I have an SSRS report where there is a parameter that asks the user to include records where revenue is greater than zero, or records with revenue values that are just zero.
Since the query is not a stored procedure and it is not an option to put it into a procedure, I need to use some case logic for the embedded query. I need to do this in the where clause in the end.
I am trying to do something like this:
SELECT * FROM TABLE
WHERE MY_DATE BETWEEN D_START AND D_END
AND
CASE
WHEN :REVENUE = 1 THEN REV != 0
WHEN :REVENUE = 2 THEN REV = 0
END
However, when I run this query I get the following error:
ORA-00905: missing keyword
Is what I am doing not possible? Or is there an error that someone can see and help me with?
Please help. Thanks!
UPDATE: Just to clarify, the user is passing a value of 1 or 2. And the query should filter the data according to what value is passed to it. If 1 is passed in the parameter, then filter out all revenue not equal to zero. Else if two is passed, then filter so that only records where revenue is zero is returned.
You can write it better with a bit of boolean logic:
SELECT * FROM TABLE
WHERE MY_DATE BETWEEN D_START AND D_END
AND (
(:REVENUE = 1 AND REV != 0)
OR
(:REVENUE = 2 AND REV = 0 )
)
CASE is meant to extract different values based on conditions, so you can use it to check conditions, but you need to use it as a value to check against a condition
It's not necessary to use a CASE expression to get this particular result.
But it is possible to make use of one.
The problem in the original query is that Oracle is more strict than other databases (like MySQL) in that Oracle doesn't implicitly convert a boolean expression to a value, or convert a value into boolean.
I suspect that Oracle is choking in a couple of places. The error message is only showing us one of those.
The CASE expression returns a value, and Oracle is balking that he won't evaluate the value as a boolean.
To get that value evaluated as a boolean, we could do a comparison of the value to some other value.
If we fix that, I think Oracle is still going to choke on the expression following THEN. Oracle is expecting to return a value, and it's finding a comparison, which evaluates to a boolean.
Okay, so we know the CASE expression needs to return a value, and we need to use that in a boolean expression. If we move that conditional test into the WHEN part, and specify a value to be returned in the THEN, we can compare the return from the CASE expression to another value.
(As an aside... I strongly recommend that you qualify the column references in the SQL statement. That makes the intent more clear. Looking at the statement, it looks like MY_DATE, D_START and D_END are all column references. That's perfectly valid, it just seems a bit odd to me.)
As an example, we could do something like this with the CASE expression:
SELECT t.*
FROM TABLE t
WHERE t.MY_DATE BETWEEN t.D_START AND t.D_END
AND CASE
WHEN ( :REVENUE = 1 AND t.REV != 0 ) THEN 1
WHEN ( :REVENUE = 2 AND t.REV = 0 ) THEN 1
ELSE NULL
END = 1
The parens inside the CASE aren't necessary; I just included them to highlight the part that Oracle is evaluating in a boolean context.
So, does that work? If the value passed in for :REVENUE is 2, the condition in the first WHEN won't evaluate to TRUE (the result of first comparison is guaranteed to be FALSE). The condition in the second WHEN may evaluate to TRUE (first comparison will yield TRUE, the result from second comparison will depend on the value in the REV column.)
That CASE expression is either going to return a value of 1 or NULL. (We could just as easily use a 0 or a -1, or 999 in place of NULL if we wanted.)
Once the CASE expression is evaluated, the value returned will be compared to a literal value, as if we wrote e.g. val = 1. That comparison is evaluated as boolean. If it evaluates to TRUE, the row will be returned...
To get Oracle to behave similarly to other databases (like MySQL), we would need to make the conversion from boolean to value and value to boolean explicit. We would still need the return from the CASE compared to 1, like we did above. In place of REV != 0 we could use another CASE expression. I'm not recommending this, just shown here for illustration, converting a boolean to a value.
WHERE CASE
WHEN ( :REVENUE = 1 )
THEN CASE WHEN ( t.REV != 0 ) THEN 1 ELSE NULL END
WHEN ( :REVENUE = 2 )
THEN CASE WHEN ( t.REV = 0 ) THEN 1 ELSE NULL END
ELSE
NULL
END = 1
Note that the return from the outermost CASE expression is being compared to a value, so we get a boolean (where Oracle expects a boolean.)
All of the ELSE NULL in the statements above can be omitted for an equivalent result, since that's the default when ELSE is omitted.)
Again, it's not necessary to use a CASE expression. You can get equivalent results without it. For example:
SELECT t.*
FROM TABLE t
WHERE t.MY_DATE BETWEEN t.D_START AND t.D_END
AND ( ( :REVENUE = 1 AND t.REV != 0 )
OR ( :REVENUE = 2 AND t.REV = 0 )
)
In these queries that all return an equivalent result, the CASE expression doesn't buy us anything. But in some circumstances, it can have some advantages over a regular OR, because the CASE expression stops evaluation when a condition in a WHEN clause evaluates to TRUE.
