Hi,
Here's my current query, which throws an error that "AgeCalc" is an invalid column in the WHERE clause:
----------
SELECT
.
.
.,
AgeCalc =
CASE
WHEN dateadd(year, datediff (year, B.DOB, B.DateIn), B.DOB) > B.DateIn
THEN datediff (year, B.DOB, B.DateIn) - 1
ELSE datediff (year, B.DOB, B.DateIn)
END
FROM
ResidentData B
WHERE
(AgeCalc >= 18)
----------
How do I do conditionals on the "AgeCalc" derived column?
Thanks.How do I do conditionals on the "AgeCalc" derived column?
Thanks.
You have to write the expression over again:
WHERE
CASE
WHEN dateadd(year, datediff (year, B.DOB, B.DateIn), B.DOB) > B.DateIn
THEN datediff (year, B.DOB, B.DateIn) - 1
ELSE datediff (year, B.DOB, B.DateIn)
END >= 18
Alternatively, write a view that includes your derived column and then you can use your column name in an expression.
I don't recommend using CASE statements in WHERE clauses. It can result in sub-optimal query execution plans.
Regards,
hmscott|||Thanks for your help - I will test the solution and see what the performance is like.
The current situation does not allow me to consider creating views, so I'll have to stick to keeping the query similar to the way it already is.|||select *
from (
SELECT ...
, AgeCalc =
CASE WHEN dateadd(year
, datediff(year, B.DOB, B.DateIn)
, B.DOB) > B.DateIn
THEN datediff(year, B.DOB, B.DateIn) - 1
ELSE datediff(year, B.DOB, B.DateIn)
END
FROM ResidentData B
) as T
WHERE AgeCalc >= 18|||Thanks guys. Both solutions worked well. I will use the second one since it's about half a second faster.
Showing posts with label case. Show all posts
Showing posts with label case. Show all posts
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Conditional Where Clause w/ Case Statement Possible?
Greetings,
After many hours search many forums and many failed experiments, I figure it's time to turn to the experts.
I need to execute a query that changes the returned data based upon a parameter's value. In my example below, the lob field contains both text values and nulls.
SELECT uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM mytable
WHERE
CASE WHEN @.myparam = 'ALL'
THEN
xdate >= '2007-09-01'
ELSE
xdate >= '2007-09-01' or
lob = @.myparm
END
I've experimented with various forms of the LIKE function, checking for null/not null and keep coming up blank.
I thought about using an IF statement and creating different versions of the entire statement, however, in real-life I need to do this with four fields using four parameters (one for each field). The permutations are a little too much.
Any ideas?
Rob
Your query can be written this way, I think:
SELECT uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM mytable
WHERE (xdate >= '20070901')
AND (
@.myparm = 'ALL'
OR
lob = @.myparm
)
In general, you can probably write:
WHERE
(@.p = 'Option1' AND (<option 1 condition>))
OR
(@.p = 'Option 2' AND (<option 2 condition>))
OR
...
Be careful where parentheses go, so AND and OR don't associate differently than you want.
In SQL, CASE .. END is an expression, by the way, so it can't be used as you hoped in your post.
Steve Kass
Drew University
http://www.stevekass.com
|||This is really bad idea to write the logical expression to validate the variable’s value on the where clause, it might force the engine to use the index scan,
If .. Else is not harm to use in your query.. Don’t try to reduce the no of lines, check the performance..
Code Snippet
If @.myparam = 'ALL'
SELECT
uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM
mytable
WHERE
xdate >= '2007-09-01'
ELSE
SELECT
uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM
mytable
WHERE
xdate >= '2007-09-01' or lob = @.myparm
|||
Steve Kass wrote:
Your query can be written this way, I think:
SELECT uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM mytable
WHERE (xdate >= '20070901')
AND (
@.myparm = 'ALL'
OR
lob = @.myparm
)
In SQL, CASE .. END is an expression, by the way, so it can't be used as you hoped in your post.
Steve - when @.myparm ='ALL', I want all of the records returned. The field (lob) does not actually contain the value 'ALL'.
I tried using a LIKE statement but found that nulls are not returned. For example, if @.myparm was populated with "%" and used in this query:
SELECT uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM mytable
WHERE (xdate >= '20070901') and
lob LIKE @.myparm
then all records with a value in lob are returned but those will a null are not. I need to inlcude the records with a null.
Rob
|||
This is really bad idea to write the logical expression to validate the variable’s value on the where clause, it might force the engine to use the index scan,
If .. Else is not harm to use in your query.. Don’t try to reduce the no of lines, check the performance..
The problem with using the IF statement is the number of permutation when I have four variables.
IF @.myparm1 = 'ALL' and @.myparm2 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm3 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm4 <> 'ALL'
(query 1)
IF @.myparm1 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm2 = 'ALL' and @.myparm3 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm4 <> 'ALL'
(query 2)
IF @.myparm1 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm2 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm3 = 'ALL' and @.myparm4 <> 'ALL'
(query 3)
...
I think I'd wind up with 16 IF statements. While it should work, it would be very difficult to support.
Rob
|||
In your case the best solution is using the dynamic sql... Buliding the Where clause expression on the fly..
There are few limitations there while using the dynamic sql.. If you really need a best performance there is no compromise..
example,
Code Snippet
Declare @.SQL as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Name as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Type as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Where as varchar(8000);
Set @.Name = null;
Set @.Type ='U'
Set @.SQL = 'Select * from Sysobjects Where 1=1'
Set @.Where = ''
IF @.Name is not NULL
Set @.Where = ' And Name=''' + @.Name + ''''
IF @.Type is NOT NULL
Set @.Where = @.Where + ' And Type=''' + @.Type + ''''
Exec (@.SQL + @.Where)
Code Snippet
Declare @.SQL as NVarchar(4000);
Declare @.Name as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Type as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Where as varchar(8000);
Set @.Name = NULL;
Set @.Type ='P'
Set @.SQL = 'Select * from Sysobjects Where 1=1'
Set @.Where = ''
IF @.Name is not NULL
Set @.Where = ' And Name=@.Name'
IF @.Type is NOT NULL
Set @.Where = @.Where + ' And Type=@.Type'
Set @.SQL = @.SQL + @.Where
Exec sp_executesql @.SQL, N'@.name varchar(100), @.type varchar(100)', @.name, @.type
|||Sorry, Rob. I misread your original intent, so let me try again. I think you want
1. If 'ALL' is passed: every row with xdate >= '20070901'
2. If 'ALL' is not passed: every row with xdate >= '20070901', as well as rows with lob = @.myparm, regardless of date.
First, a solution that assumes @.myparm is never NULL:
select uniqueID, lob, xdate
from mytable
where
(
@.myparm = 'ALL'
and
(xdate >= '20070901')
) or (
@.myparm <> 'ALL'
and
(@.myparm = lob or xdate >= '20070901')
)
Because you use NULL as a value for [lob], and you use @.myparm = NULL to select those rows, you can't rely on @.myparm = lob, which is not true when @.myparm and lob are both NULL. Unfortunately, you have to handle this separately, because T-SQL has no IS NOT DISTINCT FROM operator that means "are both equal or are both null". Whether you treat it as a third case or in the second case is up to you:
where
(
@.myparm = 'ALL'
and
(xdate >= '20070901')
) or (
@.myparm <> 'ALL'
and
(@.myparm = lob or xdate >= '20070901')
) or (
@.myparm IS NULL
and
(lob IS NULL or xdate >= '20070901')
)
So this is like what a CASE statement would be. The structure is
where
you are in case 1 and the where clause for that case holds
or
you are in case 2 and the where clause for that case holds
...
The problem with NULL is because a CASE expression would allow an OTHERWISE clause to handle both @.myparm <> 'ALL' and @.myparm IS NULL at once.
Note that I wrote the date without hyphens. Unfortunately, if xdate is [datetime] or [smalldatetime], SQL Server installations that use European and many other non-US localizations will interpret the date as you wrote it to mean January 9, 2007. I doubt you ever want that, and you can avoid a surprise by using the format I provided, or the other "safe" format '2007-09-01T00:00:00' (the T is required).
SK
|||
select uniqueID, lob, xdate
from mytable
where
(
@.myparm = 'ALL'
and
(xdate >= '20070901')
) or (
@.myparm <> 'ALL'
and
(@.myparm = lob or xdate >= '20070901')
)SK
Steve,
Thank you very much. This did the trick. It's amazing what a few AND & OR statements can do with the correct paranthesis.
I'm actually using these queres in SSRS as a data source. It took a couple of edits to get SSRS to take the paranthesis correctly as it want to "fix" them for you.
Rob
Conditional Where Clause w/ Case Statement Possible?
Greetings,
After many hours search many forums and many failed experiments, I figure it's time to turn to the experts.
I need to execute a query that changes the returned data based upon a parameter's value. In my example below, the lob field contains both text values and nulls.
SELECT uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM mytable
WHERE
CASE WHEN @.myparam = 'ALL'
THEN
xdate >= '2007-09-01'
ELSE
xdate >= '2007-09-01' or
lob = @.myparm
END
I've experimented with various forms of the LIKE function, checking for null/not null and keep coming up blank.
I thought about using an IF statement and creating different versions of the entire statement, however, in real-life I need to do this with four fields using four parameters (one for each field). The permutations are a little too much.
Any ideas?
Rob
Your query can be written this way, I think:
SELECT uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM mytable
WHERE (xdate >= '20070901')
AND (
@.myparm = 'ALL'
OR
lob = @.myparm
)
In general, you can probably write:
WHERE
(@.p = 'Option1' AND (<option 1 condition>))
OR
(@.p = 'Option 2' AND (<option 2 condition>))
OR
...
Be careful where parentheses go, so AND and OR don't associate differently than you want.
In SQL, CASE .. END is an expression, by the way, so it can't be used as you hoped in your post.
Steve Kass
Drew University
http://www.stevekass.com
|||This is really bad idea to write the logical expression to validate the variable’s value on the where clause, it might force the engine to use the index scan,
If .. Else is not harm to use in your query.. Don’t try to reduce the no of lines, check the performance..
Code Snippet
If @.myparam = 'ALL'
SELECT
uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM
mytable
WHERE
xdate >= '2007-09-01'
ELSE
SELECT
uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM
mytable
WHERE
xdate >= '2007-09-01' or lob = @.myparm
|||
Your query can be written this way, I think:
SELECT uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM mytable
WHERE (xdate >= '20070901')
AND (
@.myparm = 'ALL'
OR
lob = @.myparm
)
In SQL, CASE .. END is an expression, by the way, so it can't be used as you hoped in your post.
Steve - when @.myparm ='ALL', I want all of the records returned. The field (lob) does not actually contain the value 'ALL'.
I tried using a LIKE statement but found that nulls are not returned. For example, if @.myparm was populated with "%" and used in this query:
SELECT uniqueID, lob, xdate
FROM mytable
WHERE (xdate >= '20070901') and
lob LIKE @.myparm
then all records with a value in lob are returned but those will a null are not. I need to inlcude the records with a null.
