I'm trying to Right join two table on a column named "compte"
I need to do an addition after. The problem is that some "compte" doesn't exist in one of the table and as a result, the addition return null instead of keeping the based value
Here's the query
SELECT t.compte,t.posdev+x.mnt
FROM (
SELECT compte,SUM(mntdev) as mnt FROM mvtc22
WHERE compte IN ('11510198451','00610198451','40010198451','40010198453','00610198461','00101980081','00101980094',
'00101980111','40010198461','40010198462','40010198466','40010198463')
AND datoper BETWEEN '01/01/22' AND '06/01/22'
GROUP BY compte
)x
RIGHT OUTER JOIN
(
SELECT c.compte,c.posdev
FROM v_sldoper c
WHERE c.compte IN ('11510198451','00610198451','40010198451','40010198453','00610198461','00101980081','00101980094',
'00101980111','40010198461','40010198462','40010198466','40010198463')
AND datpos = '31/12/21'
)t
ON t.compte = x.compte
And the results :
I'm expecting to keep the results from the second subquery if there's no "compte" in the first subquery.
Thanks In advance,
Alex
You are very close, the problem is that in oracle SQL the result of any value + null value is null, so you need to handle potential null values from each column before applying the + operator betwen them.
To solve the issue, you can apply functions like NVL or decode or even CASE WHEN for that purpose.
Below I use NVL function to solve it (I assume t.posdev column cannot contain null values, otherwise apply nvl function to both columns).
SELECT t.compte, t.posdev + NVL(x.mnt, 0)
FROM (
SELECT compte,SUM(mntdev) as mnt FROM mvtc22
WHERE compte IN ('11510198451','00610198451','40010198451','40010198453','00610198461','00101980081','00101980094',
'00101980111','40010198461','40010198462','40010198466','40010198463')
AND datoper BETWEEN '01/01/22' AND '06/01/22'
GROUP BY compte
)x
RIGHT OUTER JOIN
(
SELECT c.compte,c.posdev
FROM v_sldoper c
WHERE c.compte IN ('11510198451','00610198451','40010198451','40010198453','00610198461','00101980081','00101980094',
'00101980111','40010198461','40010198462','40010198466','40010198463')
AND datpos = '31/12/21'
)t
ON t.compte = x.compte
Output result
I want the running balance in my query. I had wrote the query.
May be i am mistaking any where please let me know.
SELECT
ACC_VMAST.VM_DATE,
ACC_VDET.CHEQUE,
ACC_VMAST.NARRATION,
ACC_VDET.DEBIT,
ACC_VDET.CREDIT,
sum(nvl(ACC_VDET.DEBIT,0) - nvl(ACC_VDET.CREDIT,0) )
over (order by ACC_VMAST.VM_DATE , ACC_VDET.DEBIT ) running_bal
FROM ACC_VMAST,
ACC_VDET,
ACC_COA
WHERE ACC_VMAST.VM_PK=ACC_VDET.VM_PK
AND ACC_COA.COA_PK=ACC_VDET.COA_PK
AND ACC_VMAST.POST_BY IS NOT NULL
AND ACC_VMAST.CANCEL_STATUS IS NULL
AND ACC_VMAST.VM_DATE BETWEEN '07/06/2021' AND '07/07/2021'
AND ACC_VDET.COA_PK= '303'
ORDER BY ACC_VMAST.VM_DATE , ACC_VDET.DEBIT;
If you have rows that have the same values for the ORDER BY clause then when you SUM the values then all the rows with the same ORDER BY value will be grouped together and totalled.
To prevent that, you can add the ROWNUM pseudo-column to the ORDER BY clause of the analytic function so that there will not be any ties:
SELECT m.VM_DATE,
d.CHEQUE,
m.NARRATION,
d.DEBIT,
d.CREDIT,
SUM( COALESCE(d.DEBIT,0) - COALESCE(d.CREDIT,0) )
OVER ( ORDER BY m.VM_DATE, d.DEBIT, ROWNUM ) AS running_bal
FROM ACC_VMAST m
INNER JOIN ACC_VDET d
ON (m.VM_PK = d.VM_PK)
INNER JOIN ACC_COA c
ON (c.COA_PK = d.COA_PK)
WHERE m.POST_BY IS NOT NULL
AND m.CANCEL_STATUS IS NULL
AND m.VM_DATE BETWEEN DATE '2021-07-06' AND DATE '2021-07-07'
AND d.COA_PK = '303'
ORDER BY
m.VM_DATE,
d.DEBIT;
You need to add a row range with "rows between unbounded preceding and current row".
sum(nvl(ACC_VDET.DEBIT,0) - nvl(ACC_VDET.CREDIT,0) )
over (order by ACC_VMAST.VM_DATE , ACC_VDET.DEBIT rows between unbounded preceding and current row ) running_bal
I have this query, and one of its column is a subquery that should be bringing a list of values using a listagg function. This list has its starting point as the S.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA value. The list is a should be, it always has values.
