I got a very basic query which gets a top 10 of searched words:
select distinct keyword, sum (amount) as keyword_amount from search group by keyword order by keyword_amount DESC
This works fine in PostGresAdmin 4, I get a top 10. But when I want to test it on Spring via Postman on a endpoint, it keeps giving me 500 errors. It says ID is not found and/or should be in the group by or used in an aggregate function. I found in other topics I need to use 'distinct' or put ID in min/max(?). Still no success, and it's weirder that it does work in PostGreSQL itself.
I tried:
#Query( value = "select distinct keyword, sum (amount) as keyword_amount from search " +
"group by keyword order by keyword_amount DESC",
nativeQuery = true
)
List<Search> findTop10Keywords();
which give me the missing ID errors, and I tried without nativeQuery, but then I get:
search is not mapped [select distinct keyword, sum (amount) as keyword_amount from search group by keyword order by keyword_amount DESC
I'm not sure why/where search must be mapped?
SELECT keyword, sum(amount) AS keyword_amount
FROM "search" -- ?
GROUP BY keyword
ORDER BY keyword_amount DESC NULLS LAST
LIMIT 10;
Since you already GROUP BY keyword, adding distinct is an expensive no-op. Remove it.
sum(amount) might be NULL. If that can happen (depends on undisclosed details), be sure to use ORDER BY keyword_amount DESC NULLS LAST. See:
Sort by column ASC, but NULL values first?
Seems safe to assume that a query called indTop10Keywords should only return the top 10. So LIMIT 10.
"search" is a reserved word in standard SQL (even if allowed as identifier in Postgres). Maybe that's what throws off Spring. Double-quoting may help. But I would rather avoid reserved words as identifiers to begin with.
Related
I have the following Hibernate HQL query:
select t from Term t join ApprovedCourse ap on t.id = ap.term.id group by t order by t desc
It's failing with the
ORA-00979: not a GROUP BY expression
error because Oracle insists that all select values be in the group by. Hibernate, of course, is hiding the various fields of the Term object from us, letting us deal with it as a Term and not Term.id. (This query works on Postgres, by the way. Postgres is more liberal about its group by requirements.)
Hibernate is producing the following SQL:
select term0_.id as id1_12_, term0_.semester_id as semester_id2_12_, term0_.year_id as year_id3_12_
from term term0_
inner join approved_course approvedco1_
on (term0_.id=approvedco1_.term_id)
group by term0_.id
order by term0_.id desc
I've tried just removing the select t from the start of the query, but then Hibernate assumes that I'm selecting both the Term and ApprovedCourse objects, and that makes things worse.
So how do I make this work in a Hibernate way?
I found that I could get what I want by replacing the group by clause with a distinct in the select clause. Here's the resulting query:
select distinct(t) from Term t join ApprovedCourse ap on t.id = ap.term.id order by t desc
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.
TablePatient.Patient_ID(PK)
TableProviders.Encounter (joins to PK)
TableProviders.Provider_Type
TableProviders.Provider_ID
TableNames.Full_Name
TableNames.Provider_ID (joins to Table Names)
I want a query that will give, for all the Patient_IDs, the Full_Name of the provider for every Provider ID.
There are about 30 provider_types.
I have made this already using a left join a ton of left joins. It takes a long time to run and I am thinking there is a trick I am missing.
Any help?
Ok, my previous answer didn't match at all what you meant. You want to pivot the table to have on each line one Patient_ID with every Full_name for every provider_type. I assume that each patient has only one provider for one type and not more ; if more, you will have more than one row for each patient, and anyway I don't think it's really possible.
Here is my solution with pivot. The first part is to make it more understandable, so I create a table named TABLE_PATIENT in a subquery.
WITH TABLE_PATIENT AS
(
SELECT TablePatient.Patient_ID,
TableProviders.Provider_Type,
TableNames.Full_Name
FROM TablePatient LEFT JOIN
TableProviders on TablePatient.Patient_ID = TableProviders.Encounter
LEFT JOIN
TableNames on TableNames.Provider_ID = TableProviders.Provider_ID
group by TablePatient.Patient_ID,
TableProviders.Provider_Type,
TableNames.Full_Name
)
SELECT *
FROM TABLE_PATIENT
PIVOT
(
min(Full_name)
for Provider_type in ([type1], [type2],[type3])
) AS PVT
So TABLE_PATIENT just has many rows for each patient, with one provider each row, and the pivot puts everything on a single row. Tell me if something doesn't work.
You need to write every type you want in the [type1],[type2] etc. Just put them inside [], no other character needed as ' or anything else.
If you put only some types, then the query will not show providers of other types.
Tell me if something doesn't work.
If I understand what you mean, you just want to group the answer by Patient Id and then Provider ID. A full name is unique on a provider id right ?
This should be something like
SELECT TablePatient.Patient_ID,
TableProviders.Provider_ID,
TableNames.Full_Name
FROM TablePatient LEFT JOIN
TableProviders on TablePatient.Patient_ID = TableProviders.Encounter
LEFT JOIN
TableNames on TableNames.Provider_ID = TablerProviders.Provider_ID
group by TablePatient.Patient_ID,
TableProviders.Provider_ID,
TableNames.Full_Name
You can either group by TableNames.Full_Name or select First(TableNames.Full_Name) for example if indeed a full name is unique to a provider ID.
Note : I used the SQL server Syntax, there can be différences with Oracle ..