Rob
|||
This is really bad idea to write the logical expression to validate the variable’s value on the where clause, it might force the engine to use the index scan,
If .. Else is not harm to use in your query.. Don’t try to reduce the no of lines, check the performance..
The problem with using the IF statement is the number of permutation when I have four variables.
IF @.myparm1 = 'ALL' and @.myparm2 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm3 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm4 <> 'ALL'
(query 1)
IF @.myparm1 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm2 = 'ALL' and @.myparm3 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm4 <> 'ALL'
(query 2)
IF @.myparm1 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm2 <> 'ALL' and @.myparm3 = 'ALL' and @.myparm4 <> 'ALL'
(query 3)
...
I think I'd wind up with 16 IF statements. While it should work, it would be very difficult to support.
Rob
|||
In your case the best solution is using the dynamic sql... Buliding the Where clause expression on the fly..
There are few limitations there while using the dynamic sql.. If you really need a best performance there is no compromise..
example,
Code Snippet
Declare @.SQL as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Name as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Type as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Where as varchar(8000);
Set @.Name = null;
Set @.Type ='U'
Set @.SQL = 'Select * from Sysobjects Where 1=1'
Set @.Where = ''
IF @.Name is not NULL
Set @.Where = ' And Name=''' + @.Name + ''''
IF @.Type is NOT NULL
Set @.Where = @.Where + ' And Type=''' + @.Type + ''''
Exec (@.SQL + @.Where)
Code Snippet
Declare @.SQL as NVarchar(4000);
Declare @.Name as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Type as Varchar(8000);
Declare @.Where as varchar(8000);
Set @.Name = NULL;
Set @.Type ='P'
Set @.SQL = 'Select * from Sysobjects Where 1=1'
Set @.Where = ''
IF @.Name is not NULL
Set @.Where = ' And Name=@.Name'
IF @.Type is NOT NULL
Set @.Where = @.Where + ' And Type=@.Type'
Set @.SQL = @.SQL + @.Where
Exec sp_executesql @.SQL, N'@.name varchar(100), @.type varchar(100)', @.name, @.type
|||Sorry, Rob. I misread your original intent, so let me try again. I think you want
1. If 'ALL' is passed: every row with xdate >= '20070901'
2. If 'ALL' is not passed: every row with xdate >= '20070901', as well as rows with lob = @.myparm, regardless of date.
First, a solution that assumes @.myparm is never NULL:
select uniqueID, lob, xdate
from mytable
where
(
@.myparm = 'ALL'
and
(xdate >= '20070901')
) or (
@.myparm <> 'ALL'
and
(@.myparm = lob or xdate >= '20070901')
)
Because you use NULL as a value for [lob], and you use @.myparm = NULL to select those rows, you can't rely on @.myparm = lob, which is not true when @.myparm and lob are both NULL. Unfortunately, you have to handle this separately, because T-SQL has no IS NOT DISTINCT FROM operator that means "are both equal or are both null". Whether you treat it as a third case or in the second case is up to you:
where
(
@.myparm = 'ALL'
and
(xdate >= '20070901')
) or (
@.myparm <> 'ALL'
and
(@.myparm = lob or xdate >= '20070901')
) or (
@.myparm IS NULL
and
(lob IS NULL or xdate >= '20070901')
)
So this is like what a CASE statement would be. The structure is
where
you are in case 1 and the where clause for that case holds
or
you are in case 2 and the where clause for that case holds
...
The problem with NULL is because a CASE expression would allow an OTHERWISE clause to handle both @.myparm <> 'ALL' and @.myparm IS NULL at once.
Note that I wrote the date without hyphens. Unfortunately, if xdate is [datetime] or [smalldatetime], SQL Server installations that use European and many other non-US localizations will interpret the date as you wrote it to mean January 9, 2007. I doubt you ever want that, and you can avoid a surprise by using the format I provided, or the other "safe" format '2007-09-01T00:00:00' (the T is required).
SK
|||
select uniqueID, lob, xdate
from mytable
where
(
@.myparm = 'ALL'
and
(xdate >= '20070901')
) or (
@.myparm <> 'ALL'
and
(@.myparm = lob or xdate >= '20070901')
)SK
Steve,
Thank you very much. This did the trick. It's amazing what a few AND & OR statements can do with the correct paranthesis.
I'm actually using these queres in SSRS as a data source. It took a couple of edits to get SSRS to take the paranthesis correctly as it want to "fix" them for you.
Rob
|||in t-sql you can have conditional where clausessample:
select * from mytable
where
mycol = case when @.i = 1 then 1 else 2 end
Monday, March 19, 2012
conditional update within value
I have a column of data in SQL Server 2000 that I need to replace
values within it with new values. I know how to use CASE statements to
do conditional updates but not how to do this. Here is an example, not
the real example as the values relevant to my company would mean little
to anyone.
If value contains "name", replace it with "fullname"
If value contains "address", replace it with "fulladdress"
and so on...
What I want to do in the field is the following:
Field value now: abc##name##123
Field after change: abc##fullname###123
Field value now: asdlfkjlsdkafjnameasldfjk123
Field after change: asdlfkjlsdkafjfullnameasldfjk123
Field value now: adlsfkjaddresslksdfj34
Field after change: adlsfkjfulladdresslksdfj34
And update all rows in the approriate column with the above logic.
Any ideas?
Thanks.
JRYou don't need a Case statement to do this, you can use
Update #t Set foo = Replace (Replace (foo, 'address', 'fulladdress'),
'name', 'fullname')
Where foo Like '%name%' Or foo Like '%address%'
You could also do it with a Case statement like
Update #t Set foo = Case
When foo Like '%name%' Then Replace (foo, 'name', 'fullname')
When foo Like '%address%' Then Replace (foo, 'address', 'fulladdress')
Else foo
End
Where foo Like '%name%' Or foo Like '%address%'
Please note, however, that depending on your data, those two statements may
do different things. If a row has both "name" and "address" in that column,
the first update statement will change both name and address, but the Case
statement version will update only name to fullname, but won't change
address in that row.
Tom
"JR" <jriker1@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142706489.831624.92670@.j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have a column of data in SQL Server 2000 that I need to replace
> values within it with new values. I know how to use CASE statements to
> do conditional updates but not how to do this. Here is an example, not
> the real example as the values relevant to my company would mean little
> to anyone.
> If value contains "name", replace it with "fullname"
> If value contains "address", replace it with "fulladdress"
> and so on...
> What I want to do in the field is the following:
> Field value now: abc##name##123
> Field after change: abc##fullname###123
> Field value now: asdlfkjlsdkafjnameasldfjk123
> Field after change: asdlfkjlsdkafjfullnameasldfjk123
> Field value now: adlsfkjaddresslksdfj34
> Field after change: adlsfkjfulladdresslksdfj34
> And update all rows in the approriate column with the above logic.
> Any ideas?
> Thanks.
> JR
>|||You might want to have a look at STUFF as well, although REPLACE may well do
the trick.
The thing about CASE expressions is that they are 'falling rock' ie for the
first WHEN condition it finds to be true, it will return the THEN bit and
exit the statement. So if your string has multiple bits that need to
replacing, you'll need to run the UPDATE multiple times.
Hope that helps.
Damien
"JR" wrote:
> I have a column of data in SQL Server 2000 that I need to replace
> values within it with new values. I know how to use CASE statements to
> do conditional updates but not how to do this. Here is an example, not
> the real example as the values relevant to my company would mean little
> to anyone.
> If value contains "name", replace it with "fullname"
> If value contains "address", replace it with "fulladdress"
> and so on...
> What I want to do in the field is the following:
> Field value now: abc##name##123
> Field after change: abc##fullname###123
> Field value now: asdlfkjlsdkafjnameasldfjk123
> Field after change: asdlfkjlsdkafjfullnameasldfjk123
> Field value now: adlsfkjaddresslksdfj34
> Field after change: adlsfkjfulladdresslksdfj34
> And update all rows in the approriate column with the above logic.
> Any ideas?
> Thanks.
> JR
>
values within it with new values. I know how to use CASE statements to
do conditional updates but not how to do this. Here is an example, not
the real example as the values relevant to my company would mean little
to anyone.
If value contains "name", replace it with "fullname"
If value contains "address", replace it with "fulladdress"
and so on...
What I want to do in the field is the following:
Field value now: abc##name##123
Field after change: abc##fullname###123
Field value now: asdlfkjlsdkafjnameasldfjk123
Field after change: asdlfkjlsdkafjfullnameasldfjk123
Field value now: adlsfkjaddresslksdfj34
Field after change: adlsfkjfulladdresslksdfj34
And update all rows in the approriate column with the above logic.
Any ideas?
Thanks.
JRYou don't need a Case statement to do this, you can use
Update #t Set foo = Replace (Replace (foo, 'address', 'fulladdress'),
'name', 'fullname')
Where foo Like '%name%' Or foo Like '%address%'
You could also do it with a Case statement like
Update #t Set foo = Case
When foo Like '%name%' Then Replace (foo, 'name', 'fullname')
When foo Like '%address%' Then Replace (foo, 'address', 'fulladdress')
Else foo
End
Where foo Like '%name%' Or foo Like '%address%'
Please note, however, that depending on your data, those two statements may
do different things. If a row has both "name" and "address" in that column,
the first update statement will change both name and address, but the Case
statement version will update only name to fullname, but won't change
address in that row.
Tom
"JR" <jriker1@.yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142706489.831624.92670@.j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have a column of data in SQL Server 2000 that I need to replace
> values within it with new values. I know how to use CASE statements to
> do conditional updates but not how to do this. Here is an example, not
> the real example as the values relevant to my company would mean little
> to anyone.
> If value contains "name", replace it with "fullname"
> If value contains "address", replace it with "fulladdress"
> and so on...
> What I want to do in the field is the following:
> Field value now: abc##name##123
> Field after change: abc##fullname###123
> Field value now: asdlfkjlsdkafjnameasldfjk123
> Field after change: asdlfkjlsdkafjfullnameasldfjk123
> Field value now: adlsfkjaddresslksdfj34
> Field after change: adlsfkjfulladdresslksdfj34
> And update all rows in the approriate column with the above logic.
> Any ideas?
> Thanks.
> JR
>|||You might want to have a look at STUFF as well, although REPLACE may well do
the trick.
The thing about CASE expressions is that they are 'falling rock' ie for the
first WHEN condition it finds to be true, it will return the THEN bit and
exit the statement. So if your string has multiple bits that need to
replacing, you'll need to run the UPDATE multiple times.
Hope that helps.
Damien
"JR" wrote:
> I have a column of data in SQL Server 2000 that I need to replace
> values within it with new values. I know how to use CASE statements to
> do conditional updates but not how to do this. Here is an example, not
> the real example as the values relevant to my company would mean little
> to anyone.