The listagg function is consuming an inline view that uses a window function to create the list.
select *
from (
SELECT DISTINCT S.ID_SOLICITACAO,
S.NR_PROTOCOLO_SOLICITACAO,
S.DH_INCLUSAO,
S.ID_USUARIO,
U.NR_CPF,
OI.ID_MODULO,
OI.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA,
OI.NO_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA,
R.ID_ATRIBUICAO,
P.ID_PERMISSAO,
1 AS TIPO_NOTIFICACAO,
(
select LISTAGG(oc6.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA || '-' || oc6.ord || '-', '; ') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY oc6.ord) eai
from (
SELECT oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA,
oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA_PAI,
oc1.SG_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA,
rownum as ord
FROM TB_ORGAO_INTERNO oc1
WHERE oc1.DH_EXCLUSAO is null
-- THE VALUE FROM S.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA IS NOT AVAILBLE HERE
START WITH oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA = S.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA
CONNECT BY prior oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA_PAI = oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA
) oc6) aproPrec
FROM TB_SOLICITACAO S
INNER JOIN TB_ORGAO_INTERNO OI ON S.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA = OI.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA
INNER JOIN TB_RELACIONAMENTO_ATRIBUICAO R
ON (R.ID_MODULO = OI.ID_MODULO AND R.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA IS NULL AND
R.ID_SOLICITACAO IS NULL)
INNER JOIN TB_PERMISSAO P
ON (P.ID_USUARIO = :usuario AND P.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA = :orgao AND
P.ID_ATRIBUICAO = R.ID_ATRIBUICAO)
INNER JOIN TB_USUARIO U ON (U.ID_USUARIO = S.ID_USUARIO)
WHERE 1 = 1
AND U.DH_EXCLUSAO IS NULL
AND P.DH_EXCLUSAO IS NULL
AND S.DH_EXCLUSAO IS NULL
AND OI.DH_EXCLUSAO IS NULL
AND R.ID_ATRIBUICAO IN :atribuicoes
AND P.ID_STATUS_PERMISSAO = 7
AND OI.ID_MODULO = 1
AND S.ID_STATUS_SOLICITACAO IN (1, 2, 5, 6)
and s.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA in (SELECT DISTINCT o.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA
FROM TB_ORGAO_INTERNO o
WHERE o.DH_EXCLUSAO IS NULL
START WITH o.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA = 3
CONNECT BY PRIOR o.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA = o.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA_PAI)
);
The problem is that the aproPrec column is always returning null as its result.
If I force the criteria to have the S.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA hardcoded, the list returns its true value.
If I chance this:
START WITH oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA = S.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA
To this:
START WITH oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA = 311
where 311 is the value that the S.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA column really has.
Is there a way to make this query works as 'I think' it should work?
To make it work, I changed the subquery by this another one:
(
select qt_.*
from (
SELECT QRY_NAME.*,
rownum as ord
FROM (
SELECT oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA,
oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA_PAI,
connect_by_root (oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA) as root
FROM TB_ORGAO_INTERNO oc1
CONNECT BY NOCYCLE PRIOR oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA_PAI = oc1.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA
) QRY_NAME
WHERE root = s.ID_ORGAO_INTELIGENCIA
) qt_
)
I have a query that doesn't work; can you help me with the transformation?
The original Informix query that I want to transform to Oracle.
