How to write the below query as jpa method using findBy...?
SELECT * FROM user WHERE (user_id=1) AND ('2022-03-04' BETWEEN from_date AND to_date) OR ('2022-03-10' BETWEEN from_date AND to_date);
I'm assuming that from_date and to_date are columns on your table.
If that's the case, pass in the value of 2022-03-04 and 2022-03-10 as variables of the same date type as the column in your table to the function that is making this query.
eg. if the column stores LocalDate then pass in those dates as variables of type LocalDate.
SELECT u FROM User u WHERE u.id = 1 AND ( (:firstInputDate BETWEEN u.from_date AND u.to_date) OR (:secondInputDate BETWEEN u.from_date AND u.to_date) )
However, this seems much more complicated. My recommendation is that you just do this query as a native query.
All you would do is annotate the repository method like so
#Query(
value = "SELECT * FROM user WHERE (user_id=1) AND ('2022-03-04' BETWEEN from_date AND to_date) OR ('2022-03-10' BETWEEN from_date AND to_date)",
nativeQuery = true
)
and one last thing. Your query is missing an essential bracket. Let me explain. I'll break down the predicates
a = user_id = 1
b = ('2022-03-04' BETWEEN from_date AND to_date)
c = ('2022-03-10' BETWEEN from_date AND to_date)
Your whole query is then: select * ... where a and b or c
Conjunctions (and) is performed before disjunctions (or) which means that your query evaluates to select * ... where (a and b) or c. From context, it doesn't seem like this is what you were going for. Because this means that the query is true if the user id is 1 and the first date predicate is true. It is also true if the second date predicate is true even if their user id is not 1
Instead, you need these essential brackets making the query select * ... where a and (b or c)
Related
I want to retrieve users name and there responsibility_key where there end_date is null and i want to convert it to (sysdate+1) using nvl but i am only able to retrieve the responsibility_key not the name please help.
The error in the image says "column ambiguously defined". Take a close look. Your last END_DATE could refer to either the u alias or the table from the subquery. Change it to match the rest of your subquery (FIND_USER_GROUPS_DIRECT.END_DATE)
EDIT
Your query is
select u.USER_NAME, d.responsibility_key from FND_USER u,FND_RESPONSIBILITY_VL d
where responsibility_id in(
select responsibility_id from
FND_USER_RESP_GROUPS_DIRECT WHERE END_USER_RESP_GROUPS_DIRECT.END_DATE=nvl(END_DATE,sysdate+1)) and
u.END_DATE=nvl(END_DATE,SYSDATE + 1)
;
The query isn't formatted, which makes it hard to read.
Not all columns are qualified with table name (or aliases), as mentioned in the comments.
The query currently uses an implicit join.
The query is impossible to understand without seeing the table definitions (desc [table_name]).
For points 1 and 2, a properly formatted query will look something like
select u.user_name, d.responsibility_key
from
fnd_user u,
fnd_responsibility_vl d
where
d.responsibility_id in (
select urgd.responsibility_id
from
fnd_user_resp_groups_direct urgd
where
urgd.end_date = nvl(u.end_date, sysdate+1)
) and
u.end_date = nvl(urgd.end_date, sysdate + 1)
;
This makes it easier to read and in addition to this, you can see that without table definitions I guessed (see point 4) as to which tables the end_date column belongs in your query. If I had to guess, so does Oracle. That means you have an ambiguity problem. To fix it, take a close look at the end_date column as it appears in your original query and where you do not prefix it with anything, you need to prefix it with the appropriate alias (after you have aliased all your tables).
For point 3, you can write your query more clearly with an explicit join and by using aliases for all columns. As for the explicit join I have no idea what your tables look like but one possibility is something like
select u.user_name, d.responsibility_key
from fnd_user u
join fnd_responsibility_vl d
on u.id = d.user_id
where
d.responsibility_id in (
select responsibility_id
from fnd_user_resp_groups_direct urgd
where
urgd.end_date = nvl(u.end_date, sysdate+1)
) and
u.end_date = nvl(urgd.end_date, sysdate+1)
;
If you follow these points you will get to the root of the error.
I have a query that I need for it to return a record even when there are no records. In the case where there are records, I simply want those records returned. On the other hand, when there are no records, I need it to still return a record but with the value for the "context" column (the GROUP BY column) equal to the value of the GROUP BY column that did not meet the criteria and a default value for aggregate function/column (e.g., 0). I tried a subquery:
SELECT
(
SELECT
CONTEXT,
SUM(VAL)
FROM
A_TABLE
WHERE
COL = 'absent'
GROUP BY
CONTEXT
)
FROM
DUAL;
but anything greater than one column in the subquery SELECT clause fails w/ a "too many values" message.
I also tried a UNION (with a little more context to more faithfully represent my situation):
SELECT
*
FROM
(
SELECT
CONTEXT,
SUM(VAL)
FROM
A_TABLE
WHERE
COL = 'absent'
GROUP BY
CONTEXT
UNION
SELECT
CONTEXT,
0
FROM
B_TABLE
)
AB_TABLE
INNER JOIN C_TABLE C -- just a table that I need to join to
ON
C.ID = AB_TABLE.C_ID
WHERE
C.ID = 10
AND ROWNUM = 1 -- excludes 2nd UNION subquery result when 1st returns record;
This one does work but I don't know why since the 2nd UNION subquery does not seem to be expressly connected w/ the first (I need the 2nd CONTEXT value to be the same as the 1st for the case where the 1st returns no records). The problem is that the real query does not return any records when I try to implement a similar strategy. I would like to see if there's a better way to approach this problem and perhaps get it to work for the real query (not included as it is too large and somewhat sensitive).