> If value contains "name", replace it with "fullname"
> If value contains "address", replace it with "fulladdress"
> and so on...
> What I want to do in the field is the following:
> Field value now: abc##name##123
> Field after change: abc##fullname###123
> Field value now: asdlfkjlsdkafjnameasldfjk123
> Field after change: asdlfkjlsdkafjfullnameasldfjk123
> Field value now: adlsfkjaddresslksdfj34
> Field after change: adlsfkjfulladdresslksdfj34
> And update all rows in the approriate column with the above logic.
> Any ideas?
> Thanks.
> JR
>
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Conditional SELECT
Dear Group
I'm having trouble with the statement below. I tried CASE and IF
without success. What I'm trying to do:
There is a field in the database called Business_TelNo. If the field
has some value, I would like to return a generated field
(LaBusinessTelNo), which is the label of Busines_TelNo, reading
'Phone:'
If Business_TelNo has no value, the label should be set to ''.
Something like this:
SELECT i2b_vw_contact.Business_TelNo AS Business_TelNo,
IF (LEN(Business_TelNo) > 0) BEGIN SELECT 'Phone: ' AS LaBusinessTelNo
END ELSE BEGIN SELECT '' AS LaBusinessTelNo END
FROM i2b_vw_contact
This is working:
SELECT i2b_vw_contact.Business_TelNo AS Business_TelNo,
'Phone: ' AS LaBusinessTelNo
FROM i2b_vw_contact
PS: I know it would be much easier to add some logic in the
application but need to do this in SQL.
Thanks very much for your time and efforts!
MartinSELECT business_telno,
CASE WHEN business_telno>'' THEN 'Phone: ' ELSE '' END AS labusiness_telno
FROM i2b_vw_contact
You can find the CASE and IF syntax in Books Online but understand that CASE
is an *expression* whereas IF is a *statement* and therefore IF can't be
used as part of a query.
--
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||Thanks David!
Have a nice day :-)
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Conditional Order By Stored Procedure
I need to create a conditional if or case statement in SQL Server 2000
for a stored procedure. Basically if the value passed in is 1,2 or 3 then
it will order by either NEWID(), a text field or a datetime feild.
Not done much dynamic sql so any help would be appreciated.
Fuzzy
The approach I typically take is this:
|||My full stored procedure is listed below but i assume i have to specify the order
by clause somewhere it keeps returning a incorrect syntax near CASE error message
The sproc
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[sp_call_accomSearch]
(
@.accomType As Int,
@.sgleroom As Int,
@.dbleroom As Int,
@.twinroom As Int,
@.tripleroom As Int,
@.Garage As Int,
@.Phone As Int,
@.Altitude As Int,
@.CarPark As Int,
@.Tv As Int,
@.TownCentre As Int,
@.SwimPool As Int,
@.Radio As Int,
@.NearSlopes As Int,
@.DgsAdmit As Int,
@.Safe As Int,
@.CrossCtry As Int,
@.SuitDisable As Int,
@.Balcony As Int,
@.OnTLake As Int,
@.Solarium As Int,
@.Suite As Int,
@.QutZone As Int,
@.BeautyCb As Int,
@.Minibar As Int,
@.Tennis As Int,
@.WhirlPl As Int,
@.Elevator As Int,
@.Sauna As Int,
@.PriceRgLow As Int,
@.PriceRgHigh As Int,
@.DateFromTotal As DateTime,
@.DateToTotal As DateTime,
@.selfcatering As Int,
@.halfboard As Int,
@.fullboard As Int,
@.roomphone As Int,
@.Suitdisableroom As Int,
@.CountryID As Int,
@.OrderBy As Int
)
AS
SELECT
tblaccommodation.accommodationID,
tblaccommodation.[name],
tblaccommodation.address1,
tblaccommodation.address2,
tblaccommodation.town,
tblaccommodation.postcode,
tblaccommodation.country,
tblaccommodation.email,
tblaccommodation.contact,
tblaccommodation.editorial,
(SELECT [name] FROM tblresort WHERE resortID = resortname) As ResortName,
(SELECT SUM(sgleroom) As sgleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) As SgleRoomTotal,
(SELECT SUM(dbleroom) As dbleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) As dbleRoomTotal,
(SELECT SUM(twinroom) As twinroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) As twinRoomTotal,
(SELECT SUM(tripleroom) As tripleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) As tripleRoomTotal
FROM
tblaccommodation
WHERE
tblaccommodation.accomType = case
when @.accomType = 1 then @.accomType
else tblaccommodation.accomType
end AND
(SELECT SUM(sgleroom) As sgleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) >= @.Sgleroom AND
(SELECT SUM(dbleroom) As dbleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) >= @.dbleroom AND
(SELECT SUM(twinroom) As twinroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) >= @.twinroom AND
(SELECT SUM(tripleroom) As tripleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) >= @.tripleroom AND
tblaccommodation.Garage = case
when @.Garage <> 0 then @.Garage
else tblaccommodation.Garage
end AND
tblaccommodation.Phone = case
when @.Phone <> 0 then @.Phone
else tblaccommodation.Phone
end AND
tblaccommodation.Altitude = case
when @.Altitude <> 0 then @.Altitude
else tblaccommodation.Altitude
end AND
tblaccommodation.Carpark = case
when @.Carpark <> 0 then @.Carpark
else tblaccommodation.Carpark
end AND
tblaccommodation.TownCentre = case
when @.TownCentre <> 0 then @.TownCentre
else tblaccommodation.TownCentre
end AND
tblaccommodation.SwimPool = case
when @.SwimPool <> 0 then @.SwimPool
else tblaccommodation.SwimPool
end AND
tblaccommodation.NearSlopes = case
when @.NearSlopes <> 0 then @.NearSlopes
else tblaccommodation.NearSlopes
end AND
tblaccommodation.DgsAdmit = case
when @.DgsAdmit <> 0 then @.DgsAdmit
else tblaccommodation.DgsAdmit
end AND
tblaccommodation.Safe = case
when @.Safe <> 0 then @.Safe
else tblaccommodation.Safe
end AND
tblaccommodation.CrossCtry = case
when @.CrossCtry <> 0 then @.CrossCtry
else tblaccommodation.CrossCtry
end AND
tblaccommodation.SuitDisable = case
when @.SuitDisable <> 0 then @.SuitDisable
else tblaccommodation.SuitDisable
end AND
tblaccommodation.OnTLake = case
when @.OnTLake <> 0 then @.OnTLake
else tblaccommodation.OnTLake
end AND
tblaccommodation.Solarium = case
when @.Solarium <> 0 then @.Solarium
else tblaccommodation.Solarium
end AND
tblaccommodation.QutZone = case
when @.QutZone <> 0 then @.QutZone
else tblaccommodation.QutZone
end AND
tblaccommodation.BeautyCb = case
when @.BeautyCb <> 0 then @.BeautyCb
else tblaccommodation.BeautyCb
end AND
tblaccommodation.Tennis = case
when @.Tennis <> 0 then @.Tennis
else tblaccommodation.Tennis
end AND
tblaccommodation.Whirlpl = case
when @.Whirlpl <> 0 then @.Whirlpl
else tblaccommodation.Whirlpl
end AND
tblaccommodation.Elevator = case
when @.Elevator <> 0 then @.Elevator
else tblaccommodation.Elevator
end AND
tblaccommodation.Sauna = case
when @.Sauna <> 0 then @.Sauna
else tblaccommodation.Sauna
end AND
tblaccommodation.PriceRgLow >= @.PriceRgLow AND
tblaccommodation.PriceRgLow <= @.PriceRgHigh AND
tblaccommodation.PriceRgHigh <= @.PriceRgHigh AND
tblaccommodation.FromDT >= @.DateFromTotal AND
tblaccommodation.ToDT <= @.DateToTotal AND
tblaccommodation.selfcatering = case
when @.selfcatering<> 0 then @.selfcatering
else tblaccommodation.selfcatering
end AND
tblaccommodation.halfboard = case
when @.halfboard<> 0 then @.halfboard
else tblaccommodation.halfboard
end AND
tblaccommodation.fullboard = case
when @.fullboard<> 0 then @.fullboard
else tblaccommodation.fullboard
end AND
tblaccommodation.Country = @.CountryID AND
tblaccommodation.displayAcc = '1'
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 1 THEN NEWID() END,
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 2 THEN name END,
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 3 THEN FromDT END,
GO
|||First, I made a mistake in my example code. I mistakenly used aWHERE clause instead of an ORDER BY clause. Sorry to be confusing:-(
You are missing the ORDER BY, and you had an unneeded comma at the end. Try:
|||LOL ... i am confused most of the time anyway usually why i am on here so much
I am still getting an sql error still when i try to check the syntax of the query in question any
thoughts what is going wrong here not found anything on google groups like it yet. I have
listed the error below.
Fuzzy
Microsoft SQL-DMO (ODBC SQLState: 42000)
Error 1008: The SELECT item identified by the ORDER BY number 1 contains a variable as
part of the expression identfying a column position. Variables are only allowed when ordering
by an expression referencing a column name
|||Hmmm, it's not liking the NEWID(). I suggest this as aworkaround, but it will force NEWID() to be generated for each row inthe resultset, which *might* be a performance hit if you have a lot ofrows:
ORDER BY
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 2 THEN name END,
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 3 THEN FromDTEND,
NEWID()
|||
I had thought about that, but had become concerned that NEWID()would be calculated for every row in every table, not just for theresultset. That sent me on a fruitless hunt to find a referencefor the processing sequence of all of the different portions of aSELECT statement so that I could confirm or deny that concern. When I couldn't find a reference (does anyone have one?) , I decidedon the approach I recommended. But, with that being said, I muchprefer the approach you've recommended as it doesn't make assumptionsand as you said it is cleaner. :-)
for a stored procedure. Basically if the value passed in is 1,2 or 3 then
it will order by either NEWID(), a text field or a datetime feild.
Not done much dynamic sql so any help would be appreciated.