SELECT DISTINCT table3.no_cev,
table1.literal,
table1.colid,
table2.repid,
table2.valor,
table2.indicador,
'',
'',
table2.origen,
table2.codi,
table2.no_cia,
table2.num_dcca,
table2.no_aprof,
table2.no_compta
FROM table1,
OUTER table2,
table3
WHERE ( table1.colid = table2.colid) and
( table1.grupid = table2.grupid) and
( table3.no_cev = table2.no_cev) and
( ( table1.grupid = 2) AND
( table2.cod_exp = 99609 ) AND
( table2.indicador = 'S' ) ) AND
( table3.num_dcca = 1);
( table3.codest = 76695);
My transformation of the query from Informix to Oracle — but it looks like it doesn't work:
SELECT DISTINCT table3.no_cev,
table1.literal,
table1.colid,
table2.repid,
table2.valor,
table2.indicador,
'',
'',
table2.origen,
table2.codi,
table2.no_cia,
table2.num_dcca,
table2.no_aprof,
table2.no_compta
FROM table1
LEFT OUTER JOIN (table2
RIGHT OUTER JOIN table3
ON table3.no_cev = table2.no_cev)
ON (( table1.colid = table2.colid)
AND ( table1.grupid = table2.grupid))
WHERE ( ( table1.grupid = '2' )
AND ( table2.cod_exp = '99609' )
AND ( table2.indicador = 'S' ) )
AND ( table3.num_dcca = '1')
AND ( table3.codest = '76695');
You have joined the table with ON clause at wrong place in the code.
Corrected your code now as following:
SELECT DISTINCT
TABLE3.NO_CEV,
TABLE1.LITERAL,
TABLE1.COLID,
TABLE2.REPID,
TABLE2.VALOR,
TABLE2.INDICADOR,
'',
'',
TABLE2.ORIGEN,
TABLE2.CODI,
TABLE2.NO_CIA,
TABLE2.NUM_DCCA,
TABLE2.NO_APROF,
TABLE2.NO_COMPTA
FROM
TABLE1
LEFT OUTER JOIN
-- ( -- removed this bracket
TABLE2 ON ( ( TABLE1.COLID = TABLE2.COLID )
AND ( TABLE1.GRUPID = TABLE2.GRUPID ) ) -- added this ON here
RIGHT OUTER JOIN TABLE3 ON TABLE3.NO_CEV = TABLE2.NO_CEV
-- ) -- removed this bracket
WHERE
TABLE1.GRUPID = '2'
AND TABLE2.COD_EXP = '99609'
AND TABLE2.INDICADOR = 'S'
AND TABLE3.NUM_DCCA = '1'
AND TABLE3.CODEST = '76695' ; -- no need of extra brackets
Cheers!!
It makes life unnecessarily difficult for people who would like to help you when you don't include a more or less minimal outline schema for the tables used in your query, and some sample data, and the expected results. Further, you seem to have converted numbers (integers) in the original Informix query into strings in the Oracle query. It is not clear why. Again, the schema would help explain what's going on.
As I noted in the comments, you should omit the two empty/null fields in the select-list; you could also drop a number of the columns from table2 — candidates for being dropped include all the columns not otherwise named in the query, such as repid, valor, origen, codi, no_cia, no_aprof, no_compta. Keep one or two of them; you don't really need more. However, I've preserved all the named columns in the sample data.
Schema and data
Here is some Informix SQL that appears to match the tables and columns in the query shown in the question. In case of doubt, the column was made into an INTEGER column. All the columns are qualified with NOT NULL.
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS table1;
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS table2;
DROP TABLE IF EXISTS table3;
CREATE TABLE table1
(
grupid INTEGER NOT NULL, -- 2
literal VARCHAR(32) NOT NULL,
colid INTEGER NOT NULL
);
CREATE TABLE table2
(
grupid INTEGER NOT NULL,
no_cev INTEGER NOT NULL,
colid INTEGER NOT NULL,
repid INTEGER NOT NULL,
valor INTEGER NOT NULL,
indicador CHAR(1) NOT NULL, -- 'S'
origen INTEGER NOT NULL,
codi INTEGER NOT NULL,
no_cia INTEGER NOT NULL,
num_dcca INTEGER NOT NULL,
no_aprof INTEGER NOT NULL,
no_compta INTEGER NOT NULL,
cod_exp INTEGER NOT NULL -- 99609
);
CREATE TABLE table3
(
no_cev INTEGER NOT NULL,
num_dcca INTEGER NOT NULL, -- 1
codest INTEGER NOT NULL -- 76695
);
LOAD FROM "table1.unl" INSERT INTO table1;
LOAD FROM "table2.unl" INSERT INTO table2;
LOAD FROM "table3.unl" INSERT INTO table3;
The annotations indicate the value specified in the query for that column; they helped guide the construction of the sample data.
