Outer join
Hi all
I have a question where I need two outer join tables and there are a few filters based on the input parameters. In my example below, I need to know the difference between query 1 and 2. Query 1 does not have the data, but the fact of application 2. Please provide details
CREATE TABLE test1 ( col1 NUMBER(10), col2 VARCHAR2(10) ); INSERT INTO test1 VALUES(1,'Demo'); CREATE TABLE test2 ( col1 NUMBER(10), col2 VARCHAR2(10) ); INSERT INTO test2 VALUES(2,'Demo2'); --Query 1 SELECT * FROM test1,test2 WHERE test1.col1 = 1 AND test2.col1(+) = 3; --Query 2 SELECT * FROM test1,test2 WHERE test1.col1 = 1 AND test2.col1(+) = 3 AND test1.col1 = test2.col1(+);
In your first query, you make a Cartesian (but with a weird syntax) product with a table with no line.
If the result is nothing.
In the second query you added a join condition and do a left outer join.
If the result contains the rows in the left table.
As you can see by simply adding a predicate with not enough to define a join.
ANSI JOIN syntax would be that this is possible.
Tags: Database
Similar Questions
-
SSRS for lack of outer join with the Oracle data source
It seems to be a problem with the Oracle driver used in the Reporting SERVICES query designer.
When you use an Oracle data source, if I create an outer join in the graphic designer, it automatically inserts '{OJ' before the join and '} ' after her. This is an incorrect syntax for Oracle and refuses to start. The curly braces and the JO editable in designer text, but if I go back to the graphic designer and immediately to reintegrate them.
Only, this has started to happen a year or two ago - before that it worked, but with the old (+) syntax.
Can it not be healed? It makes things very difficult.
-Geoff
Hi Geoff,
Thanks for posting in the Microsoft Community.
However, the question you posted would be better suited in the Forums of the Oracle Support; We recommend that you post your query in Oracle Support Forums to get help:
If you have any other questions or you need Windows guru, do not hesitate to post your questions and we will be happy to help you.
-
HELP SQL (auto / full outer join with date corresponding)
I'm having a hard time get this query nailed... hoping someone can help me sorted.
create table tab1 (identification number,
date of eff_date,
Code1 varchar2 (2),
Code2 varchar2 (2)
)
/
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-01-14','YYYY-MM-DD'), 'DAT', 'AS');
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-03-19','YYYY-MM-DD'), 'DAT', 'AS');
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-08-28','YYYY-MM-DD'), 'DAT', 'AS');
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-11-12','YYYY-MM-DD'), 'DAT', 'AS');
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-01-03','YYYY-MM-DD'), "DAT", "AE");
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-03-14','YYYY-MM-DD'), "DAT", "AE");
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-04-18','YYYY-MM-DD'), "DAT", "AE");
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-09-14','YYYY-MM-DD'), "DAT", "AE");
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-01-14','YYYY-MM-DD'), "DAT", "BS");
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-02-14','YYYY-MM-DD'), "DAT", "BS");
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-03-14','YYYY-MM-DD'), "DAT", "BS");
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-05-14','YYYY-MM-DD'), 'DAT', 'BE');
insert into tab1 values (3, to_date('2015-09-16','YYYY-MM-DD'), 'DAT', 'AS');
insert into tab1 values (3, to_date('2015-04-16','YYYY-MM-DD'), "DAT", "AE");
tab1
ID, date, code 1, code2
2. DID DAT 2015-01-14
2. DID DAT 2015-03-19
2. DID DAT 2015-08-28
2. DID DAT 2015-11-12
2 AE DAT 2015-01-03
2 AE DAT 2015-03-14
2 AE DAT 2015-04-18
2 AE DAT 2015-09-14
2 BS DAT 2015-01-14
2 BS DAT 2015-02-14
2 BS DAT 2015-03-14
BE DAT 2 2015-05-14
3. DID DAT 2015-09-16
3 AE DAT 2015-04-16
What I need to do...
1 auto join to match EI for each partition ID
2. THAT the date must be less than or equal to the date of the AE and when there is more then a line corresponding to this criterion has chosen the date of closest EI of the date of the ACE.
3. it must be a full outer join because I want to show all lines, even if it is not a match. There is a beginning, but not record end end gold but no record of departure
4. If there is an AE line for many AS lines (the SA date is less then equals the date of EI) then join this AE line to all 3 rows of ACE
5. the same rules for BS and BE.
result should look like this.