Fuzzy
The approach I typically take is this:
SELECT
someColumns
FROM
someTable
WHERE
CASE WHEN @.sortValue = 1 THEN NEWID() END,
CASE WHEN @.sortValue = 2 THEN someTextColumn END,
CASE WHEN @.sortValue = 3 THEN someDateTimeColumn END,
defaultSortColumn -- just in case the @.sortValue is not 1, 2, or 3, Iknow the results will be sorted by *something*
|||My full stored procedure is listed below but i assume i have to specify the order
by clause somewhere it keeps returning a incorrect syntax near CASE error message
The sproc
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[sp_call_accomSearch]
(
@.accomType As Int,
@.sgleroom As Int,
@.dbleroom As Int,
@.twinroom As Int,
@.tripleroom As Int,
@.Garage As Int,
@.Phone As Int,
@.Altitude As Int,
@.CarPark As Int,
@.Tv As Int,
@.TownCentre As Int,
@.SwimPool As Int,
@.Radio As Int,
@.NearSlopes As Int,
@.DgsAdmit As Int,
@.Safe As Int,
@.CrossCtry As Int,
@.SuitDisable As Int,
@.Balcony As Int,
@.OnTLake As Int,
@.Solarium As Int,
@.Suite As Int,
@.QutZone As Int,
@.BeautyCb As Int,
@.Minibar As Int,
@.Tennis As Int,
@.WhirlPl As Int,
@.Elevator As Int,
@.Sauna As Int,
@.PriceRgLow As Int,
@.PriceRgHigh As Int,
@.DateFromTotal As DateTime,
@.DateToTotal As DateTime,
@.selfcatering As Int,
@.halfboard As Int,
@.fullboard As Int,
@.roomphone As Int,
@.Suitdisableroom As Int,
@.CountryID As Int,
@.OrderBy As Int
)
AS
SELECT
tblaccommodation.accommodationID,
tblaccommodation.[name],
tblaccommodation.address1,
tblaccommodation.address2,
tblaccommodation.town,
tblaccommodation.postcode,
tblaccommodation.country,
tblaccommodation.email,
tblaccommodation.contact,
tblaccommodation.editorial,
(SELECT [name] FROM tblresort WHERE resortID = resortname) As ResortName,
(SELECT SUM(sgleroom) As sgleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) As SgleRoomTotal,
(SELECT SUM(dbleroom) As dbleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) As dbleRoomTotal,
(SELECT SUM(twinroom) As twinroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) As twinRoomTotal,
(SELECT SUM(tripleroom) As tripleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) As tripleRoomTotal
FROM
tblaccommodation
WHERE
tblaccommodation.accomType = case
when @.accomType = 1 then @.accomType
else tblaccommodation.accomType
end AND
(SELECT SUM(sgleroom) As sgleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) >= @.Sgleroom AND
(SELECT SUM(dbleroom) As dbleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) >= @.dbleroom AND
(SELECT SUM(twinroom) As twinroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) >= @.twinroom AND
(SELECT SUM(tripleroom) As tripleroom
FROM tblrooms
WHERE
tblrooms.tv = case
when @.Tv = 1 then @.Tv
else tblrooms.tv
end AND
tblrooms.Radio = case
when @.Radio = 1 then @.Radio
else tblrooms.Radio
end AND
tblrooms.Balcony = case
when @.balcony = 1 then @.balcony
else tblrooms.balcony
end AND
tblrooms.ensuite = case
when @.Suite = 1 then @.Suite
else tblrooms.ensuite
end AND
tblrooms.Minibar = case
when @.Minibar = 1 then @.Minibar
else tblrooms.Minibar
end AND
tblrooms.Roomphone = case
when @.Roomphone = 1 then @.Roomphone
else tblrooms.Roomphone
end AND
tblrooms.Suitdisableroom = case
when @.Suitdisableroom = 1 then @.Suitdisableroom
else tblrooms.Suitdisableroom
end AND
tblrooms.accommodationid = tblaccommodation.accommodationid) >= @.tripleroom AND
tblaccommodation.Garage = case
when @.Garage <> 0 then @.Garage
else tblaccommodation.Garage
end AND
tblaccommodation.Phone = case
when @.Phone <> 0 then @.Phone
else tblaccommodation.Phone
end AND
tblaccommodation.Altitude = case
when @.Altitude <> 0 then @.Altitude
else tblaccommodation.Altitude
end AND
tblaccommodation.Carpark = case
when @.Carpark <> 0 then @.Carpark
else tblaccommodation.Carpark
end AND
tblaccommodation.TownCentre = case
when @.TownCentre <> 0 then @.TownCentre
else tblaccommodation.TownCentre
end AND
tblaccommodation.SwimPool = case
when @.SwimPool <> 0 then @.SwimPool
else tblaccommodation.SwimPool
end AND
tblaccommodation.NearSlopes = case
when @.NearSlopes <> 0 then @.NearSlopes
else tblaccommodation.NearSlopes
end AND
tblaccommodation.DgsAdmit = case
when @.DgsAdmit <> 0 then @.DgsAdmit
else tblaccommodation.DgsAdmit
end AND
tblaccommodation.Safe = case
when @.Safe <> 0 then @.Safe
else tblaccommodation.Safe
end AND
tblaccommodation.CrossCtry = case
when @.CrossCtry <> 0 then @.CrossCtry
else tblaccommodation.CrossCtry
end AND
tblaccommodation.SuitDisable = case
when @.SuitDisable <> 0 then @.SuitDisable
else tblaccommodation.SuitDisable
end AND
tblaccommodation.OnTLake = case
when @.OnTLake <> 0 then @.OnTLake
else tblaccommodation.OnTLake
end AND
tblaccommodation.Solarium = case
when @.Solarium <> 0 then @.Solarium
else tblaccommodation.Solarium
end AND
tblaccommodation.QutZone = case
when @.QutZone <> 0 then @.QutZone
else tblaccommodation.QutZone
end AND
tblaccommodation.BeautyCb = case
when @.BeautyCb <> 0 then @.BeautyCb
else tblaccommodation.BeautyCb
end AND
tblaccommodation.Tennis = case
when @.Tennis <> 0 then @.Tennis
else tblaccommodation.Tennis
end AND
tblaccommodation.Whirlpl = case
when @.Whirlpl <> 0 then @.Whirlpl
else tblaccommodation.Whirlpl
end AND
tblaccommodation.Elevator = case
when @.Elevator <> 0 then @.Elevator
else tblaccommodation.Elevator
end AND
tblaccommodation.Sauna = case
when @.Sauna <> 0 then @.Sauna
else tblaccommodation.Sauna
end AND
tblaccommodation.PriceRgLow >= @.PriceRgLow AND
tblaccommodation.PriceRgLow <= @.PriceRgHigh AND
tblaccommodation.PriceRgHigh <= @.PriceRgHigh AND
tblaccommodation.FromDT >= @.DateFromTotal AND
tblaccommodation.ToDT <= @.DateToTotal AND
tblaccommodation.selfcatering = case
when @.selfcatering<> 0 then @.selfcatering
else tblaccommodation.selfcatering
end AND
tblaccommodation.halfboard = case
when @.halfboard<> 0 then @.halfboard
else tblaccommodation.halfboard
end AND
tblaccommodation.fullboard = case
when @.fullboard<> 0 then @.fullboard
else tblaccommodation.fullboard
end AND
tblaccommodation.Country = @.CountryID AND
tblaccommodation.displayAcc = '1'
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 1 THEN NEWID() END,
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 2 THEN name END,
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 3 THEN FromDT END,
GO
|||First, I made a mistake in my example code. I mistakenly used aWHERE clause instead of an ORDER BY clause. Sorry to be confusing:-(
You are missing the ORDER BY, and you had an unneeded comma at the end. Try:
tblaccommodation.displayAcc = '1'
ORDER BY
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 1 THEN NEWID() END,
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 2 THEN name END,
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 3 THEN FromDTEND
|||LOL ... i am confused most of the time anyway usually why i am on here so much
I am still getting an sql error still when i try to check the syntax of the query in question any
thoughts what is going wrong here not found anything on google groups like it yet. I have
listed the error below.
Fuzzy
Microsoft SQL-DMO (ODBC SQLState: 42000)
Error 1008: The SELECT item identified by the ORDER BY number 1 contains a variable as
part of the expression identfying a column position. Variables are only allowed when ordering
by an expression referencing a column name
|||Hmmm, it's not liking the NEWID(). I suggest this as aworkaround, but it will force NEWID() to be generated for each row inthe resultset, which *might* be a performance hit if you have a lot ofrows:
ORDER BY
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 2 THEN name END,
CASE WHEN @.OrderBy = 3 THEN FromDTEND,
NEWID()
|||
You Can also do:
SELECT [all of your fields]
FROM (
SELECT [all of your fields], newID() as ID
FROM ...
) X
ORDER BY
CASE WHEN @.orderBy = 1 THEN ID END,
CASE WHEN @.orderBy = 2 THEN name END,
CASE WHEN @.orderBy = 3 THEN FromDT END
While either version will work for you, I think this one might be a little cleaner so if someone else needs to update it, they can see exactly how it is supposed to use the new ID (if orderBy is 1).
Just my 1.50
Nick
nick-w wrote:
You Can also do: SELECT [all of your fields]
FROM (
SELECT [all of your fields], newID() as ID
FROM ...
) X
ORDER BY
CASE WHEN @.orderBy = 1 THEN ID END,
CASE WHEN @.orderBy = 2 THEN name END,
CASE WHEN @.orderBy = 3 THEN FromDT END
Whileeither version will work for you, I think this one might be a littlecleaner so if someone else needs to update it, they can see exactly howit is supposed to use the new ID (if orderBy is 1).
I had thought about that, but had become concerned that NEWID()would be calculated for every row in every table, not just for theresultset. That sent me on a fruitless hunt to find a referencefor the processing sequence of all of the different portions of aSELECT statement so that I could confirm or deny that concern. When I couldn't find a reference (does anyone have one?) , I decidedon the approach I recommended. But, with that being said, I muchprefer the approach you've recommended as it doesn't make assumptionsand as you said it is cleaner. :-)
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Concurrent select is locked while another transaction executes
In this case, ideally sql server should have blocked only the inserted rows
. The select statement could have returned all other rows and select
statement on filter condition on non-index field that matches only the
existing records could also worked.
MS Access does not block select statement while Insert transaction is
running. The retrieved records from Access also does not contain any
uncommitted records.
But still, I am very surprised why SQL Server could not perform this
operation as MS Access could very well do.
And also one option that should not happen in our application in this
scenario is "Read uncommitted" option in SQL Server which retrieves the
uncommitted rows in the select.
Suggestions please !
"Uri Dimant" wrote:
> Baskar
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/blocking.asp
> http://www.sql-server-performance.c...ucing_locks.asp
>
>
> "Baskar" <Baskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:880BF5FF-E31F-4BA2-95B1-CDDE6C8616C8@.microsoft.com...
>
>On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 07:22:01 -0700, Baskar wrote:
(snip)
>MS Access does not block select statement while Insert transaction is
>running. The retrieved records from Access also does not contain any
>uncommitted records.
Hi Baskar,
There are two possible explanations for this.
#1. Access uses what's called "snapshot isolation" - this means that
changing data doesn't block others from retrieving it, but will show the
others the "before change" image of the data. You don't see data that is
inserted in an uncommitted transaction, you still see rows that have
been deleted in an uncommitted transaction and for rows that are updated
in an uncommitted transaction, you see the values as they were before
the update.
Snapshot isolation is supported in Oracle. I've read that it will also
be supported by SQL Server 2005.
Frankly, I don;t think that Access supports snapshot isolation. I prefer
my explanation #2:
#2: Access is buggy. If a row is inserted in an uncommitted transaction,
it won't be shown - but if a row is deleted in the same uncomitted
transaction, then that row won't show either.
Why is this behaviour buggy? Well, consider this simple example: one Mr.
