How can I create a sequence, which has two parts one fixed characters part and another variable integer part like "LTR00001" and the next value in the sequence should be "LTR00002"
You cannot. Sequences are just integers.
But you can select a formatted string from the sequence
SELECT 'LTR' || to_char('09999', the_sequence.nextval) FROM DUAL;
Related
I have an situation to handle negative numeric data. The position of the negative sign for some of the numeric values in the files (Stored in HDFS) are on the right side (like this 12345-), ideally negative number are denoted as minus in the left (like this, -12345).
I cannot change the data because this data is correct and when the data is used by the source system (SAP) it is able to read the data as negative number.
In hive I have to run some arithmetic manipulation, say I want SUM this values which contains data like '12345-', then HIVE is unable to recognize this value as number (the column type is DECIMAL(10,2)) and the result shows NULL as value ! Need your kind advice how to handle this situation.Thanks in advance.
Check last character, if it is '-' then use substr and concat to construct correct value:
select case when substr('12345-',-1,1)='-' then cast(concat('-',substr('12345-',1,length('12345-')-1)) as int) else cast('12345-' as int) end as column_name;
OK
-12345
Replace '12345-' with your column_name
Use this syntax:
CAST(CAST(-1 AS DECIMAL(1,0)) AS
DECIMAL(10,2))*CAST(regexp_replace(regexp_replace(TRIM(column name),'\\-',''),'-','') as decimal(10,2)),
In Oracle, while trying to concatenate two columns of both Number type and then trying to take MAX of it, I am having a question.
i.e column A column B of Number data type,
Select MAX(A||B) from table
Table data
A B
20150501 95906
20150501 161938
when I’m running the query Select MAX(A||B) from table
O/P - 2015050195906
Ideally 20150501161938 should be the output????
I am trying to format column B like TO_CHAR(B,'FM000000') and execute i'm getting the expected output.
Select MAX(A || TO_CHAR(B,'FM000000')) FROM table
O/P - 2015011161938
Why is 2015050195906 is considered as MAX in first case.
Presumably, column A is a date and column B is a time.
If that's true, treat them as such:
select max(to_date(to_char(a)||to_char(b,'FM000000'),'YYYYMMDDHH24MISS')) from your_table;
That will add a leading space for the time component (if necessary) then concatenate the columns into a string, which is then passed to the to_date function, and then the max function will treat as a DATE datatype, which is presumably what you want.
PS: The real solution here, is to fix your data model. Don't store dates and times as numbers. In addition to sorting issues like this, the optimizer can get confused. (If you store a date as a number, how can the optimizer know that '20141231' will immediately be followed by '20150101'?)
You should convert to number;
select MAX(TO_NUMBER(A||B)) from table
Concatenation will result in a character/text output. As such, it sorts alphabetically, so 9 appears after 16.
In the second case, you are specifiying a format to pad the number to six digits. That works well, because 095906 will now appear before 161938.
Could someone please explain to me the difference between the below two Oracle queries? I know they look very similar but the first one returns results and the second one does not. My implementation of the function can be seen below as well.
--Returns results
SELECT *
FROM <TABLE_NAME>
WHERE ID = CAST(<UserID> AS CHAR(2000)); --ID is defined as CHAR(8) in the DB.
--Does not return results
SELECT *
FROM <TABLE_NAME>
WHERE ID = CAST_TO_CHAR(<UserID>); --ID is defined as CHAR(8) in the DB.
--Function definition
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION CAST_TO_CHAR(varToPad IN VARCHAR2)
RETURN CHAR IS returnVal CHAR(2000);
BEGIN
SELECT CAST(varToPad AS CHAR(2000))
INTO returnVal
FROM DUAL;
RETURN returnVal;
END;
/
It almost seems to me that the type is not persisting when the value is retrieved from the database. From what I understand from CHAR comparisons in Oracle, it will take the smaller of the two fields and truncate the larger one so that the sizes match (that is why I am casting the second variable to length 2000).
The reason that I need to achieve something like this is because a vendor tool that we are upgrading from DB2 to Oracle defined all of the columns in the Oracle database as CHAR instead of VARCHAR2. They did this to make their legacy code more easily portable to a distributed environment. This is causing big issues in our web applications because compares are now being done against fixed length CHAR fields.
I thought about using TRIM() but these queries will be accessed a lot and I do not want them to do a full table scan each time. I also considered RPAD(, ) but I don't really want to hard code lengths in the application as these may change in the future.
Does anyone have any thoughts about this? Thank you in advance for your help!
I have similar problem. It turned out that these are the rules of implicit data conversion. Oracle Database automatically converts a value from one datatype to another when such a conversion makes sense.
If you change your select:
SELECT *
FROM <TABLE_NAME>
WHERE CAST(ID as CHAR(2000)) = CAST_TO_CHAR(<UserID>);
You will see that's works properly.