ID, date, code 1, id_1 code2, date_1, code1_1, code2_1
2 2015-01-14 DAT AS 2 AE DAT 2015-03-14
2 2015-03-19 DAT AS 2 AE DAT 2015-04-18
2 2015-08-28 DAT AS 2 AE DAT 2015-09-14
2 2015-11-12 DAT DID ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO
NO NO NO NO 2 AE DAT 2015-01-03
2015-01-2 14 DAT BS 2 BE DAT 2015-05-14
2015-02-2 14 DAT BS 2 BE DAT 2015-05-14
2015 03-2 14 DAT BS 2 BE DAT 2015-05-14
3 2015-09-16 DAT DID ZERO ZERO ZERO ZERO
NO NO NO NO 3 AE DAT 2015-04-16
My attempt was somewhat along these lines (dealing only with SA / combos AE) but it does not manage the many scenarios one (req 4).
Select a.*, b.* from
(select row_number () on the rn (partition by a.id order a.eff_date), a.*)
of tab1 where a.code2 = 'AS') a
full outer join
(select row_number () on the rn (b.eff_date order by b.id partition), b.*)
tab1 b where b.code2 = 'Æ') b
on a.id = b.id
and a.rn = b.rn
and a.eff_date < = b.eff_date
Hello
owbdev99 wrote:
I'm having a hard time get this query nailed... hoping someone can help me sorted.
create table tab1 (identification number,
date of eff_date,
Code1 varchar2 (2),
Code2 varchar2 (2)
)
/
insert into tab1 values (2, to_date('2015-01-14','YYYY-MM-DD'), 'DAT', 'AS');
...
Thanks for posting the CREATE TABLE and INSERT. I know it can be a lot of trouble. You want to get answers that work, not you? Make sure that the statements you post too much work. Test (and, if necessary, attach) your statements before committing. You said code1 be VARCHAR2, but all the instructions insertion have values of 3 characters for code1.
You are on the right track, with an analytical function, but ROW_NUMBER solves this problem. 1 "THAT line" could correspond to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or any other line 'AE' and vice versa. Try to use the analytical MIN function instead or ROW_NUMBER, like this:
WITH got_next_e_date AS
(
SELECT id, eff_date, code1, code2
MIN (CASE
WHEN SUBSTR (code2, 2) = 'E '.
THEN eff_date
END
) OVER (PARTITION BY ID.
, SUBSTR (code2, 1, 1)
ORDER BY eff_date DESC
) AS next_e_date
OF tab1
)
s AS
(
SELECT *.
OF got_next_e_date
"WHERE SUBSTR (code2, 2) s ="
)
e
(
SELECT *.
OF got_next_e_date
WHERE SUBSTR (code2, 2) = 'E '.
)
SELECT s.id
s.eff_date
s.code1
s.code2
e.id AS id_1
e.eff_date AS eff_date_1
e.code1 AS code1_1
e.code2 AS code2_1
S
FULL OUTER JOIN e ON s.id = e.id
AND s.next_e_date = e.eff_date
AND SUBSTR (s.code2, 1, 1) = SUBSTR (e.code2, 1, 1)
ORDER OF NVL (s.id, e.id)
, NVL (SUBSTR (s.code2, 1, 1)
, SUBSTR (e.code2, 1, 1)
)
s.eff_date
;
Out (as you asked):
ID EFF_DATE CODE1, CODE2 ID_1 EFF_DATE_1 CODE1_1 CODE2_1
--- ---------- ----- ----- ----- ---------- ------- -------
2 2015-01-14 DAT AS 2 AE DAT 2015-03-14
2 2015-03-19 DAT AS 2 AE DAT 2015-04-18
2 2015-08-28 DAT AS 2 AE DAT 2015-09-14
2. DID DAT 2015-11-12
2 AE DAT 2015-01-03
2015-01-2 14 DAT BS 2 BE DAT 2015-05-14
2015-02-2 14 DAT BS 2 BE DAT 2015-05-14
2015 03-2 14 DAT BS 2 BE DAT 2015-05-14
3. DID DAT 2015-09-16
3 AE DAT 2015-04-16
I guess code2 is always 2 characters, and the 2nd character is always ' or 'E '.
I assume that the combination [id, eff_date, code2] is unique.
If these assumptions are wrong, you need a few minor changes, but nothing big.
-
Bug with an outer join, or & Analytics function (or rownum)
Hello
Seems to be a combination of an outer join, OR and rownum confuses the CBO.
First request is without rownum, the second is with rownum.
The second query expects 203 t lines and never ends. It should behave the same as query 1, with 24 M lines.