B. Gates enter the bank and says he wants to change his account number.
Since Account# is the primary key, the row with the old account# has to
be deleted, and a new row inserted. Before this transaction is
committed, the accountant runs a query to check the totals. And all hell
breaks loose, because suddenly a few billion dollars have gone missing!
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)|||hi,
The concurrent select while insert does not work sometimes even when the
select query is based on an index-field. This happens when there are more
records (say 3000) in the table and it works when there are less records
(<250).
Also, SQL Server restricts the select / update operations during insert even
when the insert and select / update are working on different data. Is this
the supposed behavior in SQL Server ?
Are there any work around or alternative solution for this problem ?
Regards
Baskar
"Hugo Kornelis" wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 07:22:01 -0700, Baskar wrote:
> (snip)
> Hi Baskar,
> There are two possible explanations for this.
> #1. Access uses what's called "snapshot isolation" - this means that
> changing data doesn't block others from retrieving it, but will show the
> others the "before change" image of the data. You don't see data that is
> inserted in an uncommitted transaction, you still see rows that have
> been deleted in an uncommitted transaction and for rows that are updated
> in an uncommitted transaction, you see the values as they were before
> the update.
> Snapshot isolation is supported in Oracle. I've read that it will also
> be supported by SQL Server 2005.
> Frankly, I don;t think that Access supports snapshot isolation. I prefer
> my explanation #2:
> #2: Access is buggy. If a row is inserted in an uncommitted transaction,
> it won't be shown - but if a row is deleted in the same uncomitted
> transaction, then that row won't show either.
> Why is this behaviour buggy? Well, consider this simple example: one Mr.
> B. Gates enter the bank and says he wants to change his account number.
> Since Account# is the primary key, the row with the old account# has to
> be deleted, and a new row inserted. Before this transaction is
> committed, the accountant runs a query to check the totals. And all hell
> breaks loose, because suddenly a few billion dollars have gone missing!
> Best, Hugo
> --
> (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
Our application need to be able to concurrently insert and select from the
same table irrespective of the data.
But, the following issue has been found in the sql server 2000.
Initially , the insert statements (around 1000 rows) for a table is executed
in a transaction inside a stored procedure.
like:
"Insert into Test (pkey,field1,field2,strfield) values
(1400,1144,12025,'test sp insert 2')"
and simultaneously a select statement to retrieve all records from the same
table is executed in the query analyzer. Then the select statement waits
until the insert operation completes.
"select * from Test"
But, if a select statement that filters the data based on the index fields
is used, then it executes without delay.
select * from test where pkey=2000 and field1=1111
(Index: pkey and field1 combination) Suppose if the filter condition
includes the data that is being inserted, then also it is blocked.
In SQL Server 2000, whether it is possible to avoid the blocking of select
statement while insert.
Note that the insert statement is executed in the default isolation level of
sql server 2000.
In MS Access, concurrent inserts and select works without any issue.
Table and Index references:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Test] (
[pkey] [bigint] NOT NULL ,
[field1] [bigint] NOT NULL ,
[field2] [int] NULL ,
[strfield] [varchar] (50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL
) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
CREATE INDEX [IX_Test] ON [dbo].[Test]([field1], [pkey]) ON [PRIMARY]
>|||X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@.supernews.com
Lines: 55
Path: TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-spur1
.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-
01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
Xref: TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.programming:546663
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 08:49:04 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>The concurrent select while insert does not work sometimes even when the
>select query is based on an index-field. This happens when there are more
>records (say 3000) in the table and it works when there are less records
>(<250).
Hi Baskar,
Even after rereading the thread, I don't get the exact picture of what
you are doing. It would help tremendously if you could post some SQL
statements that I can run to reproduce this behaviour on my test
database. I'd need CREATE TABLE statements to set up the table, INSERT
statements for some sample starting data, then the INSERT and SELECT
statements to run concurrently.
It's much easier to comment what I can see!
>Also, SQL Server restricts the select / update operations during insert eve
n
>when the insert and select / update are working on different data. Is this
>the supposed behavior in SQL Server ?
That depends on a lot of factors. Again, I'd have to see the code in
order to comment.
>Are there any work around or alternative solution for this problem ?
Default locking behaviour is to block conflicting requests: if a
connection attempts to do something with locked data, it'll have to wait
until the lock is released. You can override this default behaviour with
one of the following locking hints:
* WITH (NOLOCK) -- specifies that no shared locks are taken, and that
existing locks are disregarded. The consequence of this is known as
"dirty reads" - data that has been updated, but not yet committed and
possibly not even yet changed. The change might be rolled back later; in
that case, your query has returned data that never really existed in the
database.
Setting the transaction isolation level to READ UNCOMMITTED is
equivalent to specifying WITH (NOLOCK) on all queries.
* WITH (READPAST) -- specifies that locked data should be skipped; if
some rows in the table are locked, your query won't wait, but will
return a result set without any data for those rows (as if they don't
exist at all). Applies only to row-level locks, and won't work if your
transaction isolation level is anything other than READ COMMITTED (the
default).
Note that these locking hints will only affect read operations. For any
data modification, the locking can't be bypassed.
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)|||hi,
The table details are available in the first thread of this question.
Basically, our application need to allow users to download data (insert
statements) and concurrently users should be able to work with the reports
(select statements).
Also, "With ReadPast" option will work for fetching records while insert.
But it will not fetch records that are locked because of update. This
behavior could not be acceptable for our application.
According to the SQL Server documentation, data that is being updated only
will be locked and insertion of data will lock only the specific data and no
t
others. But, select statement is blocked even when tried to retrieve the dat
a
which is not being inserted.
Is there any standard solution or alternative for this problem ?
Regards
Baskar
"Hugo Kornelis" wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 08:49:04 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>
> Hi Baskar,
> Even after rereading the thread, I don't get the exact picture of what
> you are doing. It would help tremendously if you could post some SQL
> statements that I can run to reproduce this behaviour on my test
> database. I'd need CREATE TABLE statements to set up the table, INSERT
> statements for some sample starting data, then the INSERT and SELECT
> statements to run concurrently.
> It's much easier to comment what I can see!
>
> That depends on a lot of factors. Again, I'd have to see the code in
> order to comment.
>
> Default locking behaviour is to block conflicting requests: if a
> connection attempts to do something with locked data, it'll have to wait
> until the lock is released. You can override this default behaviour with
> one of the following locking hints:
> * WITH (NOLOCK) -- specifies that no shared locks are taken, and that
> existing locks are disregarded. The consequence of this is known as
> "dirty reads" - data that has been updated, but not yet committed and
> possibly not even yet changed. The change might be rolled back later; in
> that case, your query has returned data that never really existed in the
> database.
> Setting the transaction isolation level to READ UNCOMMITTED is
> equivalent to specifying WITH (NOLOCK) on all queries.
> * WITH (READPAST) -- specifies that locked data should be skipped; if
> some rows in the table are locked, your query won't wait, but will
> return a result set without any data for those rows (as if they don't
> exist at all). Applies only to row-level locks, and won't work if your
> transaction isolation level is anything other than READ COMMITTED (the
> default).
> Note that these locking hints will only affect read operations. For any
> data modification, the locking can't be bypassed.
> Best, Hugo
> --
> (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
>|||On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:26:07 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>The table details are available in the first thread of this question.
Hi Baskar,
I thought that was just an example made up on the fly, since there is no
primary key or unique constraint, no unique index and no clustered
index.
Also, these details do not explain this behaviour:
I'd really have to be able to run a repro script on my database that
mimics this behaviour - i.e. do a BEGIN TRAN + INSERT in one connection
but don't commit or rollback yet, then do a SELECT in another connection
and check the results.
If you can post INSERT and SELECT statements that reproduce this
behaviour, I'll see if I can find the cause.
>Basically, our application need to allow users to download data (insert
>statements) and concurrently users should be able to work with the reports
>(select statements).
>Also, "With ReadPast" option will work for fetching records while insert.
>But it will not fetch records that are locked because of update. This
>behavior could not be acceptable for our application.
That will be hard to do. Basically, you are asking SQL Server to
distinguish between locks for newly inserted data and locks for updated
data. This distinction is not available in SQL Server's architecture.
(And for good reason, I think - what if I insert a row and then go on to
update that same row, all in the same transaction? how to handle updates
to the primary key column? etc etc)
>According to the SQL Server documentation, data that is being updated only
>will be locked and insertion of data will lock only the specific data and n
ot
>others. But, select statement is blocked even when tried to retrieve the da
ta
>which is not being inserted.
That's because the data is already in the database, it's just not yet
confirmed (read: the transaction is not yet committed). SQL Server won't
just pretend it's not there (unless you use READPAST - but that would
affect updated rows as well); neither will SQL Server say that it IS
there if there is still the possibility of a rollback (unless you use
NOLOCK - but that too would affect updated rows as well).
>Is there any standard solution or alternative for this problem ?
You might consider using a two-table approach: insert the new rows into
a staging table, create the reports off a complete table and create an
automated task that will move all new rows from the staging table to the
complete table every once in a while.
If it is crucial that your reports have up-to-the-second accuracy, this
won't be a good approach - but in that case, I guess you wouldn't want
the reports to bypass rows currently inserted either.
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)|||hi,
The following are the real time table and stored proc details:
if exists (select * from dbo.sysobjects where id =
object_id(N'[dbo].[Dummy]') and OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)
drop table [dbo].[Dummy]
GO
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Dummy] (
[pkey_id] [bigint] IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL ,
[index_id] [int] NULL ,
[intField1] [int] NULL ,
[strField1] [varchar] (50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
NOT NULL ,
[intField2] [int] NULL ,
[intField3] [int] NULL ,
[intField4] [int] NOT NULL ,
[datetimeField] [datetime] NULL ,
[bitfield] [bit] NULL ,
[strField2] [varchar] (50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
NULL
) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Dummy] WITH NOCHECK ADD
CONSTRAINT [PK_Dummy] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
(
[pkey_id]
) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
CREATE INDEX [IX_Dummy] ON [dbo].[Dummy]([index_id]) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
Test stored procedure for insert:
CREATE procedure prcMultiInserttoDummyTable (
@.indexid bigint=777,
@.TotalRows bigint =2000
)
as
Declare @.CurRow bigint
set @.CurRow=0
begin tran
While (@.CurRow < @.TotalRows)
Begin
Insert into Dummy (indexid,intField1,strField1,intField2,i
ntField3,
intField4, datetimeField, bitfield, strField2)
values(@.indexid,555,'test',10,0,168,'02/13/1998',0,'test stored proc insert'
)
set @.CurRow = @.CurRow +1
end
waitfor delay '00:00:20' -- wait to test the concurrent insertion and
selection
commit tran
Test select statements:
select * from dummy where indexid=123 -- filtered based on index
select * from dummy
select * from Dummy where intField1=245 - filtered based on non-index
"Hugo Kornelis" wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:26:07 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>
> Hi Baskar,
> I thought that was just an example made up on the fly, since there is no
> primary key or unique constraint, no unique index and no clustered
> index.
