I have a column description with varchar values that I want to unnest to retrieve the stallid and itemid as separate columns.
[{"stallid":6771032,"itemid":12232},{"stallid":6771033,"itemid":12233}]
I tried the following syntax but it doesn't work.
select JSON_EXTRACT_SCALAR(description) from tableA
Does anyone know how?
select item['stallid'] as stallid, item['itemid'] as itemid
from
(select cast(json_parse('[{"stallid":6771032,"itemid":12232},{"stallid":6771033,"itemid":12233}]') as array<MAP<VARCHAR, VARCHAR>>) as items) CROSS JOIN UNNEST(items) AS items(item);
stallid | itemid
---------+--------
6771032 | 12232
6771033 | 12233
https://trino.io/docs/current/functions/json.html#json_parse
Related
I have a table named table1 which includes the following
+----------+-------+
|date |count |
+----------+-------+
|2022-01-07|2 |
|2022-01-06|0 |
|2022-01-05|1 |
+----------+-------+
Now I need to copy this table(table1) and paste this into a new table(table2) with a different schema. The new table should look like this
+----+----------+-------+
|type|date |count |
+----+----------+-------+
|Typ1|2022-01-07|2 |
|Typ1|2022-01-06|0 |
|Typ1|2022-01-05|1 |
+----+----------+-------+
Now the problems are:
I cannot use cqlsh COPY command as the scheme of both the tables is different.
I cannot manually add the data to table2 because the table1 has 1000s of rows
The schema of the tables are:
Table1:
CREATE TABLE table1(
date date PRIMARY KEY,
count bigint
);
Table2:
CREATE TABLE table2(
type text,
date date ,
count bigint,
PRIMARY KEY(type, date)
);
You want to populate data of one table into another table. You can write a utility to do this. This utility will read your first table and push data into another table. If you can use spark, then you can do it pretty fast.
Is it possible to create an index on a UUID/TIMEUUID column in Cassandra? I'm testing out a model design which would have an index on a UUID column, but queries on that column always return 0 rows found.
I have a table like this:
create table some_data (site_id int, user_id int, run_id uuid, value int, primary key((site_id, user_id), run_id));
I create an index with this command:
create index idx on some_data (run_id) ;
No errors are thrown by CQL when I create this index.
I have a small bit of test data in the table:
site_id | user_id | run_id | value
---------+---------+--------------------------------------+-----------------
1 | 1 | 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d | 3
However, when I run the query:
select * from some_data where run_id = 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d
CQLSH just returns: (0 rows)
If I use an int for the run_id then the index behaves as expected.
Yes, you can create a secondary index on a UUID. The real question is "should you?"
In any case, I followed your steps, and got it to work.
Connected to Test Cluster at 192.168.23.129:9042.
[cqlsh 5.0.1 | Cassandra 2.1.2 | CQL spec 3.2.0 | Native protocol v3]
Use HELP for help.
aploetz#cqlsh> use stackoverflow ;
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> create table some_data (site_id int, user_id int, run_id uuid, value int, primary key((site_id, user_id), run_id));
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> create index idx on some_data (run_id) ;
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> INSERT INTO some_data (site_id, user_id, run_id, value) VALUES (1,1,9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d,3);
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> select * from usr_rec3 where run_id = 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d;
code=2200 [Invalid query] message="unconfigured columnfamily usr_rec3"
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> select * from some_data where run_id = 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d;
site_id | user_id | run_id | value
---------+---------+--------------------------------------+-------
1 | 1 | 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d | 3
(1 rows)
Notice though, that when I ran this command, it failed:
select * from usr_rec3 where run_id = 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d
Are you sure that you didn't mean to select from some_data instead?
Also, creating secondary indexes on high-cardinality columns (like a UUID) is generally not a good idea. If you need to query by run_id, then you should revisit your data model and come up with an appropriate query table to serve that.
Clarification:
Using secondary indexes in general is not considered good practice. In the new book Cassandra High Availability, Robbie Strickland identifies their use as an anti-pattern, due to poor performance.
Just because a column is of the UUID data type doesn't necessarily make it high-cardinality. That's more of a data model question for you. But knowing the nature of UUIDs and their underlying purpose toward being unique, is setting off red flags.
Put these two points together, and there isn't anything about creating an index on a UUID that sounds appealing to me. If it were my cluster, and (more importantly) I had to support it later, I wouldn't do it.
I am storing posts from all users in table. I want to retrieve post from all users the user is following.
CREATE TABLE posts (
userid int,
time timestamp,
id uuid,
content text,
PRIMARY KEY (userid, time)
)WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (time DESC)
I have the data about who all user follows in another table
CREATE TABLE follow (
userid int,
who_follow_me set<int>,
who_i_follow set<int>,
PRIMARY KEY ((userid))
)
I am making query like
select * from posts where userid in(1,2,3,4....n);
2 questions:
why I still get data in random order, though CLUSTERING ORDER BY is specified in posts. ?