The problem is that Oracle SQL does not have the boolean data type, so you cannot have columns of type boolean, pass boolean parameters to a query, have boolean expressions etc. So they have the somewhat unnatural concept of "condition" which is something that goes into logical conditions (like in the WHERE clause). Unfortunately, when they introduced the case EXPRESSION, which can be used wherever any other expression can be used (but this excludes boolean), they DID NOT introduce a "case CONDITION" - which could be used where other conditions can be used. This omission is odd, since the code for a case condition would probably use 95% of the code for the case expression. All the more weird since PL/SQL does have the boolean type, and the case expression there works seamlessly for Booleans.
Related
I saw this kind of code in vb6.
Private Enum enmMain
STEP_INIT = 1
STEP_RUN = 2
STEP_SLEEP = 3
STEP_SUSPEND = 4
STEP_ERROR = 5
End Enum
Private mStep As enmMain
Select Case mStep
Case Is <= enmMain.STEP_RUN
'Do something
Case enmMain.STEP_RUN To enmMain.STEP_ERROR
'Do something
I don't understand this:
Case enmMain.STEP_RUN To enmMain.STEP_ERROR
If it goes into that case when it meets this condition:
the latest value is STEP_RUN
current value is STEP_ERROR
How does it work?
I am posting on mobile can't write clean.
It means that the case statement will be satisfied by all values of mStep that are between 2 and 5, inclusive.
So there is an imprecision in code. Because the value STEP_RUN appears in an inclusive test twice (see the <= operator). Which behaviour is intended for STEP_RUN, the first or the second? You need to figure it out by understanding the program's logic.
Well, let's read the manual:
If testexpression matches any Case expressionlist expression, the statements following that Case clause are executed up to the next Case clause, or, for the last clause, up to End Select. Control then passes to the statement following End Select. If testexpression matches an expressionlist expression in more than one Case clause, only the statements following the first match are executed.
Select Case will run the first block that matches, and the criteria you can use to match are much more flexible than those allowed in many other languages. Case Is <= enmMain.STEP_RUN Will run for any value of mStep that is less than or equal to 2, and Case enmMain.STEP_RUN To enmMain.STEP_ERROR would run for any value between 2 and 5 inclusive.
Now it seems like somebody didn't quite understand what that meant, though, or at least wrote it in a confusing way, because for a value of 2 only the first Case would run, since as the section I quoted says only the first match is executed.
So the end result is that first 'Do something will run on values of 2 or less, and the second 'Do something will run on values of 3, 4, or 5.
this is my first post here, I'd like to ask for help on a theoretically simple query.
The current query I'm creating is to try and generate a random number, which will be identified as even or odd. Depending on that value, it should print either "M" as even, or "W" as odd. Though when I try using a case inside the select, I'm getting the "missing keyword" error. This is my following code:
select
case
when mod(round(dbms_random.value(1,100)),2) = 0 then dbms_output.put_line('M');
when mod(round(dbms_random.value(1,100)),2) = 1 then dbms_output.put_line('W');
end
from dual
I've tried checking the website for similar problems, and while I've found similar problems and people getting the solution correctly, I don't quite know what I'm missing here. When I run the select alone, I get the even or odd number I want to get, but not when I try to print out a result.
SELECT statement cannot PRINT, it can only RETURN something.
You may use query like
select
v,
case when mod(v, 2) = 0 then 'M' else 'W' end l
from
(select round(dbms_random.value(1, 100)) v from dual)
and process it's result as you wish (print, for example).
Why are you trying to embed dbms_output in a query? Just write:
select
case
when mod(round(dbms_random.value(1,100)),2) = 0 then 'M'
when mod(round(dbms_random.value(1,100)),2) = 1 then 'W'
end
from dual
Also you know, since you are calling dbms_random two different times, you get two different values in the same query. If you want one value to be compared, then use a WITH clause
with rand_value as
( select round(dbms_random.value(1,100)) val from dual
)
select
case
when mod(val,2) = 0 then 'M'
when mod(val,2) = 1 then 'W'
end
from rand_value
You get the error because of the semicolons.
Also you are calling the random function twice and thus get two different random values. I would use IF-THEN-ELSE instead of a SELECT statement, since the latter one cannot print.
IF mod(round(dbms_random.value(1,100)),2) = 0 THEN
dbms_output.put_line('M');
ELSE
dbms_output.put_line('W');
END IF;
I have a Boolean parameter called WLH where if True then it should ignore everything but if False then it should show a 0 for every craft textbox in a row that has the word "LABORER" in it. This is the expression that I am using but it doesn't seem to be doing anything. Can I get help on making it work? What am I doing wrong?
=IIF(Parameters!WLH.Value = false AND ReportItems!craft.Value LIKE "*laborer*", 0, ---main calculation for the else statement---)
Two things I see with this expression that need closer attention.
Parameters!WLH.Value = CBool("false"): The false side of the equality test needs to be converted to a boolean type with the CBool (conver to boolean) function.