Remove the GOLD clause query 2 allows him to behave as a query 1, with 24 M lines.
We never saw it? Is there a solution?
SELECT * FROM message i LEFT JOIN (SELECT hi.message_id, hi.update_dt FROM message_hist hi) h ON (t.id = h.master_id AND(t.update_dt = h.update_dt OR h.update_dt <TO_DATE('150901','RRMMDD'))); ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 24M| 13G| 475G (2)|999:59:59 | | 1 | NESTED LOOPS OUTER | | 24M| 13G| 475G (2)|999:59:59 | | 2 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE | 8037K| 1318M| 29883 (2)| 00:06:59 | | 3 | VIEW | | 3 | 1302 | 59136 (2)| 00:13:48 | |* 4 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| MESSAGE_HIST | 3 | 168 | 59136 (2)| 00:13:48 | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Predicate Information (identified by operation id): --------------------------------------------------- 4 - filter("I"."MESSAGE_ID"="HI"."MESSAGE_ID" AND ("HI"."UPDATE_DT"<TO_DATE('150901','RRMMDD') OR "I"."UPDATE_DT"="HI"."UPDATE_DT")) ---------------- SELECT * FROM message i LEFT JOIN (SELECT hi.message_id, hi.update_dt , ROWNUM FROM message_hist hi) h ON (t.id = h.master_id AND(t.update_dt = h.update_dt OR h.update_dt <TO_DATE('150901','RRMMDD'))); ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 203T| 112P| 475G (2)|999:59:59 | | 1 | NESTED LOOPS OUTER | | 203T| 112P| 475G (2)|999:59:59 | | 2 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE | 8037K| 1318M| 29883 (2)| 00:06:59 | | 3 | VIEW | | 25M| 10G| 59151 (2)| 00:13:49 | |* 4 | VIEW | | 25M| 10G| 59151 (2)| 00:13:49 | | 5 | COUNT | | | | | | | 6 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| MESSAGE_HIST | 25M| 1355M| 59151 (2)| 00:13:49 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Predicate Information (identified by operation id): --------------------------------------------------- 4 - filter("I"."MESSAGE_ID"="H"."MESSAGE_ID" AND ("I"."UPDATE_DT"="H"."UPDATE_DT" OR "H"."UPDATE_DT"<TO_DATE('150901','RRMMDD')))RowNum in a subquery is supposed to ensure that the subquery is evaluated completely before filtering, otherwise, how could you go out rownum?
Your question is compounded because of the join condition that forces a level of nested loops, which means that the table should be fully analysed once for each line of conduct rowsource. You can either transform the join in an equijoin and allow a hash to run, or you join could materialize the subquery once.
Allow the hash join:
SELECT count (*)
Message FROM
LEFT JOIN (SELECT hi.message_id, hi.update_dt
ROWNUM
OF message_hist salvation) PM ON (i.message_id = h.message_id
AND i.update_dt = h.update_dt)
LEFT JOIN (SELECT hi.message_id, hi.update_dt
ROWNUM
OF message_hist salvation) h2 ON (i.message_id = h2.message_id
AND h2.update_dt<>
AND h2.update_dt <> i.update_dt)
/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| ID | Operation | Name | Lines | Bytes | Cost (% CPU). Time |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1. 66. 211 (1) | 00:00:01 |
| 1. GLOBAL TRI | | 1. 66. | |
|* 2 | EXTERNAL RIGHT HASH JOIN | | 800 | 52800 | 211 (1) | 00:00:01 |
|* 3 | VIEW | | 1. 22. 70 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 4. COUNTY | | | | | |
| 5. TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE_HIST | 1. 22. 70 (0) | 00:00:01 |
|* 6 | EXTERNAL RIGHT HASH JOIN | | 800 | 35200. 141 (1) | 00:00:01 |
| 7. VIEW | | 1. 22. 70 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 8. COUNTY | | | | | |
| 9. TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE_HIST | 1. 22. 70 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 10. TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE | 800 | 17600 | 70 (0) | 00:00:01 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information of predicates (identified by the operation identity card):
---------------------------------------------------
2 - access("I".") MESSAGE_ID '= 'H2'.' MESSAGE_ID "(+))"
filter ("H2". "UPDATE_DT" (+)<>'I'. " ("' UPDATE_DT")
3 - filter("H2".") UPDATE_DT "(+)<>
6 - access("I".") "UPDATE_DT" ="H" UPDATE_DT "(+) AND"
"I"." ' MESSAGE_ID ' ="H" MESSAGE_ID "(+))"
Materialize the subquery:
WITH h AS (SELECT / * + MATERIALIZE * / hi.message_id, hi.update_dt)
ROWNUM
OF message_hist salvation)
