I want to generate a SQL query where tables name is stored in the tables array.
and the corresponding columns name stored in a 2-D array.
example:-
Tables array
[T1,T2,T3]
Columns array
[
[C1,C2], // T1 columns
[C1,C2], // T2 columns
[C1,C2] // T3 columns
]
QUERY:-
select T1.C1,T2.C1,T3.C1 from T1
inner join T2 ON T2.C2=T1.C2;
inner join T3 ON T3.C2=T1.C2
select first column of every table in the array
if they have a match in the second column
[assuming every table has 2 columns]
I don't want to execute this query.
I just want to print it using JOOQ.
Can someone pls help me out on this.
The phrasing of your question gives room to some interpretation. I'm assuming you have these specific array types:
Table<?>[] tables = ...
Field<?>[][] fields = ...
I'm assuming that your requirement is to match all tables by common column names (i.e. names that are the same as the name of the second column of the first table), in order to join them. Since you do not specify what happens if consecutive tables don't have such a match, I'm assuming you'd like to default to excluding such tables, and their columns.
In any case, I guess this is more of a question about an idea on how to do dynamic SQL with jOOQ in general, not necessarily how to solve your particular problem.
In that case, write:
Field<?> match = fields[0][1];
List<Field<?>> select = new ArrayList<>();
Table<?> from = tables[0];
select.add(fields[0][0]);
for (int i = 1; i < fields.length && i < tables.length; i++) {
if (match.getName().equals(fields[i][1].getName())) {
select.add(fields[i][0]);
from = from.join(tables[i]).on(match.eq((Field) fields[i][1]));
}
}
ctx.select(select)
.from(from)
.fetch();
If your actual requirements are very different to these assumptions, you can still ask a new question.
Related
Okay so I've done some research and apparently, a left join can return more than 1 record based on the tables joined from the right.
my query is:
SELECT
ord.ID AS ord_id,
oli.sfid AS oli_sfid,
ord.HasMSISDN__c AS ord_HasMSISDN__c,
ord.dealer_code__c AS ord_dealer_code__c,
ord.recordtypeid AS ord_recordtypeid,
ord.order_number__c AS ord_order_number__c,
ord.status AS ord_status,
ord.opportunityid AS ord_opportunityid,
ord.sfid AS ord_sfid,
ord.cancelled_by__c AS ord_cancelled_by__c,
ord.cancelled_on__c AS ord_cancelled_on__c,
ord.created_by__c AS ord_created_by__c,
ord.created_on__c AS ord_created_on__c,
ord.docusign_email_address__c AS ord_docusign_email_address__c,
ord.esignature_resent_to__c AS ord_esignature_resent_to__c,
ord.esignature_resent_by__c AS ord_esignature_resent_by__c,
ord.esignature_resent_on__c AS ord_esignature_resent_on__c,
ord.pricebook2id AS ord_pricebook2id,
cont.opportunity__c AS cont_opportunity__c,
cont.sfid AS cont_sfid,
opp.isclosed AS opp_isclosed,
opp.sfid AS opp_sfid,
opp.recordtypeid AS opp_recordtypeid,
opp.pricebook2id AS opp_pricebook2id,
accban.sfid AS accban_sfid,
accban.ban__c AS accban_ban__c,
usr.sfid AS usr_sfid
FROM fullsbxsalesforce.order ord
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.contract cont ON ord.contractid = cont.sfid
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.opportunity opp ON cont.opportunity__c = opp.sfid
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.user usr ON (ord.dealer_code__c = usr.dealer_code_bd__c OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.Dealer_Code_Co_Sell__c OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.Rep_Dealer_Code__c OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.dealer_code_secondary__c) LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.account_ban_tax_id__c accban ON ord.ban_number__c = accban.ban__c
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.orderitem oli ON ord.sfid = oli.orderid
WHERE ord.sfid = 'SPECIFIC ID'
Initially, I was under the impression that this would return 1 row. I am mistaken, it returns 3 rows because there are 3 different OLI's attached to the order. How can I ensure, or change my logic so that either, I am returned with a collection of OLI's in the same order or only return the first OLI so that I'm not dealing with 3 duplicates
If you want your rows returned in the same order, just add an ORDER BY <col_name_list> clause at the very end of your query.