> Also, these details do not explain this behaviour:
>
> I'd really have to be able to run a repro script on my database that
> mimics this behaviour - i.e. do a BEGIN TRAN + INSERT in one connection
> but don't commit or rollback yet, then do a SELECT in another connection
> and check the results.
> If you can post INSERT and SELECT statements that reproduce this
> behaviour, I'll see if I can find the cause.
>
> That will be hard to do. Basically, you are asking SQL Server to
> distinguish between locks for newly inserted data and locks for updated
> data. This distinction is not available in SQL Server's architecture.
> (And for good reason, I think - what if I insert a row and then go on to
> update that same row, all in the same transaction? how to handle updates
> to the primary key column? etc etc)
>
> That's because the data is already in the database, it's just not yet
> confirmed (read: the transaction is not yet committed). SQL Server won't
> just pretend it's not there (unless you use READPAST - but that would
> affect updated rows as well); neither will SQL Server say that it IS
> there if there is still the possibility of a rollback (unless you use
> NOLOCK - but that too would affect updated rows as well).
>
> You might consider using a two-table approach: insert the new rows into
> a staging table, create the reports off a complete table and create an
> automated task that will move all new rows from the staging table to the
> complete table every once in a while.
> If it is crucial that your reports have up-to-the-second accuracy, this
> won't be a good approach - but in that case, I guess you wouldn't want
> the reports to bypass rows currently inserted either.
> Best, Hugo
> --
> (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
>|||On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:34:07 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>hi,
>The following are the real time table and stored proc details:
(snip)
Hi Baskar,
My apologies for the delay in replying.
Thanks for the excellent repro script - I was able to reproduce the
problem you're having on my computer.
I was also able to find the reason. In your table, the column index_id
has an extremely low selectivity (in case you're unfamiliar with the
term, that means that the same values are repeated over and over again).
This makes an index on this column useless - if you run the queries
while no inserts are running and check the exectuion plan, you'll see
that a table scan is used in all three queries.
The reason that an index on this column is not used is a matter of cost
estimate. If the table has for instance 120,000 total rows, and 10,000
rows have the correct value in index_id, then the choice for the
optimizer is to:
a) scan the index to find the 10,000 matches very quickly, then do
10,000 individual bookmaark lookups to retrieve the complete information
for a total of 10,000 + some page reads - or
b) scan the full table; with probably 50 - 150 rows per page, this will
cost only 1200 page reads.
There are several ways that you can modify your script to see that SQL
Server won't wait when the index really is used:
1. Make sure that the index_id column is more selective. I modified the
stored procedure to set index_id to "@.indexid+@.CurRow", so that all
values in index_id would be different. The optimizer will now choose to
use the index for the first of the SELECT statements, and the data will
be returned while the insert proc is running (unless the proc also
inserts a new matching row, of course).
2. Change the query so that the index on index_id is covering:
SELECT pkey_id, index_id
FROM Dummy
WHERE index_id = 777
Now SQL Server won't have to do a bookmaark lookup since all columns
needed are included in the index pages. You'll see all matching rows
returned while another connection is busy inserting rows with a
different value for index_id.
3. Use an index hint to force the optimizer to use the index. Of course,
this will increase the cost of the query.
SELECT *
FROM Dummy (INDEX (IX_Dummy))
WHERE index_id=777
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
. The select statement could have returned all other rows and select
statement on filter condition on non-index field that matches only the
existing records could also worked.
MS Access does not block select statement while Insert transaction is
running. The retrieved records from Access also does not contain any
uncommitted records.
But still, I am very surprised why SQL Server could not perform this
operation as MS Access could very well do.
And also one option that should not happen in our application in this
scenario is "Read uncommitted" option in SQL Server which retrieves the
uncommitted rows in the select.
Suggestions please !
"Uri Dimant" wrote:
> Baskar
> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/blocking.asp
> http://www.sql-server-performance.c...ucing_locks.asp
>
>
> "Baskar" <Baskar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:880BF5FF-E31F-4BA2-95B1-CDDE6C8616C8@.microsoft.com...
>
>On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 07:22:01 -0700, Baskar wrote:
(snip)
>MS Access does not block select statement while Insert transaction is
>running. The retrieved records from Access also does not contain any
>uncommitted records.
Hi Baskar,
There are two possible explanations for this.
#1. Access uses what's called "snapshot isolation" - this means that
changing data doesn't block others from retrieving it, but will show the
others the "before change" image of the data. You don't see data that is
inserted in an uncommitted transaction, you still see rows that have
been deleted in an uncommitted transaction and for rows that are updated
in an uncommitted transaction, you see the values as they were before
the update.
Snapshot isolation is supported in Oracle. I've read that it will also
be supported by SQL Server 2005.
Frankly, I don;t think that Access supports snapshot isolation. I prefer
my explanation #2:
#2: Access is buggy. If a row is inserted in an uncommitted transaction,
it won't be shown - but if a row is deleted in the same uncomitted
transaction, then that row won't show either.
Why is this behaviour buggy? Well, consider this simple example: one Mr.
B. Gates enter the bank and says he wants to change his account number.
Since Account# is the primary key, the row with the old account# has to
be deleted, and a new row inserted. Before this transaction is
committed, the accountant runs a query to check the totals. And all hell
breaks loose, because suddenly a few billion dollars have gone missing!
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)|||hi,
The concurrent select while insert does not work sometimes even when the
select query is based on an index-field. This happens when there are more
records (say 3000) in the table and it works when there are less records
(<250).
Also, SQL Server restricts the select / update operations during insert even
when the insert and select / update are working on different data. Is this
the supposed behavior in SQL Server ?
Are there any work around or alternative solution for this problem ?
Regards
Baskar
"Hugo Kornelis" wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 07:22:01 -0700, Baskar wrote:
> (snip)
> Hi Baskar,
> There are two possible explanations for this.
> #1. Access uses what's called "snapshot isolation" - this means that
> changing data doesn't block others from retrieving it, but will show the
> others the "before change" image of the data. You don't see data that is
> inserted in an uncommitted transaction, you still see rows that have
> been deleted in an uncommitted transaction and for rows that are updated
> in an uncommitted transaction, you see the values as they were before
> the update.
> Snapshot isolation is supported in Oracle. I've read that it will also
> be supported by SQL Server 2005.
> Frankly, I don;t think that Access supports snapshot isolation. I prefer
> my explanation #2:
> #2: Access is buggy. If a row is inserted in an uncommitted transaction,
> it won't be shown - but if a row is deleted in the same uncomitted
> transaction, then that row won't show either.
> Why is this behaviour buggy? Well, consider this simple example: one Mr.
> B. Gates enter the bank and says he wants to change his account number.
> Since Account# is the primary key, the row with the old account# has to
> be deleted, and a new row inserted. Before this transaction is
> committed, the accountant runs a query to check the totals. And all hell
> breaks loose, because suddenly a few billion dollars have gone missing!
> Best, Hugo
> --
> (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
Our application need to be able to concurrently insert and select from the
same table irrespective of the data.
But, the following issue has been found in the sql server 2000.
Initially , the insert statements (around 1000 rows) for a table is executed
in a transaction inside a stored procedure.
like:
"Insert into Test (pkey,field1,field2,strfield) values
(1400,1144,12025,'test sp insert 2')"
and simultaneously a select statement to retrieve all records from the same
table is executed in the query analyzer. Then the select statement waits
until the insert operation completes.
"select * from Test"
But, if a select statement that filters the data based on the index fields
is used, then it executes without delay.
select * from test where pkey=2000 and field1=1111
(Index: pkey and field1 combination) Suppose if the filter condition
includes the data that is being inserted, then also it is blocked.
In SQL Server 2000, whether it is possible to avoid the blocking of select
statement while insert.
Note that the insert statement is executed in the default isolation level of
sql server 2000.
In MS Access, concurrent inserts and select works without any issue.
Table and Index references:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Test] (
[pkey] [bigint] NOT NULL ,
[field1] [bigint] NOT NULL ,
[field2] [int] NULL ,
[strfield] [varchar] (50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL
) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
CREATE INDEX [IX_Test] ON [dbo].[Test]([field1], [pkey]) ON [PRIMARY]
>|||X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@.supernews.com
Lines: 55
Path: TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-spur1
.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-12!sn-xit-09!sn-post-
01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
Xref: TK2MSFTNGP08.phx.gbl microsoft.public.sqlserver.programming:546663
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 08:49:04 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>The concurrent select while insert does not work sometimes even when the
>select query is based on an index-field. This happens when there are more
>records (say 3000) in the table and it works when there are less records
>(<250).
Hi Baskar,
Even after rereading the thread, I don't get the exact picture of what
you are doing. It would help tremendously if you could post some SQL
statements that I can run to reproduce this behaviour on my test
database. I'd need CREATE TABLE statements to set up the table, INSERT
statements for some sample starting data, then the INSERT and SELECT
statements to run concurrently.
It's much easier to comment what I can see!
>Also, SQL Server restricts the select / update operations during insert eve
n
>when the insert and select / update are working on different data. Is this
>the supposed behavior in SQL Server ?
That depends on a lot of factors. Again, I'd have to see the code in
order to comment.
>Are there any work around or alternative solution for this problem ?
Default locking behaviour is to block conflicting requests: if a
connection attempts to do something with locked data, it'll have to wait
until the lock is released. You can override this default behaviour with
one of the following locking hints:
* WITH (NOLOCK) -- specifies that no shared locks are taken, and that
existing locks are disregarded. The consequence of this is known as
"dirty reads" - data that has been updated, but not yet committed and
possibly not even yet changed. The change might be rolled back later; in
that case, your query has returned data that never really existed in the
database.
Setting the transaction isolation level to READ UNCOMMITTED is
equivalent to specifying WITH (NOLOCK) on all queries.
* WITH (READPAST) -- specifies that locked data should be skipped; if
some rows in the table are locked, your query won't wait, but will
return a result set without any data for those rows (as if they don't
exist at all). Applies only to row-level locks, and won't work if your
transaction isolation level is anything other than READ COMMITTED (the
default).
Note that these locking hints will only affect read operations. For any
data modification, the locking can't be bypassed.
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)|||hi,
The table details are available in the first thread of this question.
Basically, our application need to allow users to download data (insert
statements) and concurrently users should be able to work with the reports
(select statements).
Also, "With ReadPast" option will work for fetching records while insert.
But it will not fetch records that are locked because of update. This
behavior could not be acceptable for our application.
According to the SQL Server documentation, data that is being updated only
will be locked and insertion of data will lock only the specific data and no
t
others. But, select statement is blocked even when tried to retrieve the dat
a
which is not being inserted.
Is there any standard solution or alternative for this problem ?