SELECT count (*)
Message FROM
LEFT JOIN: ON (i.message_id = h.message_id
AND (i.update_dt = h.update_dt OR h.update_dt<>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| ID | Operation | Name | Lines | Bytes | Cost (% CPU). Time |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1. 22. 1740 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 1. TRANSFORMATION OF THE TEMPORARY TABLE. | | | | |
| 2. LOAD SELECT ACE | SYS_TEMP_0FD9D6810_5B8F6E67 | | | | |
| 3. COUNT | | | | | |
| 4. TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE_HIST | 1. 22. 70 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 5. GLOBAL TRI | | 1. 22. | |
| 6. NESTED EXTERNAL LOOPS | | 800 | 17600 | 1670 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 7. TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE | 800 | 17600 | 70 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 8. VIEW | | 1. | 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
|* 9 | VIEW | | 1. 22. 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 10. TABLE ACCESS FULL | SYS_TEMP_0FD9D6810_5B8F6E67 | 1. 22. 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information of predicates (identified by the operation identity card):
---------------------------------------------------
9 - filter("I".") ' MESSAGE_ID ' ="H" MESSAGE_ID' AND ('I'. "" "UPDATE_DT"="H" UPDATE_DT' OR
"H"." UPDATE_DT ".<>
You may need to change the first condition to make sure that you select the correct subquery.
-edit
Not able to view a plan but you can invade the second join condition select and then the result of a subquery with a predicate according to your requirement. This should delay the or rating and leave only an equijoin (although rowsource return may be slightly larger than the opposite).
-Second edition, it did not work exactly when I tried it.
A hybrid of the previous two plans with a slight modification of how he was imitating the GOLD:
WITH h AS (SELECT / * + MATERIALIZE * / hi.message_id, hi.update_dt)
ROWNUM Clotilde
OF message_hist salvation)
SELECT i.MESSAGE_ID
i.UPDATE_DT
COALESCE(h.message_id,h2.message_id) message_id
, COALESCE (h.update_dt, h2.update_dt) update_dt
Clotilde COALESCE (h.rown, h2.rown)
Message FROM
LEFT JOIN: ON (i.message_id = h.message_id
AND i.update_dt = h.update_dt)
LEFT JOIN: h2 WE (DECODE(h.message_id,,i.message_id) = h2.message_id - only try this if previous join returned NULL
AND h2.update_dt<>
/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| ID | Operation | Name | Lines | Bytes | Cost (% CPU). Time |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1. 66. 8 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 1. TRANSFORMATION OF THE TEMPORARY TABLE. | | | | |
| 2. LOAD SELECT ACE | SYS_TEMP_0FD9D6605_28F27F | | | | |
| 3. COUNT | | | | | |
| 4. TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE_HIST | 150. 3300 | 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 5. GLOBAL TRI | | 1. 66. | |
|* 6 | EXTERNAL RIGHT HASH JOIN | | 10497. 676K | 6 (0). 00:00:01 |
|* 7 | VIEW | | 150. 3300 | 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 8. TABLE ACCESS FULL | SYS_TEMP_0FD9D6605_28F27F | 150. 3300 | 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
|* 9 | OUTER HASH JOIN | | 328. 14432 | 4 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 10. TABLE ACCESS FULL | MESSAGE | 200 | 4400 | 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 11. VIEW | | 150. 3300 | 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
| 12. TABLE ACCESS FULL | SYS_TEMP_0FD9D6605_28F27F | 150. 3300 | 2 (0) | 00:00:01 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Information of predicates (identified by the operation identity card):
---------------------------------------------------6 - access("H2".") MESSAGE_ID "(+) = DECODE (TO_CHAR ('H'". "))" MESSAGE_ID"), NULL, 'I '. (("' MESSAGE_ID '))
7 - filter("H2".") UPDATE_DT "(+)<>
9 - access("I".") "UPDATE_DT" ="H" UPDATE_DT "(+) AND 'I'." "" ' MESSAGE_ID '="H" MESSAGE_ID "(+))"(This plan is another system if costs are not comparable)
-
Outer join does not not as expected left
Hi all
I have it here are three tables with values. Mentioned the under outer join query does not and behave like the inner query.