Three sample data files in the Informix (pipe-separated values) UNLOAD format are:
table1.unl
2|Literal value 1|100
2|Literal value 2|123
2|Literal value 3|134
2|Literal value 4|145
table2.unl
2|2345|100|222|333|S|444|555|666|777|888|999|99609
2|2346|123|223|333|S|444|555|666|776|888|999|99609
2|2347|134|224|333|S|444|555|666|775|888|999|99609
2|2348|145|225|333|S|444|555|666|774|888|999|99609
1|2345|100|225|333|S|444|555|666|773|888|999|99609
2|2340|123|226|333|S|444|555|666|772|888|999|99609
3|2347|134|227|333|S|444|555|666|771|888|999|99609
2|2350|145|228|333|S|444|555|666|770|888|999|99609
table3.unl
2345|1|76695
2346|1|88776
2347|2|76695
2348|1|76695
Result of query using Informix-style OUTER join
Assuming that the stray early semicolon in the original query should be an AND (that matches what is written in the proposed Oracle query), removing the two empty string result columns, and removing the superfluous level of parentheses, then the original query looks like:
SELECT DISTINCT
table3.no_cev,
table1.literal,
table1.colid,
table2.repid,
table2.valor,
table2.indicador,
table2.origen,
table2.codi,
table2.no_cia,
table2.num_dcca,
table2.no_aprof,
table2.no_compta
FROM table1,
OUTER table2,
table3
WHERE (table1.colid = table2.colid) AND
(table1.grupid = table2.grupid) AND
(table3.no_cev = table2.no_cev) AND
(table1.grupid = 2) AND
(table2.cod_exp = 99609) AND
(table2.indicador = 'S') AND
(table3.num_dcca = 1) AND
(table3.codest = 76695);
On the sample data shown, using Informix 12.10.FC6 running on a MacBook Pro with macOS 10.14.6 Mojave (not that the o/s is likely to be a factor in the results), this produces:
2345|Literal value 1|100|222|333|S|444|555|666|777|888|999
2345|Literal value 2|123|||||||||
2345|Literal value 3|134|||||||||
2345|Literal value 4|145|||||||||
2348|Literal value 1|100|||||||||
2348|Literal value 2|123|||||||||
2348|Literal value 3|134|||||||||
2348|Literal value 4|145|225|333|S|444|555|666|774|888|999
Why, you ask? Good question! The Informix old-style OUTER join is a complex critter, and doesn't necessarily have a simple translation to modern standard SQL (and hence to Oracle, etc). You can find some description of the way it works at Complex Outer Joins.
There are two groups of tables — table1 and table3 are the dominant tables, and table2 is the only OUTER table here. This means that Informix processes table1 and table3 using inner join, and then outer joins the result with table2. Since there is no direct join between table1 and table3, the result is a cartesian product of the two tables — each of the 4 rows in table1 is joined with each of the 4 rows in table3, yielding 16 rows. However, the filter conditions eliminate the rows from table3 where no_cev is 2346 and 2347. All the remaining 8 rows will be preserved, regardless of the results of the outer join operation. Now the rows are outer joined with table2. The rows with (no_cev, colid) of (2345, 100) and (2348, 145) have matching rows in table3 where the data satisfies the conditions in the WHERE clause. The other rows don't have such matching rows so the columns from table2 for those rows are 'all NULL'. As I said, it is weird — contorted. And explaining is hard work!
A first approximation using standard SQL
This query is a moderate approximation to a direct translation of the Informix query:
SELECT DISTINCT
t3.no_cev,
t1.literal,
t1.colid,
t2.repid,
t2.valor,
t2.indicador,
t2.origen,
t2.codi,
t2.no_cia,
t2.num_dcca,
t2.no_aprof,
t2.no_compta
FROM table1 AS t1
INNER JOIN table3 AS t3 ON 1 = 1
LEFT JOIN table2 AS t2 ON t3.no_cev = t2.no_cev
AND t1.colid = t2.colid
AND t1.grupid = t2.grupid
WHERE t1.grupid = 2
AND t2.cod_exp = 99609
AND t2.indicador = 'S'
AND t3.num_dcca = 1
AND t3.codest = 76695;
The output is:
2345|Literal value 1|100|222|333|S|444|555|666|777|888|999
2348|Literal value 4|145|225|333|S|444|555|666|774|888|999
This is missing the rows with 'null values'.
