I want to create a rest API that will take the stored procedure name as input with the procedure parameter as a rest API parameter. while I create an entity class I just get one table access for example I have a customer table but my stored procedure access different tables and views it gives me an error: "invalid column name id" this is because the executed procedure doesn't use columns and table that we mentioned in the entity class.
I want to create this API with spring rest using spring mvc and jpa.
I also want to authenticate if the system id exists in the table or not, example tablename:customer { sysid : ram, procedure_name:sp_byid }.
for now, How it work is check the systemid input with table(customer) used in entity classes , I am not even able to get a single data ie procedure_name as we cant pass "select colname from table name where id = x" in #query annotation. If a record exists we want to check what stored procedure mapped with the id. sp_byid is the stored procedure that gets data from different table "user" but we are not able to do that due to entity class not having the same table as used by stored procedure and gives error of "invalid column name id".
this is the use case example of one stored procedure with only one record I have many to be added.
how do we work with this, is there any alternative to jpa to work without entity and just pass custom queries?
example rest URL : localhost:8080/get/systemid/procedurename
I found an answer to do a custom query is by making a custom repository to get data via Entitymanager. but custom query returns a query type which can be converted to list of object. you cant get key-value pair like entity.
Related
I'm currently trying to create txt files from all tables in the dbo schema
I have like 200s-300s tables there, so it would takes up too much times to create it manually..
I was thinking for creating a loop.
so as example (using AdventureWorks2019) :
select t.name as table_name
from sys.tables t
where schema_name(t.schema_id) = 'Person'
order by table_name;
This would get all the table name within the Person schema.
So I would loop :
Table input : select * from ${table_name}
But then i realized that for txt files, i need to declare all the field and their data types in pentaho, so it would become a problems.
Any ideas how to do this "backup" txt files?
Using Metadata Injection and more queries to the schema catalog tables in SQL Server. You not only need to retrieve the table name, you would need to afterwards retrieve the columns in that table and the data types, and inject that information (metadata) to the text output step.
You have in the samples directory of your spoon installation an example on how to use Metadata Injection, use it, along with the documentation, to build a simple example (the check to generate a transformation with the metadata you have injected is of great use to debug)
I have something similar to copy data from one database to another, both in Oracle, but with SQL Server you have similar catalog tables as in Oracle to retrieve the information you need. I created a simple, almost empty transformation to read one table and write to another. This transformation has almost no information, only the database origin in the Table Input step and the target database in the Table Output step:
And then I have a second transformation where I fill up all the information (metadata) to inject: The query to perform in the Table Input step, and all the data I need in the Table Output: Target table, if I need to truncate before inserting, the columns from (stream field) and to (Table field):
I am new to Oracle PL/SQL and have been given some code I am being asked to modify. I have been looking through the oracle documentation and think I know what it is doing but would like to get a verification as to if my understanding is correct or not.
Here is the code:
TYPE array_rec_type IS RECORD (gla_sub tblName.id%type);
v_closes_sc array_rec_type;
TYPE v_sc_type is TABLE OF v_closes_sc%TYPE INDEX BY BINARY_INTEGER;
sc_array v_sc_type;
Here is what I believe is being declared here:
TYPE array_rec_type IS RECORD (gla_sub tblName.id%type);
It looks like a collection is being declared using the column type from the id column from the tblName table. Which could be a number or UUID, etc.
v_closes_sc array_rec_type;
A variable of the newly created type is being created
TYPE v_sc_type is TABLE OF v_closes_sc%TYPE INDEX BY BINARY_INTEGER;
A new type is being created using the collection (Record) previously created a template for the table. The table will have a single column of ID.
sc_array v_sc_type;
A new variable is being created to hold the new table variable.
A record is not a collection, so your explanation is slightly confused. From the docs (which you've probably already looked at:
In a collection, the internal components always have the same data type, and are called elements. ... To create a collection variable, you either define a collection type and then create a variable of that type or use %TYPE.
In a record, the internal components can have different data types, and are called fields. You can access each field of a record variable by its name ... To create a record variable, you either define a RECORD type and then create a variable of that type or use %ROWTYPE or %TYPE.
So looking at what you said:
Here is what I believe is being declared here:
TYPE array_rec_type IS RECORD (gla_sub tblName.id%type);
This is a record, not a collection. In this case it has a single field called gla_sub which is indeed being declared using the data type of the id column from the tblName table. The use of %type means that, to some extent, you don't need to know what the data type actually is, and you may not have to change your code if that changes (if the size of a varchar2 column is increased, for instance).
v_closes_sc array_rec_type;
Correct - a variable of the newly created type is being created.
TYPE v_sc_type is TABLE OF v_closes_sc%TYPE INDEX BY BINARY_INTEGER;
This is a collection, specifically an associative array. It's a sparse array whose members are instance of the record type declared above, with a numeric index. That could also be declared using the type directly, as:
TYPE v_sc_type is TABLE OF array_rec_type INDEX BY BINARY_INTEGER;
sc_array v_sc_type;
Correct - a new variable is being created of that just-declared table type.
Having a record type with a single field seems a bit pointless, as you could have a collection based on the table column data type. Your existing code will be expecting that structure though, so changing it isn't quite trivial.