Regards
Baskar
"Hugo Kornelis" wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 08:49:04 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>
> Hi Baskar,
> Even after rereading the thread, I don't get the exact picture of what
> you are doing. It would help tremendously if you could post some SQL
> statements that I can run to reproduce this behaviour on my test
> database. I'd need CREATE TABLE statements to set up the table, INSERT
> statements for some sample starting data, then the INSERT and SELECT
> statements to run concurrently.
> It's much easier to comment what I can see!
>
> That depends on a lot of factors. Again, I'd have to see the code in
> order to comment.
>
> Default locking behaviour is to block conflicting requests: if a
> connection attempts to do something with locked data, it'll have to wait
> until the lock is released. You can override this default behaviour with
> one of the following locking hints:
> * WITH (NOLOCK) -- specifies that no shared locks are taken, and that
> existing locks are disregarded. The consequence of this is known as
> "dirty reads" - data that has been updated, but not yet committed and
> possibly not even yet changed. The change might be rolled back later; in
> that case, your query has returned data that never really existed in the
> database.
> Setting the transaction isolation level to READ UNCOMMITTED is
> equivalent to specifying WITH (NOLOCK) on all queries.
> * WITH (READPAST) -- specifies that locked data should be skipped; if
> some rows in the table are locked, your query won't wait, but will
> return a result set without any data for those rows (as if they don't
> exist at all). Applies only to row-level locks, and won't work if your
> transaction isolation level is anything other than READ COMMITTED (the
> default).
> Note that these locking hints will only affect read operations. For any
> data modification, the locking can't be bypassed.
> Best, Hugo
> --
> (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
>|||On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:26:07 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>The table details are available in the first thread of this question.
Hi Baskar,
I thought that was just an example made up on the fly, since there is no
primary key or unique constraint, no unique index and no clustered
index.
Also, these details do not explain this behaviour:
I'd really have to be able to run a repro script on my database that
mimics this behaviour - i.e. do a BEGIN TRAN + INSERT in one connection
but don't commit or rollback yet, then do a SELECT in another connection
and check the results.
If you can post INSERT and SELECT statements that reproduce this
behaviour, I'll see if I can find the cause.
>Basically, our application need to allow users to download data (insert
>statements) and concurrently users should be able to work with the reports
>(select statements).
>Also, "With ReadPast" option will work for fetching records while insert.
>But it will not fetch records that are locked because of update. This
>behavior could not be acceptable for our application.
That will be hard to do. Basically, you are asking SQL Server to
distinguish between locks for newly inserted data and locks for updated
data. This distinction is not available in SQL Server's architecture.
(And for good reason, I think - what if I insert a row and then go on to
update that same row, all in the same transaction? how to handle updates
to the primary key column? etc etc)
>According to the SQL Server documentation, data that is being updated only
>will be locked and insertion of data will lock only the specific data and n
ot
>others. But, select statement is blocked even when tried to retrieve the da
ta
>which is not being inserted.
That's because the data is already in the database, it's just not yet
confirmed (read: the transaction is not yet committed). SQL Server won't
just pretend it's not there (unless you use READPAST - but that would
affect updated rows as well); neither will SQL Server say that it IS
there if there is still the possibility of a rollback (unless you use
NOLOCK - but that too would affect updated rows as well).
>Is there any standard solution or alternative for this problem ?
You might consider using a two-table approach: insert the new rows into
a staging table, create the reports off a complete table and create an
automated task that will move all new rows from the staging table to the
complete table every once in a while.
If it is crucial that your reports have up-to-the-second accuracy, this
won't be a good approach - but in that case, I guess you wouldn't want
the reports to bypass rows currently inserted either.
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)|||hi,
The following are the real time table and stored proc details:
if exists (select * from dbo.sysobjects where id =
object_id(N'[dbo].[Dummy]') and OBJECTPROPERTY(id, N'IsUserTable') = 1)
drop table [dbo].[Dummy]
GO
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Dummy] (
[pkey_id] [bigint] IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL ,
[index_id] [int] NULL ,
[intField1] [int] NULL ,
[strField1] [varchar] (50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
NOT NULL ,
[intField2] [int] NULL ,
[intField3] [int] NULL ,
[intField4] [int] NOT NULL ,
[datetimeField] [datetime] NULL ,
[bitfield] [bit] NULL ,
[strField2] [varchar] (50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS
NULL
) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Dummy] WITH NOCHECK ADD
CONSTRAINT [PK_Dummy] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
(
[pkey_id]
) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
CREATE INDEX [IX_Dummy] ON [dbo].[Dummy]([index_id]) ON [PRIMARY]
GO
Test stored procedure for insert:
CREATE procedure prcMultiInserttoDummyTable (
@.indexid bigint=777,
@.TotalRows bigint =2000
)
as
Declare @.CurRow bigint
set @.CurRow=0
begin tran
While (@.CurRow < @.TotalRows)
Begin
Insert into Dummy (indexid,intField1,strField1,intField2,i
ntField3,
intField4, datetimeField, bitfield, strField2)
values(@.indexid,555,'test',10,0,168,'02/13/1998',0,'test stored proc insert'
)
set @.CurRow = @.CurRow +1
end
waitfor delay '00:00:20' -- wait to test the concurrent insertion and
selection
commit tran
Test select statements:
select * from dummy where indexid=123 -- filtered based on index
select * from dummy
select * from Dummy where intField1=245 - filtered based on non-index
"Hugo Kornelis" wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 00:26:07 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>
> Hi Baskar,
> I thought that was just an example made up on the fly, since there is no
> primary key or unique constraint, no unique index and no clustered
> index.
> Also, these details do not explain this behaviour:
>
> I'd really have to be able to run a repro script on my database that
> mimics this behaviour - i.e. do a BEGIN TRAN + INSERT in one connection
> but don't commit or rollback yet, then do a SELECT in another connection
> and check the results.
> If you can post INSERT and SELECT statements that reproduce this
> behaviour, I'll see if I can find the cause.
>
> That will be hard to do. Basically, you are asking SQL Server to
> distinguish between locks for newly inserted data and locks for updated
> data. This distinction is not available in SQL Server's architecture.
> (And for good reason, I think - what if I insert a row and then go on to
> update that same row, all in the same transaction? how to handle updates
> to the primary key column? etc etc)
>
> That's because the data is already in the database, it's just not yet
> confirmed (read: the transaction is not yet committed). SQL Server won't
> just pretend it's not there (unless you use READPAST - but that would
> affect updated rows as well); neither will SQL Server say that it IS
> there if there is still the possibility of a rollback (unless you use
> NOLOCK - but that too would affect updated rows as well).
>
> You might consider using a two-table approach: insert the new rows into
> a staging table, create the reports off a complete table and create an
> automated task that will move all new rows from the staging table to the
> complete table every once in a while.
> If it is crucial that your reports have up-to-the-second accuracy, this
> won't be a good approach - but in that case, I guess you wouldn't want
> the reports to bypass rows currently inserted either.
> Best, Hugo
> --
> (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
>|||On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:34:07 -0700, Baskar wrote:
>hi,
>The following are the real time table and stored proc details:
(snip)
Hi Baskar,
My apologies for the delay in replying.
Thanks for the excellent repro script - I was able to reproduce the
problem you're having on my computer.
I was also able to find the reason. In your table, the column index_id
has an extremely low selectivity (in case you're unfamiliar with the
term, that means that the same values are repeated over and over again).
This makes an index on this column useless - if you run the queries
while no inserts are running and check the exectuion plan, you'll see
that a table scan is used in all three queries.
The reason that an index on this column is not used is a matter of cost
estimate. If the table has for instance 120,000 total rows, and 10,000
rows have the correct value in index_id, then the choice for the
optimizer is to:
a) scan the index to find the 10,000 matches very quickly, then do
10,000 individual bookmaark lookups to retrieve the complete information
for a total of 10,000 + some page reads - or
b) scan the full table; with probably 50 - 150 rows per page, this will
cost only 1200 page reads.
There are several ways that you can modify your script to see that SQL
Server won't wait when the index really is used:
1. Make sure that the index_id column is more selective. I modified the
stored procedure to set index_id to "@.indexid+@.CurRow", so that all
values in index_id would be different. The optimizer will now choose to
use the index for the first of the SELECT statements, and the data will
be returned while the insert proc is running (unless the proc also
inserts a new matching row, of course).
2. Change the query so that the index on index_id is covering:
SELECT pkey_id, index_id
FROM Dummy
WHERE index_id = 777
Now SQL Server won't have to do a bookmaark lookup since all columns
needed are included in the index pages. You'll see all matching rows
returned while another connection is busy inserting rows with a
different value for index_id.
3. Use an index hint to force the optimizer to use the index. Of course,
this will increase the cost of the query.
SELECT *
FROM Dummy (INDEX (IX_Dummy))
WHERE index_id=777
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
Sunday, February 12, 2012
concatenation of '0' + converted interger value into a string?
I am unsure as to why I cannot concatenate '0' with the when '1' case
statement below. Even thought the convert statement explicitly converts the
integer, my results remain unchanged. I would appreciate any assistance...
SELECT
case LEN(datepart(m,trandate))
when '1' then '0' + CONVERT(varchar(1),DATEPART(M, trandate))
when '2' then DATEPART(M,trandate)
end
FROM Offtable where trandate is not nullHi Jeff,
You can strip the monthpart out of string representation of a date, that
will always include a leading zero when necessary, so you don't have to
worry about that, for example:
SELECT CONVERT(CHAR(2), trandate, 1)
FROM Offtable where trandate is not null
Style 1 with convert returns mm/dd/yy, and we are only interested in the
leftmost two characters, so a CHAR(2) will do.
--
Jacco Schalkwijk MCDBA, MCSD, MCSE
Database Administrator
Eurostop Ltd.
"Jeff Humphrey" <jeffhumphrey@.cox-internet.com> wrote in message
news:uYhK335dDHA.1636@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I am unsure as to why I cannot concatenate '0' with the when '1' case
> statement below. Even thought the convert statement explicitly converts
the
> integer, my results remain unchanged. I would appreciate any
assistance...
>
> SELECT
> case LEN(datepart(m,trandate))
> when '1' then '0' + CONVERT(varchar(1),DATEPART(M, trandate))
> when '2' then DATEPART(M,trandate)
> end
> FROM Offtable where trandate is not null
>|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--=_NextPart_000_0181_01C37783.62DF5350
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There I go again:
select
replace (str (datepart (mm, TranDate), 2), ' ', '0')
from
Offtable
where
trandate is not null
-- Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message =news:OEKO955dDHA.1152@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
You can rewrite the statement:
select
replace (str (TranDate, 2), ' ', '0')
from
Offtable
where
trandate is not null
-- Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Jeff Humphrey" <jeffhumphrey@.cox-internet.com> wrote in message =news:uYhK335dDHA.1636@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
I am unsure as to why I cannot concatenate '0' with the when '1' case
statement below. Even thought the convert statement explicitly converts =the
integer, my results remain unchanged. I would appreciate any =assistance...