Is an OLI a unique value? Which table defines an OLI?
If you always want this query to always return one single row, just add a LIMIT 1 to the end of your query.
If your query returns multiple OLI's and you only want one row per OLI, then you can use a window function:
SELECT ...
FROM (
-- Your initial query with new field added
SELECT ...
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY OLI_field_name ORDER BY <ordering_clause>) AS RowRank
FROM ...
) src
WHERE RowRank = 1
This will return one row per <OLI_field_name>.
Update
If you want to just have one row per OLI and keep all the detailed info, use the window function method. Something like this:
SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT
ord.ID AS ord_id,
oli.sfid AS oli_sfid,
ord.HasMSISDN__c AS ord_HasMSISDN__c,
ord.dealer_code__c AS ord_dealer_code__c,
ord.recordtypeid AS ord_recordtypeid,
ord.order_number__c AS ord_order_number__c,
ord.status AS ord_status,
ord.opportunityid AS ord_opportunityid,
ord.sfid AS ord_sfid,
ord.cancelled_by__c AS ord_cancelled_by__c,
ord.cancelled_on__c AS ord_cancelled_on__c,
ord.created_by__c AS ord_created_by__c,
ord.created_on__c AS ord_created_on__c,
ord.docusign_email_address__c AS ord_docusign_email_address__c,
ord.esignature_resent_to__c AS ord_esignature_resent_to__c,
ord.esignature_resent_by__c AS ord_esignature_resent_by__c,
ord.esignature_resent_on__c AS ord_esignature_resent_on__c,
ord.pricebook2id AS ord_pricebook2id,
cont.opportunity__c AS cont_opportunity__c,
cont.sfid AS cont_sfid,
opp.isclosed AS opp_isclosed,
opp.sfid AS opp_sfid,
opp.recordtypeid AS opp_recordtypeid,
opp.pricebook2id AS opp_pricebook2id,
accban.sfid AS accban_sfid,
accban.ban__c AS accban_ban__c,
usr.sfid AS usr_sfid,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY oli.sfid ORDER BY <order_col>) AS RowRank -- Assigns a rank to each row with the same oli.sfid value
FROM fullsbxsalesforce.order ord
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.contract cont ON ord.contractid = cont.sfid
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.opportunity opp ON cont.opportunity__c = opp.sfid
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.user usr ON (ord.dealer_code__c = usr.dealer_code_bd__c OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.Dealer_Code_Co_Sell__c OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.Rep_Dealer_Code__c OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.dealer_code_secondary__c)
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.account_ban_tax_id__c accban ON ord.ban_number__c = accban.ban__c
LEFT JOIN fullsbxsalesforce.orderitem oli ON ord.sfid = oli.orderid
WHERE ord.sfid = 'SPECIFIC ID'
) src
WHERE RowRank = 1 -- Only get one row per oli.sfid value
This assumes that oli.sfid is the OLI ID
Just change the outer SELECT * to return all the fields except RowRank. Also, modify the <order_col> value to determine which row you want to return for each oli.sfid.
Not very nice, but you can set a subquery as a table in your FROM clause instead of doing the left join with oli:
, (select * from fullsbxsalesforce.orderitem WHERE ord.sfid = orderid limit 1) oli
I would question whether or not you only want one record? I see two potential answers:
1. You want all the Order Items
That you are selecting from the OrderItems table implies you want records from there. If three records match your results, then it seems illogical that you would want to arbitrarily ignore some?