Is model correct to satisfy the query optimally (user can have n number of followers)?
I am using Cassandra 2.0.10.
"why I still get data in random order, though CLUSTERING ORDER BY is specified in posts?"
This is because ORDER BY only works for rows within a particular partitioning key. So in your case, if you wanted to see all of the posts for a specific user like this:
SELECT * FROM posts WHERE userid=1;
That return your results ordered by time, as all of the rows within the userid=1 partitioning key would be clustered by it.
"Is model correct to satisfy the query optimally (user can have n number of followers)?"
It will work, as long as you don't care about getting the results ordered by timestamp. To be able to query posts for all users ordered by time, you would need to come up with a different partitioning key. Without knowing too much about your application, you could use a column like GROUP (for instance) and partition on that.
So let's say that you evenly assign all of your users to eight groups: A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H. Let's say your table design changed like this:
CREATE TABLE posts (
group text,
userid int,
time timestamp,
id uuid,
content text,
PRIMARY KEY (group, time, userid)
)WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (time DESC)
You could then query all posts for all users for group B like this:
SELECT * FROM posts WHERE group='B';
That would give you all of the posts for all of the users in group B, ordered by time. So basically, for your query to order the posts appropriately by time, you need to partition your post data on something other than userid.
EDIT:
PRIMARY KEY (userid, follows)) WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (created DESC);
That's not going to work. In fact, that should produce the following error:
code=2200 [Invalid query] message="Missing CLUSTERING ORDER for column follows"
And even if you did add follows to your CLUSTERING ORDER clause, you would see this:
code=2200 [Invalid query] message="Only clustering key columns can be defined in CLUSTERING ORDER directive"
The CLUSTERING ORDER clause can only be used on the clustering column(s), which in this case, is only the follows column. Alter your PRIMARY KEY definition to cluster on follows (ASC) and created (DESC). I have tested this, and inserted some sample data, and can see that this query works:
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> SELECT * FROM posts WHERE userid=2 AND follows=1;
userid | follows | created | id
--------+---------+--------------------------+--------------------------------------
2 | 1 | 2015-01-25 13:27:00-0600 | 559cda12-8fe7-45d3-9a61-7ddd2119fcda
2 | 1 | 2015-01-25 13:26:00-0600 | 64b390ba-a323-4c71-baa8-e247a8bc9cdf
2 | 1 | 2015-01-25 13:24:00-0600 | 1b325b66-8ae5-4a2e-a33d-ee9b5ad464b4
(3 rows)
Although, if you want to query by just userid you can see posts from all of your followers. But in that case, the posts will only be ordered within each followerid, like this:
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> SELECT * FROM posts WHERE userid=2;
userid | follows | created | id
--------+---------+--------------------------+--------------------------------------
2 | 0 | 2015-01-25 13:28:00-0600 | 94da27d0-e91f-4c1f-88f2-5a4bbc4a0096
2 | 0 | 2015-01-25 13:23:00-0600 | 798053d3-f1c4-4c1d-a79d-d0faff10a5fb
2 | 1 | 2015-01-25 13:27:00-0600 | 559cda12-8fe7-45d3-9a61-7ddd2119fcda
2 | 1 | 2015-01-25 13:26:00-0600 | 64b390ba-a323-4c71-baa8-e247a8bc9cdf
2 | 1 | 2015-01-25 13:24:00-0600 | 1b325b66-8ae5-4a2e-a33d-ee9b5ad464b4
(5 rows)
This is my new schema,
CREATE TABLE posts(id uuid,
userid int,
follows int,
created timestamp,
PRIMARY KEY (userid, follows)) WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (created DESC);
Here userid represents who posted it and follows represents userid for his one of the follower. Say user x follows 10 other people , i am making 10+1 inserts. Definitely there is too much data duplication. However now its easier to get timeline for one of the user with following query
select * from posts where follows=?
I have two columns in oracle database
+---------+---------+
| Column1 | Column2 |
+---------+---------+
| A | 1 |
| A | 2 |
+---------+---------+
I want to retireive the data like i will get data as result
+---------+---------+
| Column1 | Column2 |
+---------+---------+
| A | 1,2 |
+---------+---------+
Please provide me the solution.
Tim Hall has a pretty canonical list of string aggregation techniques in Oracle.
Which technique you use depends on a number of factors including the version of Oracle and whether you are looking for a purely SQL solution. If you are using Oracle 11.2, I'd probably suggest using LISTAGG
SELECT column1, listagg( column2, ',' ) WITHIN GROUP( order by column2 )
FROM table_name
GROUP BY column1
If you are using an earlier version of Oracle, assuming you don't need a purely SQL solution, I would generally prefer using the user-defined aggregate function approach.
