I have two different queries in oracle, I was able to show these queries side by side with cross join, but I want to see them in the same cell.
First query :
SELECT
pa.attrb_an_value
FROM
piece_attrb pa
WHERE
pa.piece_num_id = 1056436 AND
pa.attrb_code = 'PSP')
result : MCXTS
Second Query :
SELECT max(CAOSL.ATTRB_AN_VALUE)
FROM config_attrb_of_so_line caosl,
so_piece sp
WHERE sp.piece_num_id = 1056436
AND sp.so_id = caosl.so_id
AND sp.so_line_id = caosl.so_line_id
and SP.IS_ACTIVE_FLAG = 'Y'
AND CAOSL.ATTRB_CODE = 'GRS'
Result : DC0
I want to see like that in cell:
MCXTS - DC0
Concatenate them, then.
WITH
tab_1 (retval)
AS
-- first query
(SELECT pa.attrb_an_value
FROM piece_attrb pa
WHERE pa.piece_num_id = 1056436
AND pa.attrb_code = 'PSP'),
tab_2 (retval)
AS
-- second query
(SELECT MAX (caosl.attrb_an_value)
FROM config_attrb_of_so_line caosl, so_piece sp
WHERE sp.piece_num_id = 1056436
AND sp.so_id = caosl.so_id
AND sp.so_line_id = caosl.so_line_id
AND sp.is_active_flag = 'Y'
AND caosl.attrb_code = 'GRS')
-- final result
SELECT a.retval || ' - ' || b.retval as final_result
FROM tab_1 a CROSS JOIN tab_2 b
Related
I have update query which returns updated rows ID. Execution time of query is about 90 seconds. When i remove Returning clause, then execution time is 1ms.
Table update_table has 39000 rows.
Query updates 0 rows in this case. When updates 3 rows- execution time is same.
DECLARE
type intTable IS TABLE OF INTEGER;
idCol intTable;
BEGIN
UPDATE
update_table
SET
prop1 = 3, prop2 = NULL
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT null FROM update_table f
INNER JOIN rel_table1 u ON f.ID= u.ID
INNER JOIN rel_table2 VP ON f.another_ID = VP.another_ID
WHERE (u.prop1 = 3)
AND VP.prop1 = 1
AND (u.prop2 = 75)
AND f.ID = update_table.ID
)
ReTURNING ID BULK COLLECT INTO idCol;
.
.
.
END;
Why returning clause slows down query?
A good part of using Oracle is knowing what is "supposed" to happen and what isn't.
Adding a RETURNING INTO clause is not "supposed" to make your update run more slowly. When something happens that isn't supposed to happen, check Oracle's support site to see whether it is a known bug.
In your case, it looks like you are encountering:
Bug 27131648 - SUB OPTIMAL PLAN ON UPDATE STATEMENT WITH RETURNING INTO
I am not sure if there is a patch, but there is a simple workaround: use the UNNEST hint. In your case, that would be:
UPDATE
update_table
SET
prop1 = 3, prop2 = NULL
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT /*+ UNNEST */ null FROM update_table f
INNER JOIN rel_table1 u ON f.ID= u.ID
INNER JOIN rel_table2 VP ON f.another_ID = VP.another_ID
WHERE (u.prop1 = 3)
AND VP.prop1 = 1
AND (u.prop2 = 75)
AND f.ID = update_table.ID
)
ReTURNING ID BULK COLLECT INTO idCol;
I would recommend splitting it into two parts, first BULK COLLECT and next FORALL collected ID's, both extremely fast and you'll keep being able to further reference updated ID's from idCol.
DECLARE
type intTable IS TABLE OF INTEGER;
idCol intTable;
BEGIN
SELECT f.id
BULK COLLECT INTO idCol
FROM update_table f
INNER JOIN rel_table1 u ON f.ID= u.ID
INNER JOIN rel_table2 VP ON f.another_ID = VP.another_ID
WHERE (u.prop1 = 3)
AND VP.prop1 = 1
AND (u.prop2 = 75);
FORALL indx IN 1..idCol.COUNT
UPDATE update_table
SET prop1 = 3, prop2 = NULL
WHERE id = idCol(indx);
.
.
.
END;
I hope I helped!
query1 where condition = "condition1" ; queryresult1 = number1
query2 where condition = "condition2" ; queryresult2 = number2
I want number1-number2 , how can i make this possible with just a single query
Assuming i understand your question correctly, easiest way is joining two table and perform your whatever calculation.
select valueone, valuetwo, valueone - valuetwo as finalresult
from (select 18 as valueone from dual where 1 = 1) -- query one)
inner join (select 6 as valuetwo from dual where 1 = 1) -- query two)
on 1 = 1 -- join condition
where 1 = 1; -- some condition
The following LINQ query isn't allowed when I use multiple where elements - it stops liking the 'into':
var query =
from ph in _db.PlayHits
join ua in _db.UserAgents on ph.UserAgentId equals ua.UserAgentId
where (ph.VideoId == 1 && ua.AgentString.Contains("test"))
into hits
select new
{
ResultCount = hits.Count()
};
Any idea why or how I amend this?