I am not sure I understand the question, but let's try.
I believe what you are saying is this. You have a table called A_TABLE, with columns CONTEXT, VAL, COL (and perhaps others as well).
You want to group by CONTEXT, and get the sum of VAL but only for those rows where COL = 'absent'. Otherwise you want to return a default value (let's say 0).
This can be done with conditional aggregation. The condition is in a CASE expression within the SUM, not in a WHERE clause (as you saw already, if you filter by COL='absent', in a WHERE clause, the query - past the WHERE clause - has no knowledge of the CONTEXT values that don't appear in any rows with COL = 'absent').
If the "default value" was NULL, you could do it like this:
select context, sum(case when col = 'absent' then value end) as val
from a_table
group by context
;
If the default value is anything other than NULL, the temptation may be to use NVL() around the sum. However, if VAL may be NULL, then it is possible that SUM(VAL) is NULL even when there are rows with COL = 'absent'. To address that possibility, you must leave the sum as NULL in those cases, and instead set the value to 0 (or whatever other "default value") only when there are NO rows with COL = 'absent'. Here is one way to do that. Still a standard "conditional" aggregate query:
select context,
case when count(case when col = 'absent' then 1 end) > 0
then sum(case when col = 'absent' then value end)
else 0 -- or whatever "default value" you must assign here
end as val
from a_table
group by context
;
Here's another way you could handle it that avoids the two additional tables (B_TABLE and C_TABLE).
SELECT context
, MAX(val)
FROM (
SELECT context
, SUM(val) as val
FROM a_table
WHERE col = 'absent'
GROUP BY context
UNION
SELECT context
, 0 as val
FROM a_table
) t
GROUP BY context
This assumes the default value you want to return is 0 and that any value in A_TABLE.VAL will be a positive integer.
http://sqlfiddle.com/#!4/c6ca0/20
SELECT b.context
, sum(a.val)
FROM b_table b
LEFT OUTER JOIN a_table a
ON a.context = b.context
AND a.col = 'absent'
GROUP BY b.context
I created this query using HQL with Hibernate and Oracle
select c from Cat c
left join c.kittens k
where (c.location= 1 OR c.location = 2)
and (i.activo = 1)
group
by c.id,
c.name,
c.fulldescription,
c.kittens
order by count(e) desc
The problem comes with the fact that in HQL you need to specify all fields in Cat in order to perform a Group By, but fulldescription is a CLOB, and you cannot group by by a CLOB (I get a "Not a Group By Expression" error. I've seen a few solutions around for a pure SQL sentence but none for HQL.
A serious issue GROUP BY of HQL because if you specify your object in GROUP BY and in your SELECT field list behaviours are differents. In GROUP BY has considered only id field but in SELECT field list all fields are considered.
So you can use a subquery with GROUP BY to return only id from your object, so that result becomes an input for the main query, like the follow I write for you.
Pay attention there are some alias table (i and e) not defined, so this query doesn't work, but you know as fixed.
Try this:
select c2 from Cat c2
where c2.id in (
select c.id from Cat c
left join c.kittens k
where (c.location= 1 OR c.location = 2)
and (i.activo = 1) <-- who is i alias??
group by c.id)
order by count(e) desc <-- who is e alias???
Query:
select *
from easquestionsinfo
where questionname in(select questionname
from easresponseinfo
where isconflict = 'yes')
This query works fine and returns me the records from table 'easquestioninfo' when questionname is equal to the one returned by the inner query which returns set of questionname where isconflict='yes'.
JPA supports JPQL, SQL, and Criteria.
You can execute this SQL directly using createNativeQuery().
For JPQL, it depends on your object model, perhaps something like,
Select q fom QuestionInfo q where q.name in (Select r.name from ResponseInfo q2 where r.isConflict = 'yes')
See,
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Java_Persistence/JPQL
I have one table, 'a', with id and timestamp. Another table, 'b', has N multiple rows referring to id, and each row has 'type', and "some other data".
I want a LINQ query to produce a single row with id, timestamp, and "some other data" x N. Like this:
1 | 4671 | 46.5 | 56.5
where 46.5 is from one row of 'b', and 56.5 is from another row; both with the same id.
I have a working query in SQLite, but I am new to LINQ. I dont know where to start - I don't think this is a JOIN at all.
SELECT
a.id as id,
a.seconds,
COALESCE(
(SELECT b.some_data FROM
b WHERE
b.id=a.id AND b.type=1), '') AS 'data_one',
COALESCE(
(SELECT b.some_data FROM
b WHERE
b.id=a.id AND b.type=2), '') AS 'data_two'
FROM a first
WHERE first.id=1
GROUP BY first.ID
you didn't mention if you are using Linq to sql or linq to entities. However following query should get u there
(from x in a
join y in b on x.id equals y.id
select new{x.id, x.seconds, y.some_data, y.type}).GroupBy(x=>new{x.id,x.seconds}).
Select(x=>new{
id = x.key.id,
seconds = x.Key.seconds,
data_one = x.Where(z=>z.type == 1).Select(g=>g.some_data).FirstOrDefault(),
data_two = x.Where(z=>z.type == 2).Select(g=>g.some_data).FirstOrDefault()
});
Obviously, you have to prefix your table names with datacontext or Objectcontext depending upon the underlying provider.
What you want to do is similar to pivoting, see Is it possible to Pivot data using LINQ?. The difference here is that you don't really need to aggregate (like a standard pivot), so you'll need to use Max or some similar method that can simulate selecting a single varchar field.