I have a created a table (movies) in Hive as below(id,name,year,rating,views)
1,The Nightmare Before Christmas,1993,3.9,4568
2,The Mummy,1932,3.5,4388
3,Orphans of the Storm,1921,3.2,9062
4,The Object of Beauty,1991,2.8,6150
5,Night Tide,1963,2.8,5126
6,One Magic Christmas,1985,3.8,5333
7,Muriel's Wedding,1994,3.5,6323
8,Mother's Boys,1994,3.4,5733
9,Nosferatu: Original Version,1929,3.5,5651
10,Nick of Time,1995,3.4,5333
I want to write a hive query to get the name of the movie with highest views.
select name,max(views) from movies;
but it gives me an error
FAILED: Error in semantic analysis: Line 1:7 Expression not in GROUP BY key name
but doing a group by with name gives me the complete list (which is expected).
What changes should I make to my query?
It is very possible that there is a simpler way to do this.
select name
from(
select max(views) as views
, name
, row_number() over (order by max(views) desc) as row_num
from movies
group by name
) m
where row_num = 1
After little bit of digging, I found out that the answer is not so straightforward as we do in SQL. Below query gives the expected result.
select a.name,a.views from movies a left semi join(select max(views) views from movies)b on (a.views=b.views);
I need a list of users in one database that are not listed as the new_user_id in another. There are 112,815 matching users in both databases; user_id is the key in all queries tables.
Query #1 works, and gives me 111,327 users who are NOT referenced as a new_user_Id. But it requires querying the same data twice.
-- 111,327 GSU users are NOT listed as a CSS new user
-- 1,488 GSU users ARE listed as a new user in CSS
--
select count(gup.user_id)
from gsu.user_profile gup
join (select cud.user_id, cud.new_user_id, cud.user_type_code
from css.user_desc cud) cudsubq
on gup.user_id = cudsubq.user_id
where gup.user_id not in (select cud.new_user_id
from css.user_desc cud
where cud.new_user_id is not null);
Query #2 would be perfect... and I'm actually surprised that it's syntactically accepted. But it gives me a result that makes no sense.
-- This gives me 1,505 users... I've checked, and they are not
-- referenced as new_user_ids in CSS, but I don't know why the ones
-- that were excluded were excluded.
--
-- Where are the missing 109,822, and whatexcluded them?
--
select count(gup.user_id)
from gsu.user_profile gup
join (select cud.user_id, cud.new_user_id, cud.user_type_code
from css.user_desc cud) cudsubq
on gup.user_id = cudsubq.user_id
where gup.user_id not in (cudsubq.new_user_id);
What exactly is the where clause in the second query doing, and why is it excluding 109,822 records from the results?
Note The above query is a simplification of what I'm really after. There are other/better ways to do the above queries... they're just representative of the part of the query that's giving me problems.
Read this: http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::NO::P11_QUESTION_ID:442029737684
For what I understand, your cudsubq.new_user_id can be NULL even though both tables are joined by user_id, so, you won't get results using the NOT IN operator when the subset contains NULL values . Consider the example in the article:
select * from dual where dummy not in ( NULL )
This returns no records. Try using the NOT EXISTS operator or just another kind of join. Here is a good source: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/10/a-visual-explanation-of-sql-joins.html
And what you need is the fourth example:
SELECT COUNT(descr.user_id)
FROM
user_profile prof
LEFT OUTER JOIN user_desc descr
ON prof.user_id = descr.user_id
WHERE descr.new_user_id IS NULL
OR descr.new_user_id != prof.user_id
Second query is semantically different. In this case
where gup.user_id not in (cudsubq.new_user_id)
cudsubq.new_user_id is treated as expression (doc: IN condition), not as a subquery, thus the whole clause is basically equivalent to
where gup.user_id != cudsubq.new_user_id
So, in your first query, you're literally asking "show me all users in GUP, who also have entries in CSS and their GUP.ID is not matching ANY NOT NULL NEW_ID in CSS ".
However, the second query is "show me all users in GUP, who also have entries in CSS and their GUP.ID is not equal to their RESPECTIVE NULLABLE (no is not null clause, remember?) CSS.NEW_ID value".
And any (not) in (or equality/inequality) checks with nulls don't actually work.
12:07:54 SYSTEM#oars_sandbox> select * from dual where 1 not in (null, 2, 3, 4);
no rows selected
Elapsed: 00:00:00.00
This is where you lose your rows. I would probably rewrite your second query's where clause as
where cudsubq.new_user_id is null, assuming that non-matching users have null new_user_id.
Your second select compares gup.user_id with cud.new_user_id on current joining record. You can rewrite the query to get the same result
select count(gup.user_id)
from gsu.user_profile gup
join (select cud.user_id, cud.new_user_id, cud.user_type_code
from css.user_desc cud) cudsubq
on gup.user_id = cudsubq.user_id
where gup.user_id != cud.new_user_id or cud.new_user_id is null;
You mentioned you compare list of user in one database with a list of users in another. So you need to query data twice and you don't query the same data. Maybe you can use "minus" operator to avoid using "in"
select count(gup.user_id)
from gsu.user_profile gup
join (select cud.user_id from css.user_desc cud
minus
select cud.new_user_id from css.user_desc cud) cudsubq
on gup.user_id = cudsubq.user_id;
You want new_user_id's from table gup that don't match any new_user_id on table cud, right? It sounds like a job for a left join:
SELECT count(gup.user_id)
FROM gsu.user_profile gup LEFT JOIN css.user_desc cud
ON gup.user_id = cud.new_user_id
WHERE cud.new_user_id is NULL
The join keeps all rows of gup, matching them with a new_user_id if possible. The WHERE condition keeps only the rows that have no matching row in cud.
(Apologies if you know this already and you're only interested in the behavior of the not in query)