ReportItems!craft.Value.IndexOf("laborer") >= 0: SSRS doesn't support LIKE in expressions but we can test for the existance of a substring in this manner. What this is doing is looking for the index (where the string "laborer" starts) in the field value and checking for a value greater than 0. This would mean that "laborer" was found while a value other than a positive integer means that the string "laborer" was not found.
I don't have SSRS installed on this machine to double check so post a comment if you still need help. Also note that IndexOf is case sensitive and that if you want to match to "Laborer" as well, you will have to do a case conversion prior to the IndexOf.
Full expression:
=IIF(Parameters!WLH.Value = CBool("false") AND ReportItems!craft.Value.IndexOf("laborer") >= 0, 0, ---main calculation for the else statement---)
EDIT: To deal with case sensitivity
Use "UCase()" to convert your field to upper case and then test only against "LABORER".
=IIF(Parameters!WLH.Value = CBool("false") AND UCase(ReportItems!craft.Value).IndexOf("LABORER") >=0, 0, ---main calculation for the else statement---)
I have a data column of strings containing a lead status. I only want to count if the lead is qualified or nurture. I have this expression:
Is Qualified = If('Lead'[Status] = OR("Qualified", "Nurture"),1,0)
But I am getting this error:
DAX comparison operations do not support comparing values of type Text
with values of type True/False. Consider using the VALUE or FORMAT
function to convert one of the values.
I'm new with DAX and haven't been able to fix this one. Any help would be great, thanks.
OR() returns a boolean value. I assume 'Lead'[Status] is a text field, in which we will find some strings with the values "Qualified" or "Nurture". If this is the case you want to do the following:
IsQualified =
IF(
'Lead'[Status] = "Qualified"
|| 'Lead'[Status] = "Nurture"
,1
0
)
This is performing two tests, and combining them with a logical or ( || - the double pipe is DAX's or operator ).
Using Oracle 11gR2 Expression Edition.
My data looks like following
ordertype
---------
ZOCO
ZOSA
ZOST
We are trying to find out records where the column is not between a certain range of values.
If I run a query with <= and >= operators:
SELECT * FROM table where ordertype <= 'ZAAA' OR ordertype >= 'ZZZZ';
then I get 0 results. This is the right answer.
However, if I use NOT BETWEEN:
SELECT * FROM table where ordertype NOT BETWEEN 'ZAAA' AND 'ZZZZ';
, then it gives multiple hits.
My understanding is that both syntax should give the same result but they are not. What am I missing? Reason I want to use NOT BETWEEN because a lot of our existing code already has this syntax and I do not want to change it without understanding the reasons.
Thank you.
Thanks for all those who posted. I ran the queries again and after fixing the "OR" in the first query, the results are the same. I still have the question of why Oracle character sorting is not recognizing it as expected, but my question which is about difference between NOT BETWEEN and <> was a false alarm. I apologize for confusion.
SELECT * FROM table where ordertype <= 'ZAAA' AND ordertype >= 'ZZZZ';
No string can be <= 'ZAAA' and >= 'ZZZZ'.
You need to use a disjunction instead:
SELECT * FROM table where ordertype < 'ZAAA' OR ordertype > 'ZZZZ';
BTW, given that BETWEEN is inclusive, NOT BETWEEN is exclusive
This is a common pitfall. you have to remember the De Morgan's Laws:
not (A and B) is the same as (not A) or (not B)
Feel free to experiment with this simple live example to convince yourself that those results are quite coherent: http://sqlfiddle.com/#!4/d41d8/38326
That being said, the only way (I can see) for the string like ZOCO for not being between ZAAA and ZZZZ would be:
having some hidden character just behind the Z (i.e.: 'Z'||CHR(0)||'OCO')
or using a locale such as Z-something is actually considered as a different letter, with a collation order outside of the given range. I don't know if such locale exists, but for example, in Welch, LL is considered as a single letter that should be sorted after the plain L. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphabetical_order#Language-specific_conventions
or having homogplyphs such as 0, 𐒠 or О instead of O in your data.
If it's not between the values, it has to be either < OR >, not AND.
In the first query, you ask for the records that are at the same time less than 'ZAAA' and also greater than 'ZZZZ'. Of course, there is no such value that fullfills both requirements, hence zero records are returned.
In the second query, you ask for records, that are either less than 'ZAAA' or greater than 'ZZZZ' (ie not between those boundaries [not between...]). There is a possibility that such records exist, and as your select statement proves, there are indeed such records, that are returned by the statement.
Your understanding that both statements are same is incorrect. NOT BETWEEN is not evaluated the way you're thinking. It simply returns the results which fall outside evaluation of BETWEEN for the parameters.
IF you check Oracle documentation for BETWEEN, it says -
The value of
expr1 NOT BETWEEN expr2 AND expr3
is the value of the expression
NOT (expr1 BETWEEN expr2 AND expr3)