(I've seen this, and done it, but it is indicative of a problem)
2. You don't want Order Items at all
This seems more likely, based on your willingness to just discard the data.
That you are willing to just discard the data all together would imply that you don't actually want it in the first place. If you don't want it, just don't include the table at all.
Conclusion
Looking at your query I am guessing you are in case #2. The issue more likely that you have included a table unnecessarily.
Where you say oli.sfid AS oli_sfid, did you mean to get the sfid of the order? If so, you no longer need the join on OrderItems.
If after reading all of that, you are still sure you want just one, totally arbitrary, item from the order, order by and limit (as suggested by others) are the solution.
3. Edit: A third scenario
After reading a comment by the OP: If all that is being attempted to verify that OrderItems exist, aggregation may be another way to go:
SELECT ord.ID AS ord_id,
count(*) AS oli_count,
ord.HasMSISDN__c AS ord_HasMSISDN__c,
...
accban.ban__c AS accban_ban__c,
usr.sfid AS usr_sfid
FROM order ord
...
LEFT JOIN orderitem oli ON ord.sfid = oli.orderid
WHERE ord.sfid = 'SPECIFIC ID'
GROUP BY
ord.ID,
ord.HasMSISDN__c,
...
accban.ban__c,
usr.sfid
Though in this case, the group by would be difficult and painful to maintain.
If the objective is to ignore Orders that do not have items associated with them, then you don't want a left join, you want an inner join:
SELECT ord.ID AS ord_id,
...
oli.sfid AS oli_sfid,
usr.sfid AS usr_sfid
FROM fullsbxsalesforce.order ord
INNER JOIN orderitem oli ON ord.sfid = oli.orderid
LEFT JOIN contract cont ON ord.contractid = cont.sfid
LEFT JOIN opportunity opp ON cont.opportunity__c = opp.sfid
LEFT JOIN user usr ON ord.dealer_code__c = usr.dealer_code_bd__c
OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.Dealer_Code_Co_Sell__c
OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.Rep_Dealer_Code__c
OR ord.dealer_code__c = usr.dealer_code_secondary__c
LEFT JOIN account_ban_tax_id__c accban ON ord.ban_number__c = accban.ban__c
WHERE ord.sfid = 'SPECIFIC ID'
Note the change of position of orderitem in the table sequence.
I have a Java program reading data from an Access database where the table is created dynamically each time, and the number of columns varies depending on the data populated.
The table has columns as shown below. Only columns RowID and StatusOfProcessing are fixed and will be at the end.
column1,column2,column3, ... columnN,RowID,StatusOfProcessing
Below is piece of code
String str = "SELECT TOP 50 * FROM Dynamic_table WHERE StatusOfProcessing='0'";
resultSet = stmt.executeQuery(str);
When reading data from the ResultSet, does it always have columns in the order listed above, or should I use
String str = "SELECT TOP 50 column1,column2,column3 .... columnN,RowID,StatusOfProcessing FROM Dynamic_table WHERE StatusOfProcessing='0'";
resultSet = stmt.executeQuery(str);
Can someone clarify?
SELECT * will normaly return columns in the order in which they were created, e.g., the order in which they appeared in the CREATE TABLE statement. However, bear in mind that in addition to retrieving the value of a column by its index, as in
int col1value = resultSet.getInt(1);
you can also retrieve the value in a given column by referring to its name, as in
int col1value = resultSet.getInt("column1");
Furthermore, if you need to see the actual order of the columns or verify the names and types of the columns in a ResultSet you can use a ResultSetMetaData object to get that information.
Suppose you have a following JPA query:
select car.year, car.month, count(car) from Car car group by car.year, car.month
Before we query for results, we need to know how many records this query will return (for pagination, UI and so on). In other words we need something like this:
select count(*) from
(select car.year, car.month, count(car)
from Car car group by car.year)
But JPA/EclipseLink does not support subqueries in "from" clause. It there a way around it?