All abow answers are correct and I want to add one case to solve small problem. In my case my_column1 type was nvarchar2 but text was number and the bellow code does not work and display me only whitespace:
select group_id, listagg( t.my_column1 || '-' || to_char(t.doc_date,'dd.mm.yyyy') || ' ') within group(order by doc_date)
from my_table t
group by group_id
when I wrote like this it works.
select group_id, listagg( to_char(t.my_column1) || '-' || to_char(t.doc_date,'dd.mm.yyyy') || ' ') within group(order by doc_date)
from my_table t
group by group_id
I hope my feedback would save someone's time
If you have got 10g, then you have to go through the function below:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION get_comma_separated_value (input_val in number)
RETURN VARCHAR2
IS
return_text VARCHAR2(10000) := NULL;
BEGIN
FOR x IN (SELECT col2 FROM table_name WHERE col1 = input_val) LOOP
return_text := return_text || ',' || x.col2 ;
END LOOP;
RETURN LTRIM(return_text, ',');
END;
/
So, you can do like:
select col1, get_comma_separated_value(col1) from table_name
Fiddle here
If you have got oracle 11g, you can use listagg :
SELECT
col1,
LISTAGG(col2, ', ') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY col2) "names"
FROM table_x
GROUP BY col1
Fiddle here for Listagg
For mysql, its gonna be simple:
SELECT col1, GROUP_CONCAT(col2) FROM table_name GROUP BY col1
On my oracle version 10 it do the job:
SELECT column1, wm_concat( column2)
FROM table_name
GROUP BY column1
I have some 20 excel files containing data. all the tables have same columns like id name age location etc..... each file has distinct data but i don't know if data in one file is again repeated in another file. so i want to join all the files and the result st should contain distinct values. please help me out with this problem as soon as possible. i want the result set to be stored in an access database.
I would recomend either linking the sheets in acces, or importing the sheets as tabels.
Then from there try to determine using a DISTINCT select from the tables/sheets the keys required, and only selecting the records as required.
In SQL, you can use JOIN or NATURAL JOIN to join tables. I would look into NATURAL JOIN since you said all tables have the same values.
After that you can use DISTINCT to get distinct values.
I'm not sure if this is what you're looking for though: your question asks about excel but you've tagged it with SQL.
If you can use all the tables in one query, you can use a union to get the distinct rows:
select id, name, age, location from Table1
union
select id, name, age, location from Table2
union
select id, name, age, location from Table3
union
...
You can insert the records directly from the result:
insert into ResultTable
select id, name, age, location from Table1
union
....
If you only can select from one table at a time, you can skip the insert of rows that are already in the table:
insert into ResultTable
select t.id, t.name, t.age, t.location from Table1 as t
left join ResultTable as r on r.id = t.id
where r.id is null
(Assuming that id is a unique field identifying the record.)
It seems the unique set of data you want is this:
SELECT T1.name, T1.loc
FROM [Excel 8.0;HDR=YES;IMEX=1;DATABASE=C:\db1.xls;
].[Sheet1$] AS T1
UNION
SELECT T1.name, T1.loc
FROM [Excel 8.0;HDR=YES;IMEX=1;DATABASE=C:\db2.xls;
].[Sheet1$] AS T1
...but that you then want to arbitrarily apply a sequence of integers as id (rather than using the id values from the Excel tables).
Because Access Database Engine does not support common table expressions and Excel does not support VIEWs, you will have to repeat that UNION query as derived tables (hopefully the optimizer will recognize the repeat?) e.g. using a correlated subquery to get the row number:
SELECT (
SELECT COUNT(*) + 1
FROM (
SELECT T1.name, T1.loc
FROM [Excel 8.0;HDR=YES;IMEX=1;DATABASE=C:\db1.xls;
].[Sheet1$] AS T1
UNION
SELECT T1.name, T1.loc
FROM [Excel 8.0;HDR=YES;IMEX=1;DATABASE=C:\db2.xls;
].[Sheet1$] AS T1
) AS DT1
WHERE DT1.name < DT2.name
) AS id,
DT2.name, DT2.loc
FROM (
SELECT T2.name, T2.loc
FROM [Excel 8.0;HDR=YES;IMEX=1;DATABASE=C:\db1.xls;
].[Sheet1$] AS T2
UNION
SELECT T2.name, T2.loc
FROM [Excel 8.0;HDR=YES;IMEX=1;DATABASE=C:\db2.xls;
].[Sheet1$] AS T2
) AS DT2;
Note:
i want the result set to be stored in
an access database
Then maybe you should migrate the Excel data into a staging table in your Access database and do the data scrubbing from there. At least you could put that derived table into a VIEW :)
Join is to combine two tables by matching the values in corresponding columns. In result, you will get a merged table which consists of the first table, plus the matched rows copied from the second table. You can use DIGBD add-in for excel