The equivilent sql I want is:
select count(*) as ResultCount
from Playhits ph
join UserAgents ua on ph.UserAgentId = ua.UserAgentId
where ph.VideoId = 1
and ua.AgentString like '%test%'
To my understanding, counting of the results can be done using the extension methond Count as follows.
var query =
from ph in _db.PlayHits
join ua in _db.UserAgents on ph.UserAgentId equals ua.UserAgentId
where (ph.VideoId == 1 && ua.AgentString.Contains("test"));
int Result = query.Count();
When I execute the query below, I get the message like this: "ORA-01427: Sub-query returns more than one row"
Define REN_RunDate = '20160219'
Define MOP_ADJ_RunDate = '20160219'
Define RID_RunDate = '20160219'
Define Mbr_Err_RunDate = '20160219'
Define Clm_Err_RunDate = '20160219'
Define EECD_RunDate = '20160219'
select t6.Member_ID, (Select 'Y' from MBR_ERR t7 where t7.Member_ID = t6.Member_ID and t7.Rundate = &Mbr_Err_RunDate ) Mbr_Err,
NVL(Claim_Sent_Amt,0) Sent_Claims, Rejected_Claims,Orphan_Claim_Amt,Claims_Accepted, MOP_Adj_Sent Sent_MOP_Adj,Net_Sent,
(Case
When Net_Sent < 45000 then 0
When Net_Sent > 25000 then 20500
Else
Net_Sent - 45000
End
)Net_Sent_RI,
' ' Spacer,
Total_Paid_Claims CMS_Paid_Claims, MOP_Adjustment CM_MOP_Adj, MOP_Adjusted_Paid_claims CM_Net_Claims, Estimated_RI_Payment CM_RI_Payment
from
(
select NVL(t3.Member_ID,t5.Member_ID)Member_ID, t3.Claim_Sent_Amt, NVL(t4.Reject_Claims_Amt,0) Rejected_Claims, NVL( t8.Orphan_Amt,0) Orphan_Claim_Amt,
(t3.Claim_Sent_Amt - NVL(t4.Reject_Claims_Amt,0) - NVL(t8.Orphan_Amt,0)) Claims_Accepted,
NVL(t2.MOP_Adj_Amt,0) MOP_Adj_Sent ,
( (t3.Claim_Sent_Amt - NVL(t4.Reject_Claims_Amt,0)) - NVL(t2.MOP_Adj_Amt,0) - NVL(t8.Orphan_Amt,0) ) Net_Sent,
t5.Member_ID CMS_Mbr_ID,t5.Total_Paid_Claims,t5.MOP_Adjustment, t5.MOP_Adjusted_Paid_Claims, t5.Estimated_RI_Payment
From
(
Select t1.Member_ID, Sum( t1.Paid_Amount) Claim_Sent_Amt
From RENS t1
where t1.rundate = &REN_RunDate
group by t1.Member_ID
) t3
Left Join MOP_ADJ t2
on (t3.Member_ID = t2.Member_ID and t2.rundate = &MOP_ADJ_RunDate)
Left Join
(select Member_ID, sum(Claim_Total_Paid_Amount) Reject_Claims_Amt from CLAIM_ERR
where Rundate = &Claim_Err_RunDate
and Claim_Total_Paid_Amount != 0
Group by member_ID
)t4
on (t4.Member_ID = t3.Member_ID )
Full Outer Join
(
select distinct Member_ID,Total_Paid_Claims,MOP_Adjustment,MOP_Adjusted_Paid_Claims, Estimated_RI_Payment
from RID
where Rundate = &RID_RunDate
and Estimated_RI_Payment != 0
)t5
On(t5.Member_ID = t3.Member_ID)
Left Outer Join
(
select Member_ID, Sum(Claim_Paid_Amount) Orphan_Amt
From EECD
where RunDate = &EECD_RunDate
group by Member_ID
)t8
On(t8.Member_ID = t3.Member_ID)
)t6
order by Member_ID
You have this expression among the select columns (at the top of your code):
(Select 'Y' from MBR_ERR t7 where t7.Member_ID = t6.Member_ID
and t7.Rundate = &Mbr_Err_RunDate ) Mbr_Err
If you want to select the literal 'Y', then just select 'Y' as Mbr_Err. If you want to select either 'Y' or null, depending on whether the the subquery returns exactly one row or zero rows, then write it that way.
I suspect this subquery (or perhaps another one in your code, used in a similar way) returns more than one row - in which case you will get exactly the error you got.
I am new to Linq. I am trying to query some data in MS SQL.
Here is my statement:
select * from booking
left outer join carpark
on booking.bookingId = carpark.bookingId
where userID = 5 and status = 'CL'
When I run this in MS SQL, I get the expected result. How can I do this in Linq?
Thank you for your help.
you need this:
var query = (from t1 in tb1
join t2 in tb2 on t1.pKey = t2.tb1pKey into JoinedList
from t2 in JoinedList.DefaultIfEmpty()
where t1.userID == 5 && t1.status == "CL"
select new
{
t1,
t2
})
.ToList();
You can try to do left join this way :
from t1 in tb1
from t2 in tb2.Where(o => o.tb1pKey == t1.pKey).DefaultIfEmpty()
where tb1.userId == 5 && tb1.status == "CL"
select t1;
Usually when people say they want a "left outer join," that's just because they've already converted what they really want into SQL in their head. Usually what they really want is all of the items from table A, and the ability to get the related items from table B if there are any.
Assuming you have your navigation properties set up correctly, this could be as easy as:
var tb1sWithTb2s = context.tb1
.Include(t => t.tb2s) // Include all the tb2 items for each of these.
.Where(t => t.userID == 5 and t.status = "CL");