(Of course you can use plain SQL and native queries, but this is not an option for us)
A portable JPA solution:
select count(*) from Car c where c.id in
(select MIN(car.id) from Car car group by car.year, car.month)
You could also go with something like:
select COUNT(DISTINCT CONCAT(car.year, "#", car.month)) from car
but I expect this to be less performant due to operations with textual values.
What about:
select count(distinct car.year) from car
I have another approach to solve this issue . by using my approach you don't need to know the no of rows this query is going to return.
here it is your solution :-
you going to need two variables
1) pageNo (your page no should be 1 for first request to data base and proceeding request it should be incremental like 2 ,3 , 4 5 ).
2) pageSize.
int start = 0;
if(pageNo!=null && pageSize!=null){
start = (pageNo-1) * pageSize;
}else{
pageSize = StaticVariable.MAX_PAGE_SIZE; // default page size if page no and page size are missing
}
your query
em.createquery("your query ")
.setfirstResult(start)
.setMaxResult(pageSize)
.getResultList();
As #chris pointed out EclipseLink supports subqueries. But the subquery can't be the first one in the from-clause.
So I came up with the following workaround which is working:
select count(1) from Dual dual,
(select car.year, car.month, count(car)
from Car car group by car.year) data
count(1) is important as count(data) would not work
You have to add an entity Dual (If your database does not have a DUAL table, create one with just one record.)
This works but I still consider it a workaround that would only work if you allowed to create the DUAL table.
Simply you can use setFirstResult and setMaxResult to set record bound for query ,also use size of list to return count of records that query runs. like this :
Query query = em.createQuery("SELECT d.name, COUNT(t) FROM Department d JOIN
d.teachers t GROUP BY d.name");
//query.setFirstResult(5);
//query.setMaxResult(15); this will return 10 (from 5 to 15) record after query executed.
List<Object[]> results = query.getResultList();
for (int i = 0; i < results.size(); i++) {
Object[] arr = results.get(i);
for (int j = 0; j < arr.length; j++) {
System.out.print(arr[j] + " ");
}
System.out.println();
}
-----Updated Section------
JPA does not support sub-selects in the FROM clause but EclipseLink 2.4 current milestones builds does have this support.
See, http://wiki.eclipse.org/EclipseLink/UserGuide/JPA/Basic_JPA_Development/Querying/JPQL#Sub-selects_in_FROM_clause
You can probably rewrite the query with just normal joins though.
Maybe,
Select a, size(a.bs) from A a
or
Select a, count(b) from A a join a.bs b group by a
I hope this helps you.
I have two tables in SQL Server :
Table A
ID Num
11 tj55
4 tj40
Table B
ID NUM A_ID
3 se400 4
5 se500 4
I have a stored procedure which will return for each row in A all corresponding rows in B, I have this result
NumA NumB
tj40 se400
tj40 se500
Code:
ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[Proc]
#param nvarchar(MAX),
AS
BEGIN
SELECT
aa.Num,
bb.Num
FROM
[dbo].[A] as aa
INNER JOIN
[dbo].[B] AS bb ON bb.A_ID = aa.ID
WHERE
aa.Num = #param
ORDER BY
aa.Num
END
I want to use a call my StoredProcedure in my Java application with JPA to have the two rows generated (my goal is to have List containing all the NumB (in this case 'se400' and 'se500')
StoredProcedureQuery query2 = em.createStoredProcedureQuery("Proc");
query2.registerStoredProcedureParameter("param", String.class,ParameterMode.IN);;
query2.setParameter("param", "tj40");
query2.execute();
List<Object> res = query2.getResultList();
for (int i=0; i<res.size(); i++){
System.out.println(res.get(i).toString());
}
it founds the two rows but it returns
[Ljava.lang.Object;#94814
[Ljava.lang.Object;#00856
Could you help me please?
