name', po.name))
)
FROM mainTable mt,
jsonb_array_elements(mt.myData) AS heading_elems,
jsonb_array_elements(heading_elems -> 'pItems') AS elems
JOIN products po ON (elems ->> 'pid' )::int = po.pid
INNER JOIN clients client ON client.client_id = mt.client_id
INNER JOIN projects project on project.project_id = mt.project_id
https://dbfiddle.uk/?rdbms=postgres_10&fiddle=63e5b8a49940bb50b5bb7985a947c09e
I have tried removing alias i still get the same error. Quick googling says it is caused because of JOIN & ", delimited FROM" query
The syntax
table,
json_array_elements()
is the shortcut for
table CROSS JOIN LATERAL
json_array_elements()
So with the , syntax you used is an implicit join. After that, with using INNER JOIN you are using an explicit join. The mix is not always working, so replace the implicit syntax with an explicit one and it works.
demo:db<>fiddle
Beside this, the used function json_agg() is an aggregate, so if you want to get other columns like test you have to do a GROUP BY and/or use more aggregate functions on these columns.
Can somebody help me in converting below mentioned query in to Maximo's where clause:
select distinct workorder.wonum from workorder inner join [assignment]
On workorder.wonum=[assignment].wonum
inner join amcrew
On amcrew.amcrew=[assignment].amcrew
inner join amcrewlabor
On amcrewlabor.amcrew=amcrew.amcrew
inner join labor
On amcrewlabor.laborcode=labor.laborcode
inner join person
on labor.laborcode=person.personid where amcrewlabor.laborcode='KELLYB'
KELLYB is PERSONID used here for just reference.
If you are using a custom search query in Maximo, you can try prepending your with in (your query)
For example, if you're in Maximo's work order tracking module, the application uses select * from workorder by default. Any time you add a search filter such as work order number (wonum), then the query appends to run a query as select * from workorder where wonum = '123' if 123 is the work order number you entered.
Your where clause might look something like this:
wonum in (
select distinct workorder.wonum
from workorder
join assignment on workorder.wonum=assignment.wonum
join amcrew on amcrew.amcrew=assignment.amcrew
join amcrewlabor on amcrewlabor.amcrew=amcrew.amcrew
join labor on amcrewlabor.laborcode=labor.laborcode
join person on labor.laborcode=person.personid
where amcrewlabor.laborcode='KELLYB'
)
The SQL that is generated in Microsoft Access will not necessarily work in Maximo without some modification.
I searched a lot about sorting elements by sum of votes (in another model), like I do in SQL here :
SELECT item.* FROM item
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT
vote.item,
SUM(vote.value) AS vote.rating
FROM vote
GROUP BY vote.item
) AS res ON item.id = vote.item
ORDER BY res.rating DESC
Is there a way to do it via waterline methods ?
I think you can't do the left join with simple waterline methods, but you can use the .query method to execute your raw SQL syntax.
Sails MySQL adapter makes sum('field') conflict with sort('field'). It will generate SQL query like:
SELECT SUM(table.field) AS field FROM table ORDER BY table.field;
But I want:
SELECT SUM(table.field) AS field FROM table ORDER BY field;
It same as:
SELECT SUM(table.field) AS f FROM table ORDER BY f;
My solution is using lodash.sortBy() to process results. https://lodash.com/docs/4.16.4#sortBy
I have created a query with a subquery in Access, and cannot link it in Excel 2003: when I use the menu Data -> Import External Data -> Import Data... and select the mdb file, the query is not present in the list. If I use the menu Data -> Import External Data -> New Database Query..., I can see my query in the list, but at the end of the import wizard I get this error:
Too few parameters. Expected 2.
My guess is that the query syntax is causing the problem, in fact the query contains a subquery. So, I'll try to describe the query goal and the resulting syntax.
Table Positions
ID (Autonumber, Primary Key)
position (double)
currency_id (long) (references Currency.ID)
portfolio (long)
Table Currency
ID (Autonumber, Primary Key)
code (text)
Query Goal
Join the 2 tables
Filter by portfolio = 1
Filter by currency.code in ("A", "B")
Group by currency and calculate the sum of the positions for each currency group an call the result: sumOfPositions
Calculate abs(sumOfPositions) on each currency group
Calculate the sum of the previous results as a single result
Query
The query without the final sum can be created using the Design View. The resulting SQL is:
SELECT Currency.code, Sum(Positions.position) AS SumOfposition
FROM [Currency] INNER JOIN Positions ON Currency.ID = Positions.currency_id
WHERE (((Positions.portfolio)=1))
GROUP BY Currency.code
HAVING (((Currency.code) In ("A","B")));
in order to calculate the final SUM I did the following (in the SQL View):
SELECT Sum(Abs([temp].[SumOfposition])) AS sumAbs
FROM [SELECT Currency.code, Sum(Positions.position) AS SumOfposition
FROM [Currency] INNER JOIN Positions ON Currency.ID = Positions.currency_id
WHERE (((Positions.portfolio)=1))
GROUP BY Currency.code
HAVING (((Currency.code) In ("A","B")))]. AS temp;
So, the question is: is there a better way for structuring the query in order to make the export work?