Achieving the same result using standard INNER and OUTER joins
We can collect those rows by looking for rows where one of the columns in table2 is null (because they're either all null or none null — because the columns are qualified NOT NULL):
SELECT DISTINCT
t3.no_cev,
t1.literal,
t1.colid,
t2.repid,
t2.valor,
t2.indicador,
t2.origen,
t2.codi,
t2.no_cia,
t2.num_dcca,
t2.no_aprof,
t2.no_compta
FROM table1 AS t1
INNER JOIN table3 AS t3 ON 1 = 1
LEFT JOIN table2 AS t2 ON t3.no_cev = t2.no_cev
AND t1.colid = t2.colid
AND t1.grupid = t2.grupid
WHERE t1.grupid = 2
AND ((t2.cod_exp = 99609 AND t2.indicador = 'S') OR t2.cod_exp IS NULL)
AND t3.num_dcca = 1
AND t3.codest = 76695;
This yields the output:
2345|Literal value 1|100|222|333|S|444|555|666|777|888|999
2345|Literal value 2|123|||||||||
2345|Literal value 3|134|||||||||
2345|Literal value 4|145|||||||||
2348|Literal value 1|100|||||||||
2348|Literal value 2|123|||||||||
2348|Literal value 3|134|||||||||
2348|Literal value 4|145|225|333|S|444|555|666|774|888|999
This is the same as the original old-style Informix OUTER join query.
Tejash's proposed solution
The SQL in Tejash's answer (revision 1) yields, on the same data:
2345|Literal value 1|100|222|333|S|\ |\ |444|555|666|777|888|999
2348|Literal value 4|145|225|333|S|\ |\ |444|555|666|774|888|999
The backslash-space values correspond to the empty strings — it's Informix's slightly peculiar way of encoding a zero-length non-null string. It's an area where Oracle may well behave slightly differently, but it is tangential to the problem with the query.
Clearly, this is not the same result as the Informix query. It's probably more reasonable; it works out of the box (I simply did copy'n'paste, quoted numbers and all, and it worked with no editing needed).
I don't know about Informix OUTER syntax, so my answer may be wrong. The WHERE clause, however, lacking any relation between table1 and table3 suggests that this is just a cross join of table1 and table3 and then an outer join of table2.
One way to write this:
select t3.no_cev, t1.literal, t1.colid, t2.*
from table1 t1
cross join table3 t3
left join table2 t2 on t2.colid = t1.colid
and t2.grupid = t1.grupid
and t2.no_cev = t3.no_cev
and t2.cod_exp = 2
and t2.indicador = 'S'
where t1.grupid = 2
and t3.num_dcca = 1
and t3.codest = 76695;
Another is:
with t1 as (select * from table1 where grupid = 2)
, t2 as (select * from table1 where grupid = 2 and cod_exp = 2 and indicador = 'S')
, t3 as (select * from table3 where num_dcca = 1 and codest = 76695)
select t3.no_cev, t1.literal, t1.colid, t2.*
from t1
cross join t3
left join t2 on t2.colid = t1.colid and t2.no_cev = t3.no_cev;
Above queries are standard SQL and supported by Oracle as of version 9i I think.
Following columns of a table should not be equal in my where clause.
cd_delivery_address
cd_mail_delivery_address
cd_st_code
cd_mail_st_code
cd_zip
cd_mail_zip
Please find my code snippet to achieve this:
select * from table cd
where
(
(cd_mail_delivery_address <> cd_delivery_address or
(cd_mail_delivery_address is null and cd_delivery_address is not null) or
(cd_mail_delivery_address is not null and cd_delivery_address is null)
)
and (
cd.cd_city <> cd.cd_mail_city or
(cd.cd_city is null and cd_mail_city is not null) or
(cd_city is not null and cd_mail_city is null))
and (
cd.st_code <> cd.cd_mail_st_code or
(cd.st_code is null and cd_mail_st_code is not null) or
(st_code is not null and cd_mail_st_code is null)
)
and (
cd.cd_zip <> cd.cd_mail_zip or
(cd.cd_zip is null and cd_mail_zip is not null) or
(cd_zip is not null and cd_mail_zip is null)
)
)
All columns are varchar2 and i get correct output for this code. But is it a better way to compare multiple columns in pl sql? can i improve this code? Any suggestion would be helpful.
You could replace your null checks with NVL function something like this:
...
NVL(cd_mail_delivery_address,'_') <> NVL(cd_delivery_address,'_')
...
it's definitively more readable but I'm not sure about query efficency
I have done it for two columns using a join:
select a.cd_delivery_address,b.cd_mail_delivery_address
from cd a inner join cd b
where a.cd_delivery_address <> b.cd_mail_delivery_address and
a.cd_delivery_address = b.cd_delivery_address
Here null checking condition will be omitted and will reduce the number of conditions, but there is a performance impact since join is involved.