I am using custom object types with Oracle PL/SQL, including several object types that inherit from a parent object. I have a TP_DOCUMENTS parent object, and child document types, such as TP_PUBLICATION, TP_CONTRACT, etc. We successfully created a table of TP_DOCUMENT and have added records of TP_PUBLICATION, TP_CONTRACT, and other child document records. However, I needed to create an additional type of document. Once I did this, it broke the DOCUMENTS table. How can I create additional child types, without breaking the table of the parent object (making me lose all the data previously contained in the parent object table!!)?
Here is some of my code:
create or replace TYPE "TP_DOCUMENT" AS OBJECT
(
...fields go here
) NOT FINAL
create or replace TYPE "TP_PUB_INSTRUCTION" UNDER TP_DOCUMENT()
CREATE TABLE DOCUMENTS OF TP_DOCUMENT
After creating these types (and others with additional fields), I created the table DOCUMENTs as shown above. I tried to create another sub-type, and the DOCUMENTS table broke.
MORE INFORMATION:
The error code message is as follows:
ORA-04063: table/view has errors
Cause: Attempt to execute a stored procedure or use a view that has errors. For stored procedures, the problem could be syntax errors or references to other, non-existent procedures. For views, the problem could be a reference in the view's defining query to a non-existent table. Can also be a table which has references to non-existent or inaccessible types.
Action: Fix the errors and/or create referenced objects as necessary.
Thank you!
UPDATE WITH ANSWER FROM COMMENTER BELOW:
I had unfortunately dropped a Sub-Type using the Force option. That likely was the cause for why my Documents table was corrupted. In the future, I will use the Validate command (see answer below).
Instead of FORCE you should use the VALIDATE option when dropping types:
VALIDATE
If you specify VALIDATE when dropping a type, then Oracle Database
checks for stored instances of this type within substitutable columns
of any of its supertypes. If no such instances are found, then the
database completes the drop operation.
This clause is meaningful only for subtypes. Oracle recommends the use
of this option to safely drop subtypes that do not have any explicit
type or table dependencies.
Here's an example:
create or replace type tp_document as object
(
a number
) not final;
create or replace type tp_pub_instruction under tp_document();
create table documents of tp_document;
--This fails with this error message:
--ORA-02303: cannot drop or replace a type with type or table dependents
drop type tp_pub_instruction;
--This works since there's no data with that type.
drop type tp_pub_instruction validate;
I've Table uses Trigger and sequence to set its PK column.
The Hibernate mapping strategy for its Pk is assigned..
This yields in session.save(obj) returns object with id=0
How to make it returns the correct assigned PK value.
session.getIdentifier() doesn't work!
assigned means: Nobody generates the ID, the ID is set explicitely in the entity before persisting it.
What you want to do is impossible. Hibernate would have to insert an entity without knowing its ID, then the database would generate the ID, and Hibernate would have to reload the entity from the database to know its ID. But how would it reload the entity without knowing its ID?
The native generator does the same thing, and it works because the database provides a getLastGeneratedId() method which allows getting the IOD that the database has generated. But you can't do that with Oracle and a trigger.
Remove the trigger from the database, use the sequence generator, and everything will be fine.
I am just curious whats the difference between object and record type in oracle, More specifically between the below declarations
create type emp2_oty is object
(
empno number,
ename varchar2(20),
deptno number
);
create type emp2_nt is table of emp2_oty;
and
type emp2_oty is record
(
empno number,
ename varchar2(20),
deptno number
);
create type emp2_nt is table of emp2_oty;
Please elaborate.
record:
Cannot be stored in the database.
Cannot be recursively referenced.
Cannot have logic defined as part of their definition.
object:
Can be stored as a database table column or as an entire row.
Can be recursively referenced using the SELF parameter.
Can have logic defined as part of their definition using member methods.
The OBJECT type can be stored in the database and can be used in both SQL and PL/SQL
Understanding PL/SQL Records
Records are composed of a group of fields, similar to the columns in a row.The %ROWTYPE attribute lets you declare a PL/SQL record that represents a row in a database table, without listing all the columns.
Basically, if you are familiar with C/C++ or similar languages, you could tell that Records are nothing but structures (i.e a data type that can be used to group items of possibly different types into a single type) they can not have methods within. Objects on the other hand are completely different:
Oracle Objects
Oracle object types are user-defined types that make it possible to model real-world entities
1. Objects Can Encapsulate Operations Along with Data
Database tables contain only data. Objects can include the ability to perform operations (i.e methods) that are likely to be needed on that data (e.g a purchase order object might include a method to sum the cost of all the items purchased).
2. Objects Can Represent Part-Whole Relationships
An object can have other objects as attributes, and the attribute objects can have their own object attributes too. An entire parts-list hierarchy can be built up in this way from interlocking object types.
3. Objects Are Efficient
3.1 Object types and their methods are stored with the data in the database, so they are available for any application to use.
3.2 You can fetch and manipulate a set of related objects as a single unit (e.g when you select a customer object and get the customer's name, phone, and the multiple parts of his address in a single round-trip between the client and the server) .