And here's another test script showing that the function works correctly:
SET SERVEROUTPUT ON --for DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE.
DECLARE
test_string_c CHAR(8);
test_string_v VARCHAR2(8);
BEGIN
--Assign the same value to each string.
test_string_c := 'string';
test_string_v := 'string';
--Test the strings for equality.
IF test_string_c = CAST_TO_CHAR(test_string_v) THEN
DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('The names are the same');
ELSE
DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('The names are NOT the same');
END IF;
END;
/
anonymous block completed
The names are the same
Here are some rules govern the direction in which Oracle Database makes implicit datatype conversions:
During INSERT and UPDATE operations, Oracle converts the value to
the datatype of the affected column.
During SELECT FROM operations, Oracle converts the data from the
column to the type of the target variable.
When comparing a character value with a numeric value, Oracle
converts the character data to a numeric value.
When comparing a character value with a DATE value, Oracle converts
the character data to DATE.
When making assignments, Oracle converts the value on the right side
of the equal sign (=) to the datatype of the target of the assignment
on the left side.
When you use a SQL function or operator with an argument of a
datatype other than the one it accepts, Oracle converts the argument
to the accepted datatype.
Complete list of datatype comparison rules you can explore here
I want to convert a 9 digit number to 10 digit by appending a 0 to it.
For example In Table ABC say there is a column named B which takes a number which is at the max 10 digit long.
Now sometimes I will get a 9 digit number only.
So in that case when a 9 digit number is faced i need to fire a trigger to make it 10 digit and then insert in the table.
For that you need to create the column with character datatype so that it can hold the leading zeros.
You don't need to write any trigger for this simple operation. you can use lpad for this purpose:
eg.g
Insert into table1(number_col) values ( lpad(999999999, 10, '0'));
select * from table1;
| number_col |
|-----------------|
| 0999999999 |
To use this in trigger, create a trigger as follows (Not Tested);
create or replace trigger trg_table1
before insert or update of number_col on table1
for each row
begin
:new.number_col := lpad( :new.number_col, 10, '0' );
end;
You don't really need to make this a trigger. Adding a 0 to the front of the number is really only for humans, the computer doesn't care and that information can't be stored in the database unless you convert the column to a string format.
What you're looking for is one of three things: Either, change the way your forms display the information to add padding if the number is less 10,000,000,000 to affect the way the user sees the information (most recommended)
Or, use the lpad function to convert the number to a string with 0 padding if necessary
lpad(input,10,'0')
Note that this will require conversion back to a number to insert into the DB if it is possible for the user to edit this number. (second most recommended)
Lastly, you can always store the value in a string format and use lpad as above on insert.
I wouldn't recommend this as strings take up much more space than numbers, and the db won't search them as fast. Also, why store a number as a string purely for the user's sake, when you can change the way your data looks to the user programatically?
I have a simple Sqlite table with 2 columns for a telephone number and a counter. I want to update the table on the basis of .csv files that also contain telephone numbers and counters. If the number exists in the database it should be updated by the sum of the existing counter + the counter in the file. If it doesn't exist a new record should be inserted with the value from the file.
My one remaining problem is that the telephone numbers have a zero in the first position.
When I populate the db the zero is retained, (I can manually select and find an existing number like 09999) when I fetch the values from the file the zero is retained but when I try to insert/update something happens in my Ruby code that inserts a new record without the leading zero, so 0999 becomes 999 in the db. Numbers without leading zeros are handled correctly.
My code looks like this:
rowArray=thisFile[k].split(';')
number = rowArray[0]
couplings = rowArray[1]
updString="INSERT OR REPLACE INTO Caller (Telno,count) VALUES (#{number},COALESCE((SELECT count + #{couplings} FROM Caller WHERE Telno=#{number}),# {couplings}))"
db.execute(updString)
Any idea what I'm doing wrong here? The easiest solution would be to drop the leading zero but I would prefer to do it right. Many thanks in advance.
You need to use placeholders in your prepare call and pass the actual values in a call to execute. Like this
insert = db.prepare(<<__SQL__)
INSERT OR REPLACE INTO Caller (Telno, count)
VALUES (:number, COALESCE((SELECT count + :couplings FROM Caller WHERE Telno = :number), :couplings))
__SQL__
insert.execute(number: number, couplings: couplings)
(Note that :number and :couplings in the SQL statement are named placeholders. They can be anything, but I have chosen them to match the corresponding names of the variables that are to be bound.)
The problem is that, using simple interpolation, you end up with a string like
INSERT OR REPLACE INTO Caller (Telno, count) VALUES (0999, ...
and the 0999 appears to be a number rather than a string. If you pass strings to execute then the variables will be bound with the correct type.