How do I do the order_by part in codeigniter?
SELECT <field> FROM <table> ORDER BY STR_TO_DATE( <field>, '%H:%i' ) DESC LIMIT 0 , 30
Tried this but it takes "'%H:%i')" as the field name.
$this->db->order_by("STR_TO_DATE(".$field.", '%H:%i')", $order);
The field is a varchar and the query I posted returns the result that I want but I don't know how to do it in codeigniter
I don't think you can do that in CodeIgniter in version 2.1.0. As Madmartigan put it, the comma trigger CI to wrap the wrong part in the backticks and thus giving the mysql error. I think there is no point digging into active record on the order_by function to find a workaround than a real fix for this to work. I check into the upstream and apparently, they have something which is interesting, you might want to keep an eye when is that released.
I didn't spend more time to find workaround in active record order_by but resort to this alternative which seem to work fine. Consider the following?
$sql = "SELECT <field> FROM <table> ORDER BY STR_TO_DATE(?, '%H:%i') desc LIMIT 0, 30";
$this->db->query($sql, array('19:20'));
Related
FILTER("source"."recordCount" USING "source"."snapshot_date" =
EVALUATE('TO_CHAR(%1, ''YYYYMMDD'')', TIMESTAMPADD(SQL_TSI_DAY, -7, EVALUATE('TO_DATE(%1, %2)', "source"."snapshot_date" , 'YYYYMMDD'))))
So i have this piece of code here. I know some will say "Just use the AGO function" But somehow it's causing problems because of it's connection with other tables so what I'm trying to achieve here is like a remake. The process goes this way:
The snapshot_date there is actually in varchar format and not date. So it's like "20131016" and I'm trying to change it to a date then subtract 7 days from it using the TIMESTAMPADD function and then finally returning it back to varchar to use it with FILTER.
This snippet somehow works when testing the FILTER using hardcoded values like "20131016" for example but when tested out with the code above all the row are blank. On paper, the process i assumed would happen goes lke this. "20131016" turns to a date with a format of 20131016 (yyyymmdd) and then less 7 days: 20131009 and then turned into char again "20131009" to be used in the filter.
But somehow that doesn't happen. I think the data format is not applying either to the string->date or the date->string conversion. which results to the values not getting a match at all.
Anyone have any idea what's wrong with my code?
By the way I've already tried to use CAST instead of EVALUATE or TO_TIMEDATE with the same result. Oh and this goes to the formula of the column in BMM.
Thanks
You might get some clues by looking at the SQL generated by the BI Server. I can't see any issues with your column expression, so I wouldn't limit your debugging to that alone.
A query returning nulls is often caused by incorrect levels being set (especially on logical table sources, but potentially on a measure column too). This will often result in some form of SELECT NULL FROM ... in the physical SQL.
Try this :
FILTER("source"."recordCount" USING "source"."snapshot_date" =
EVALUATE('TO_CHAR(%1, %2)', TIMESTAMPADD(SQL_TSI_DAY, -7, EVALUATE('TO_DATE(%1, %2)', TO_CHAR("source"."snapshot_date" , 'YYYYMMDD') , 'YYYYMMDD')) , 'YYYYMMDD'))
I'm fairly new to Laravel having come over from Codeigniter and for the most part I really like it, but I really can't get my head around Eloquent.
If I want to do a simple query like this:
SELECT * FROM site INNER JOIN tweeter ON tweeter.id = site.tweeter_id
I try doing something like this (with a "belongs to"):
$site = Site::with('tweeter')->find($site_id);
But now I have two queries and an IN() which isn't really needed, like so:
SELECT * FROM `site` WHERE `id` = '12' LIMIT 1
SELECT * FROM `tweeter` WHERE `id` IN ('3')
So I try and force a join like so:
$site = Site::join('tweeter', 'tweeter.id', '=', 'site.tweeter_id')->find($site_id);
And now I get an error like so:
SQLSTATE[23000]: Integrity constraint violation: 1052 Column 'id' in where clause is ambiguous
SQL: SELECT * FROM `site` INNER JOIN `tweeter` ON `tweeter`.`id` = `site.tweeter_id` WHERE `id` = ? LIMIT 1
Bindings: array (
0 => 12,
)
It's obvious where the error is, the where needs to use something like "site.id = ?". But I can't see anyway to make this happen?
So i'm just stuck going back to fluent and using:
DB::table('site')->join('tweeter', 'tweeter.id', '=', 'site.tweeter_id')->where('site.id','=',$site_id)->first()
I guess it's not a massive problem. I would just really like to understand eloquent. I can't help but feel that i'm getting it massively wrong and misunderstanding how it works. Am I missing something? Or does it really have to be used in a very specific way?
I guess my real question is: Is there anyway to make the query I want to make using Eloquent?
I actually find this behaviour advantageous. Consider this (I'll modify your example). So we have many sites and each has many tweeters. Each site has a lot of info in the DB: many columns, some of them text columns with lots of text / data.
