I'm trying to code "not in" statement in FN, but don't really know what's the best way to make it. Here is some sql statement:
select * from T1
where T1. id not in
(
select distinct T2.fkeyID from T2
)
Should I create mappings with references one-to-many and use a property check? Or is there any other way, e.g. somehow to write QueryOver for resolving issue?
Thanks.
var subquery = QueryOver.Of<T2>()
.Select(Projections.Distinct(Projections.Property("referencedT1.id")))
var results = session.QueryOver<T1>()
.WithSubquery.WhereProperty(t1 => t1.Id).NotIn(subquery)
.List();
Related
Is it possible to use .QueryMultiple (or some other method) in Dapper, and use the results of each former query to be used in the where clause of the next query, without having to do each query individually, get the id, and then .Query again, get the id and so on.
For example,
string sqlString = #"select tableA_id from tableA where tableA_lastname = #lastname;
select tableB_id from tableB WHERE tableB_id = tableA_id";
db.QueryMultiple.(sqlString, new {lastname = "smith"});
Is something like this possible with Dapper or do I need a view or stored procedure to accomplish this? I can use multiple joins for one SQL statement, but in my real query there are 7 joins, and I didn't think I should return 7 objects.
Right now I'm just using object.
You can store every previous query in table parameter and then first perform select from the parameter and query for next, for example:
DECLARE #TableA AS Table(
tableA_id INT
-- ... all other columns you need..
)
INSERT #TableA
SELECT tableA_id
FROM tableA
WHERE tableA_lastname = #lastname
SELECT *
FROM #TableA
SELECT tableB_id
FROM tableB
JOIN tableA ON tableB_id = tableA_id
I'm trying to figure out how to replicate the below query in SQLAlchemy
SELECT c.company_id AS company_id,
(SELECT policy_id FROM associative_table at WHERE at.company_id = c.company_id) AS policy_id_ref,
(SELECT `default` FROM policy p WHERE p.policy_id = policy_id_ref) AS `default`,
FROM company c;
Note that this is a stripped down, basic example of what I'm really dealing with. The actual schema supports data and relationship versioning that requires the subqueries to include additional conditions, sorting, and limiting, making it impractical (if not impossible) for them to be joins.
The crux of the problem is in how the second subquery relies on policy_id_ref -- the value obtained from the first subquery. In SQLAlchemy, this is effectively what I have now:
ct = aliased(classes.company)
at = aliased(classes.associative_table)
pt = aliased(classes.policy)
policy_id_ref = session.query(at.policy_id).\
filter(at.company_id == ct.company_id).\
label('policy_id_ref')
policy_default = session.query(pt.default).\
filter(pt.id == 'policy_id_ref').\
label('default')
query = session.query(ct.company_id,policy_id_ref,policy_default)
The pull from the "company" table works fine as does the first subquery that retrieves the "policy_id_ref" column. The problem is the second subquery that has to reference that "policy_id_ref" column. I don't know how to write its filter in such a way that it literally renders "policy_id_ref" in the resulting query, to match the label of the first subquery.
Suggestions?
Thanks in advance
You can write your query as
select(
Companies.company_id,
AssociativeTable.policy_id.label('policy_id_ref'),
Policy.default.label('policy_default'),
).select_from(
Companies,
).join(
AssociativeTable,
AssociativeTable.company_id == Companies.company_id,
).join(
Policy,
AssociativeTable.policy_id == Policy.id
)
but in case you need reference to label from subquery => use literal_column
from sqlalchemy import func, select, literal_column
session.query(
func.array_agg(
literal_column('batch_info'),
JSONB
).label('history')
).select_from(
select(
func.jsonb_build_object(
'batch_id', AccountingQueueBatch.id,
'batch_label', AccountingQueueBatch.label,
).label('batch_info')
).select_from(
AccountingQueueBatch,
)
)
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 tried to translate SQL "NOT IN" expression to LINQ, and I found that I should use the "Contains" option.
I have 2 tables:
ProductsGroups Products
-------------- ---------
id product_id
product_id product_name
My queries looks like this:
var innerQuery = from pg in Session.Query<ProductsGroups>
select pg.product_id;
var Query = from p in Session.Query<Products>
where !innerQuery.Contains(p.product_id)
select new {p.product_id, p.product_name};
But the sql that nHibernate generates is wrong:
select p.product_id, p.product_name
from Products p
where not (exists (select product_id
from ProductsGroups pg
where p.product_id = pg.id))
The "where" clause is not on the right field, it compares product_id to progucts group id.
Does anybody knows how can I solve it?
The solution that I found for meanwhile is to convert first query to list, and then
use this list in second query:
var innerQuery = (from pg .....).ToList();
Then, the nHibernate translates the "Contains" expression to "NOT IN", as I want:
select p.product_id, p.product_name
from Products p
where not (p.product_id in (1,2,3,4))
I am not sure, but I think you're running into a problem b/c contains determines if an element is in the collection by "using the default equality comparer." (MS documentation) I assume your productgroup mapping specifies it's Id as the Id property. So from nHibernate's perspective that is the value to use to determine equality.
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.