SELECT
case LEN(datepart(m,trandate))
when '1' then '0' + CONVERT(varchar(1),DATEPART(M, trandate))
when '2' then DATEPART(M,trandate)
end
FROM Offtable where trandate is not null
--=_NextPart_000_0181_01C37783.62DF5350
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
&
There I go again:
select
replace (str =(datepart (mm, TranDate), 2), ' ', '0')
from
=Offtable
where
trandate is not null
-- Tom
---T=homas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBASQL Server MVPColumnist, SQL =Server ProfessionalToronto, ON Canadahttp://www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql">www.pinnaclepublishing.com=/sql
"Tom Moreau"= wrote in message news:OEKO955dDHA.1152=@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
You can rewrite the =statement:
select
replace (str =(TranDate, 2), ' ', '0')
from
=Offtable
where
trandate is not null
-- Tom
---T=homas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBASQL Server MVPColumnist, SQL =Server ProfessionalToronto, ON Canadahttp://www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql">www.pinnaclepublishing.com=/sql
"Jeff Humphrey" wrote in message news:uYhK335dDHA.1636=@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...I am unsure as to why I cannot concatenate '0' with the when '1' =casestatement below. Even thought the convert statement explicitly converts theinteger, my results remain unchanged. I would appreciate =any assistance...SELECT case LEN(datepart(m,trandate)) when '1' then '0' =+ CONVERT(varchar(1),DATEPART(M, trandate)) =when '2' then DATEPART(M,trandate) end FROM Offtable where =trandate is not null
--=_NextPart_000_0181_01C37783.62DF5350--
statement below. Even thought the convert statement explicitly converts the
integer, my results remain unchanged. I would appreciate any assistance...
SELECT
case LEN(datepart(m,trandate))
when '1' then '0' + CONVERT(varchar(1),DATEPART(M, trandate))
when '2' then DATEPART(M,trandate)
end
FROM Offtable where trandate is not nullHi Jeff,
You can strip the monthpart out of string representation of a date, that
will always include a leading zero when necessary, so you don't have to
worry about that, for example:
SELECT CONVERT(CHAR(2), trandate, 1)
FROM Offtable where trandate is not null
Style 1 with convert returns mm/dd/yy, and we are only interested in the
leftmost two characters, so a CHAR(2) will do.
--
Jacco Schalkwijk MCDBA, MCSD, MCSE
Database Administrator
Eurostop Ltd.
"Jeff Humphrey" <jeffhumphrey@.cox-internet.com> wrote in message
news:uYhK335dDHA.1636@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I am unsure as to why I cannot concatenate '0' with the when '1' case
> statement below. Even thought the convert statement explicitly converts
the
> integer, my results remain unchanged. I would appreciate any
assistance...
>
> SELECT
> case LEN(datepart(m,trandate))
> when '1' then '0' + CONVERT(varchar(1),DATEPART(M, trandate))
> when '2' then DATEPART(M,trandate)
> end
> FROM Offtable where trandate is not null
>|||This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--=_NextPart_000_0181_01C37783.62DF5350
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There I go again:
select
replace (str (datepart (mm, TranDate), 2), ' ', '0')
from
Offtable
where
trandate is not null
-- Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Tom Moreau" <tom@.dont.spam.me.cips.ca> wrote in message =news:OEKO955dDHA.1152@.TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
You can rewrite the statement:
select
replace (str (TranDate, 2), ' ', '0')
from
Offtable
where
trandate is not null
-- Tom
---
Thomas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBA
SQL Server MVP
Columnist, SQL Server Professional
Toronto, ON Canada
www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql
"Jeff Humphrey" <jeffhumphrey@.cox-internet.com> wrote in message =news:uYhK335dDHA.1636@.TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
I am unsure as to why I cannot concatenate '0' with the when '1' case
statement below. Even thought the convert statement explicitly converts =the
integer, my results remain unchanged. I would appreciate any =assistance...
SELECT
case LEN(datepart(m,trandate))
when '1' then '0' + CONVERT(varchar(1),DATEPART(M, trandate))
when '2' then DATEPART(M,trandate)
end
FROM Offtable where trandate is not null
--=_NextPart_000_0181_01C37783.62DF5350
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
&
There I go again:
select
replace (str =(datepart (mm, TranDate), 2), ' ', '0')
from
=Offtable
where
trandate is not null
-- Tom
---T=homas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBASQL Server MVPColumnist, SQL =Server ProfessionalToronto, ON Canadahttp://www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql">www.pinnaclepublishing.com=/sql
"Tom Moreau"
You can rewrite the =statement:
select
replace (str =(TranDate, 2), ' ', '0')
from
=Offtable
where
trandate is not null
-- Tom
---T=homas A. Moreau, BSc, PhD, MCSE, MCDBASQL Server MVPColumnist, SQL =Server ProfessionalToronto, ON Canadahttp://www.pinnaclepublishing.com/sql">www.pinnaclepublishing.com=/sql
"Jeff Humphrey"
--=_NextPart_000_0181_01C37783.62DF5350--
Concatenation
I am attempting to run the following sql:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then sc.length
when 'char' then sc.length
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' + convert(varchar(10),
sc.xscale)
else sc.length
end as size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
I get an error stating:
Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
smallint.
How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the numbers?
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200510/1Robert,
Try:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'char' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + '.' +
convert(varchar(10),sc.xscale)else CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length) end as
size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
HTH
Jerry
"Robert R via SQLMonster.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:55d586276a600@.uwe...
>I am attempting to run the following sql:
> select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
> case st.name
> when 'varchar' then sc.length
> when 'char' then sc.length
> when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' +
> convert(varchar(10),
> sc.xscale)
> else sc.length
> end as size
> from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
> where so.xtype = 'U'
> and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
> and so.id = sc.id
> and sc.xtype = st.xtype
> order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
> I get an error stating:
> Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
> smallint.
> How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the
> numbers?
>
> --
> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200510/1
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then sc.length
when 'char' then sc.length
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' + convert(varchar(10),
sc.xscale)
else sc.length
end as size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
I get an error stating:
Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
smallint.
How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the numbers?
--
Message posted via SQLMonster.com
http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200510/1Robert,
Try:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'char' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + '.' +
convert(varchar(10),sc.xscale)else CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length) end as
size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
HTH
Jerry
"Robert R via SQLMonster.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:55d586276a600@.uwe...
>I am attempting to run the following sql:
> select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
> case st.name
> when 'varchar' then sc.length
> when 'char' then sc.length
> when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' +
> convert(varchar(10),
> sc.xscale)
> else sc.length
> end as size
> from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
> where so.xtype = 'U'
> and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
> and so.id = sc.id
> and sc.xtype = st.xtype
> order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
> I get an error stating:
> Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
> smallint.
> How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the
> numbers?
>
> --
> Message posted via SQLMonster.com
> http://www.sqlmonster.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/sql-server/200510/1
Concatenation
I am attempting to run the following sql:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then sc.length
when 'char' then sc.length
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' + convert(varchar(10
),
sc.xscale)
else sc.length
end as size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
I get an error stating:
Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
smallint.
How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the numbers?
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200510/1Robert,
Try:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'char' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + '.' +
convert(varchar(10),sc.xscale)else CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length) end as
size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
HTH
Jerry
"Robert R via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:55d586276a600@.uwe...
>I am attempting to run the following sql:
> select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
> case st.name
> when 'varchar' then sc.length
> when 'char' then sc.length
> when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' +
> convert(varchar(10),
> sc.xscale)
> else sc.length
> end as size
> from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
> where so.xtype = 'U'
> and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
> and so.id = sc.id
> and sc.xtype = st.xtype
> order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
> I get an error stating:
> Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
> smallint.
> How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the
> numbers?
>
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200510/1
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then sc.length
when 'char' then sc.length
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' + convert(varchar(10
),
sc.xscale)
else sc.length
end as size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
I get an error stating:
Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
smallint.
How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the numbers?
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200510/1Robert,
Try:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'char' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + '.' +
convert(varchar(10),sc.xscale)else CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length) end as
size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
HTH
Jerry
"Robert R via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:55d586276a600@.uwe...
>I am attempting to run the following sql:
> select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
> case st.name
> when 'varchar' then sc.length
> when 'char' then sc.length
> when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' +
> convert(varchar(10),
> sc.xscale)
> else sc.length
> end as size
> from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
> where so.xtype = 'U'
> and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
> and so.id = sc.id
> and sc.xtype = st.xtype
> order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
> I get an error stating:
> Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
> smallint.
> How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the
> numbers?
>
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forum...server/200510/1
Concatenation
I am attempting to run the following sql:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then sc.length
when 'char' then sc.length
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' + convert(varchar(10),
sc.xscale)
else sc.length
end as size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
I get an error stating:
Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
smallint.
How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the numbers?
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200510/1
Robert,
Try:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'char' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + '.' +
convert(varchar(10),sc.xscale)else CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length) end as
size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
HTH
Jerry
"Robert R via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:55d586276a600@.uwe...
>I am attempting to run the following sql:
> select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
> case st.name
> when 'varchar' then sc.length
> when 'char' then sc.length
> when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' +
> convert(varchar(10),
> sc.xscale)
> else sc.length
> end as size
> from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
> where so.xtype = 'U'
> and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
> and so.id = sc.id
> and sc.xtype = st.xtype
> order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
> I get an error stating:
> Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
> smallint.
> How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the
> numbers?
>
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200510/1
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then sc.length
when 'char' then sc.length
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' + convert(varchar(10),
sc.xscale)
else sc.length
end as size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
I get an error stating:
Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
smallint.
How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the numbers?
Message posted via droptable.com
http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200510/1
Robert,
Try:
select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
case st.name
when 'varchar' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'char' then CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length)
when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + '.' +
convert(varchar(10),sc.xscale)else CONVERT(VARCHAR(20),sc.length) end as
size
from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
where so.xtype = 'U'
and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
and so.id = sc.id
and sc.xtype = st.xtype
order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
HTH
Jerry
"Robert R via droptable.com" <u3288@.uwe> wrote in message
news:55d586276a600@.uwe...
>I am attempting to run the following sql:
> select so.name as 'Table_Name', sc.name as 'Col_Name', st.name,
> case st.name
> when 'varchar' then sc.length
> when 'char' then sc.length
> when 'numeric' then convert(varchar(10),sc.xprec) + ',' +
> convert(varchar(10),
> sc.xscale)
> else sc.length
> end as size
> from sysobjects so, syscolumns sc, systypes st
> where so.xtype = 'U'
> and so.name <> 'dtproperties'
> and so.id = sc.id
> and sc.xtype = st.xtype
> order by so.name, sc.name, st.name
> I get an error stating:
> Syntax error converting the varchar value '18,2' to a column of data type
> smallint.
> How can I rewrite the concatenation to allow the comma to join the
> numbers?
>
> --
> Message posted via droptable.com
> http://www.droptable.com/Uwe/Forums...erver/200510/1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)