You do the query your way:
SELECT * FROM site INNER JOIN tweeter ON tweeter.id = site.tweeter_id
There are two downsides:
You get lots of redundant data. Each row you get for a tweeter of the same site will have the same site data that you only need once so the communication between PHP and your DB takes longer.
How do you do foreach (tweeter_of_this_site)? I'm guessing you display all the sites in some kind of list and then inside each site you display all of it's tweeters. You'll have to program some custom logic to do that.
Using the ORM approach solves both these issues: it only gets the site data once and it allows you to do this:
foreach ($sites as $site) {
foreach($site->tweeters as $tweeter) {}
}
What I'm also saying is: don't fight it! I used to be the one that said: why would I ever use an ORM, I can code my own SQL, thank you. Now I'm using it in Laravel and it's great!
You can always think of Eloquent as an extension of Fluent.
The problem you're running into is caused by the find() command. It uses id without a table name, which becomes ambiguous.
It's a documented issue: https://github.com/laravel/laravel/issues/1050
To create the command you are seeking, you can do this:
$site = Site::join('tweeter', 'tweeter.id', '=', 'site.tweeter_id')->where('site.id', '=', $site_id)->first($fields);
Of course, your syntax with join()->find() is correct once that issue fix is adopted.
I'm wondering if anyone has any clarification on the difference between the following statements using sqlite3 gem with ruby 1.9.x:
#db.execute("INSERT INTO table(a,b,c) VALUES (?,?,?)",
some_int, other_int, some_string)
and
#db.execute("INSERT INTO table(a,b,c) VALUES (#{some_int},"+
+"#{some_int}, #{some_string})")
My problem is: When I use the first method for insertion, I can't query for the "c" column using the following statement:
SELECT * FROM table WHERE c='some magic value'
I can use this:
"SELECT * FROM table WHERE c=?", "some magic value"
but what I really want to use is
"SELECT * FROM table WHERE c IN ('#{options.join("','")}')"
And this doesn't work with the type of inserts.
Does anyone know what the difference is at the database level that is preventing the IN from working properly?
I figured this out quite a while ago, but forgot to come back and point it out, in case someone finds this question at another time.
The difference turns out to be blobs. Apparently when you use the first form above (the substitution method using (?,?)) SQLite3 uses blogs to enter the data. However, if you construct an ordinary SQL statement, it's inserted as a regular string and the two aren't equivalent.
Insert is not possible to row query but row query used in get data that time this one working.
SQLite in you used in mobile app that time not work bat this row query you write in SQLite Browse in that work
So I set a variable in my main ruby file that's handling all my post and get requests and then use ERB templates to actually show the pages. I pass the database handler itself into the erb templates, and then run a query in the template to get all (for this example) grants.
In my main ruby file:
grants_main_order = "id_num"
get '/grants' do
erb :grants, :locals => {:db=>db, :order=>grants_main_order, :message=>params[:message]}
end
In the erb template:
db = locals[:db]
getGrants = db.exec("SELECT * FROM grants ORDER BY $1", [locals[:order]])
This produces some very random ordering, however if I replace the $1 with id_num, it works as it should.
Is this a typing issue? How can I fix this? Using string replacement with #{locals[:order]} also gives funky results.
Parameters are there to put in constant values into the query. It's possible and legal, but not meaningful to use them in an ORDER BY-clause.
Say you want to issue this query:
SELECT first_name, last_name
FROM people
ORDER BY first_name
If you put "first_name" in a string and pass it in as a parameter, you instead get:
SELECT first_name, last_name
FROM people
ORDER BY "first_name"
The difference is huge. That last ORDER BY-clause really tells te database not to care about the column values for each row, and just sort as if all rows were identical. Sorting order will be random.
I would recommend using datamapper (http://datamapper.org/) for sinatra. It's a very slick ORM and handles the paramaterized queries you are trying to build quite well.
have you inspected what locals[:order] is? Maybe something funky in there.
p locals[:order]
Greetings,
I'm trying to use the 'group' parameter for a find using CakePHP.
The dbms is oracle and to my surprise it didn't work (no group by in the query).
Example:
$this->User->find('all', array('group' => 'id'));
The query returned:
select * from users User where 1 = 1;
digging around the source code at the DboOracle::renderStatement() I found this:
return "SELECT {$fields} FROM {$table} {$alias} {$joins} {$conditions} {$order} {$limit}";
I was surprised not seeing a {$group}, so I look around and found out that some of the dbo_ files do actually have {$group} included in the query, for example dbo_source.php
return "SELECT {$fields} FROM {$table} {$alias} {$joins} {$conditions} {$group} {$order} {$limit}";
Does this mean that cake doesn't support group by statement on oracle? Or is there a workaround that I'm not aware of?
This is a known problem that was recently fixed. Check this link