Thank you very much
In my application I am using the following way
List i1 = query2.getResultList();
while(i1.hasNext()){
Object[] object =(Object[]) i1.next();
//your rest code
//object[0] will contain numA and object[1] will contain numB
}
I have a SELECT query which combining three tables. I want to add them to a Jtable by separating the MYSQL tables. I just want to know how can I identify the table name in a Resultset?
resultLoad("SELECT sqNum,RegDate,JobNo,DecName,NoOfLines,EntryType,EntrySubType,EntrySubType2,Amount,Status FROM paysheet WHERE TypeBy='" + cmbStaff.getSelectedItem().toString() + "' AND CommissionStatus='no' UNION SELECT sqNum,RegDate,JobNo,DecName,NoOfLines,EntryType,EntrySubType,EntrySubType2,Amount,Status FROM creditsheet WHERE TypeBy='" + cmbStaff.getSelectedItem().toString() + "' AND CommissionStatus='no' ORDER BY RegDate UNION SELECT sqNumber,date,JobNumber,DecName,noOfLines,type,type,type,CommissionAmount,status FROM newjobsheet WHERE TypeBy='" + cmbStaff.getSelectedItem().toString() + "' AND CommissionStatus='no' ORDER BY RegDate");
private void resultLoad(String loadQuery) {
try {
Connection c = DB.myConnection();
Statement s = c.createStatement();
ResultSet r = s.executeQuery(loadQuery);
while (r.next()) {
Vector v = new Vector();
v.addElement(r.getString("sqNum"));
v.addElement(r.getString("RegDate"));
v.addElement(r.getString("JobNo"));
v.addElement(r.getString("DecName"));
v.addElement(r.getString("NoOfLines"));
v.addElement(r.getString("EntryType") + " - " + r.getString("EntrySubType") + " - " + r.getString("EntrySubType2"));
v.addElement(r.getString("Amount"));
v.addElement(r.getString("Status"));
tm.addRow(v);
totalComAmount = totalComAmount + Integer.parseInt(r.getString("Amount"));
}
} catch (Exception e) {
// e.printStackTrace();
JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(this, e, "Error!", JOptionPane.ERROR_MESSAGE);
}
}
I want to add to the Jtable like this by sorting the dates. But the three tables containing different columns.
From your result set, you can get ResultSetMetaData. It looks like this:
rs.getMetaData().getTableName(int Column);
"I want to add them to a table by separating the tables."
Not sure what you mean by that, but:
"I just want to know how can I identify the table name in a Resultset?"
the answer is no, not unless you rewrite the query so that it does it for you.
A SELECT statement yields a new (virtual) table - any columns it delivers are technically columns of that new virtual table. The result does not remember the origin of those columns
However, you can write the query so as to give every expression in the SELECT list a column alias that allows you to identify the origin. For instance, you could do:
SELECT table1.column1 AS table1_column1
, table1.column2 AS table1_column2
, ...
, table2.column1 AS table2_column1
, ...
FROM table1 INNER JOIN table2 ON ... etc
If the underscore is not suitable as a separator for your purpose, then you could consider to quote the aliases and pick whatever character as separator you like, including a dot:
SELECT table1.column1 AS `table1.column1`
, ....
etc.
UPDATE:
I just noticed your query is a UNION over several tables. Obviously this method won't work in that case. I think your best bet is still to rewrite the query so that it reads:
SELECT 'paysheet' as table_name, ...other columns...
FROM paysheet
UNION
SELECT 'creditsheet', ...other columns...
...
It seems to me like you want to SELECT data from three separate tables and have it returned in one query as one ResultSet, then you want to separate the results back out into individual tables.
This is completely counter intuitive.
If you want to have your results separated so that you are able to look at each table's results separately, your best bet is to perform 3 different SELECT queries. Basically, what you are asking it to combine 3 things and then separate them again in one pass. Don't do this; if you leave them uncombined in the first place, separating them back out won't be an issue for you.