I can't see too much wrong with it, but I would take out some of the junk Access puts in and scale down the query to this, hopefully this should run ok:
SELECT Sum(Abs(A.SumOfPosition)) As SumAbs
FROM (SELECT C.code, Sum(P.position) AS SumOfposition
FROM Currency As C INNER JOIN Positions As P ON C.ID = P.currency_id
WHERE P.portfolio=1
GROUP BY C.code
HAVING C.code In ("A","B")) As A
It might be worth trying to declare your parameters in the MS Access query definition and define their datatypes. This is especially important when you are trying to use the query outside of MS Access itself, since it can't auto-detect the parameter types. This approach is sometimes hit or miss, but worth a shot.
PARAMETERS [[Positions].[portfolio]] Long, [[Currency].[code]] Text ( 255 );
SELECT Sum(Abs([temp].[SumOfposition])) AS sumAbs
FROM [SELECT Currency.code, Sum(Positions.position) AS SumOfposition
FROM [Currency] INNER JOIN Positions ON Currency.ID = Positions.currency_id
WHERE (((Positions.portfolio)=1))
GROUP BY Currency.code
HAVING (((Currency.code) In ("A","B")))]. AS temp;
I have solved my problems thanks to the fact that the outer query is doing a trivial sum. When choosing New Database Query... in Excel, at the end of the process, after pressing Finish, an Import Data form pops up, asking
Where do you want to put the data?
you can click on Create a PivotTable report... . If you define the PivotTable properly, Excel will display only the outer sum.
I want to perform a simple join on two tables (BusinessUnit and UserBusinessUnit), so I can get a list of all BusinessUnits allocated to a given user.
The first attempt works, but there's no override of Select which allows me to restrict the columns returned (I get all columns from both tables):
var db = new KensDB();
SqlQuery query = db.Select
.From<BusinessUnit>()
.InnerJoin<UserBusinessUnit>( BusinessUnitTable.IdColumn, UserBusinessUnitTable.BusinessUnitIdColumn )
.Where( BusinessUnitTable.RecordStatusColumn ).IsEqualTo( 1 )
.And( UserBusinessUnitTable.UserIdColumn ).IsEqualTo( userId );
The second attept allows the column name restriction, but the generated sql contains pluralised table names (?)
SqlQuery query = new Select( new string[] { BusinessUnitTable.IdColumn, BusinessUnitTable.NameColumn } )
.From<BusinessUnit>()
.InnerJoin<UserBusinessUnit>( BusinessUnitTable.IdColumn, UserBusinessUnitTable.BusinessUnitIdColumn )
.Where( BusinessUnitTable.RecordStatusColumn ).IsEqualTo( 1 )
.And( UserBusinessUnitTable.UserIdColumn ).IsEqualTo( userId );
Produces...
SELECT [BusinessUnits].[Id], [BusinessUnits].[Name]
FROM [BusinessUnits]
INNER JOIN [UserBusinessUnits]
ON [BusinessUnits].[Id] = [UserBusinessUnits].[BusinessUnitId]
WHERE [BusinessUnits].[RecordStatus] = #0
AND [UserBusinessUnits].[UserId] = #1
So, two questions:
- How do I restrict the columns returned in method 1?
- Why does method 2 pluralise the column names in the generated SQL (and can I get round this?)
I'm using 3.0.0.3...
So far my experience with 3.0.0.3 suggests that this is not possible yet with the query tool, although it is with version 2.
I think the preferred method (so far) with version 3 is to use a linq query with something like:
var busUnits = from b in BusinessUnit.All()
join u in UserBusinessUnit.All() on b.Id equals u.BusinessUnitId
select b;
I ran into the pluralized table names myself, but it was because I'd only re-run one template after making schema changes.
Once I re-ran all the templates, the plural table names went away.
Try re-running all 4 templates and see if that solves it for you.