CREATE TABLE RET_FUND_FEE
(
NPTF VARCHAR2 (8 CHAR),
TPART VARCHAR2 (4 CHAR)
);
CREATE TABLE PART_PTF
(
Mf_Id VARCHAR2 (6 CHAR) NOT NULL,
TPARTS VARCHAR2 (4 CHAR) NOT NULL
);
CREATE TABLE TFC_FUNDS
(
NPTF VARCHAR2 (8 CHAR) NOT NULL,
MULTIFONDS_ID VARCHAR2 (6 CHAR)
);
INSERT INTO RET_FUND_FEE VALUES('111','A');
INSERT INTO RET_FUND_FEE VALUES('111','D');
INSERT INTO RET_FUND_FEE VALUES('111','E');
INSERT INTO PART_PTF VALUES ('MF1', 'A');
INSERT INTO PART_PTF VALUES ('MF1', 'B');
INSERT INTO PART_PTF VALUES('MF1','C');
INSERT INTO TFC_FUNDS VALUES('111','MF1');
INSERT INTO TFC_FUNDS VALUES('111','MF1');
INSERT INTO TFC_FUNDS VALUES('111','MF1');
SELECT A.TPART, B.TPARTS, A.NPTF, B.Mf_Id, C.MULTIFONDS_ID, C.NPTF
OF RET_FUND_FEE A, PART_PTF B, TFC_FUNDS C
WHERE A.NPTF = C.NPTF
AND C.MULTIFONDS_ID = B.Mf_Id
AND A.TPART = B.TPARTS (+)
AND C.MULTIFONDS_ID = 'MF1 '.
AND C.NPTF = '111'
Here, I expect all records in the RET_FUND_FEE table that I am using outer join.
But I'm only corresponding chronogram RET_FUND_FEE, PART_PTF as an inner join. Can you get it someone please let me know what lack us.
Is my version of oracle 11g
SELECT
A.TPART, B.TPARTS, A.NPTF, B.Mf_Id, C.MULTIFONDS_ID, C.NPTF
Of
PART_PTF B
Join
C TFC_FUNDS
on (C.MULTIFONDS_ID = B.Mf_Id
AND C.MULTIFONDS_ID = 'MF1 '.
AND C.NPTF = '111'
)
right outer join
RET_FUND_FEE HAS
on (A.TPART = B.TPARTS
and A.NPTF = C.NPTF) - added as correction
TPART TPARTS NPTF MF_ID MULTIFONDS_ID NPTF A A 111 MF1 MF1 111 A A 111 MF1 MF1 111 A A 111 MF1 MF1 111 E - 111 - - - D - 111 - - - or
SELECT A.TPART, d.TPARTS, A.NPTF, d.Mf_Id, d.MULTIFONDS_ID, d.NPTF
OF RET_FUND_FEE HAS
, (
Select
*
PART_PTF b, TFC_FUNDS C
where B.Mf_Id = C.MULTIFONDS_ID
AND C.MULTIFONDS_ID = 'MF1 '.
AND C.NPTF = '111'
) d
WHERE A.TPART = D.TPARTS (+)
and A.NPTF = D.NPTF (+) - added as a correction
Sorry had to correct the syntax oracle solution.
The first one was bad because it would return also B lines that have no match in C.
Sorry a correction more on these two approaches, missed the second predicate.
-
Oracle: Use LEFT OUTER JOIN, but convert the data to an external list
Hello, all,.
I know it can be done; I just don't remember how I got it done, oh there are so many years.
Assumes that the tables exist for groups and individuals. People can belong to several groups.
SELECT g.groupName, p.lastName || ', ' || p.firstName as fullName FROM groups g LEFT OUTER JOIN groupPersonAssociation gpa ON gpa.groupID = g.groupID LEFT OUTER JOIN person p ON p.personID = gpa.personID ORDER BY g.groupName, fullName
This gives us:
Group One Alpha, Daniel Group One Bravo, Charles Group One Charlie, Chuck Group Two Beta, Alpha Group Two Delta, Bonnie Group Three Echo, Bunny Group Three Golf, Samuel Group Three November, Stan
How word the SQL to get the data as:
Group One Alpha, Daniel | Bravo, Charles | Charlie, Chuck Group Two Beta, Alpha | Delta, Bonnie Group Three Echo, Bunny | Golf, Samuel | November, Stan
V/r,
^_^
I finally thought to it. I was using incorrect keywords on Google.
SELECT g.groupName, LISTAGG(p.lastName || ', ' || p.firstName,' | ') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY g.groupName) "fullName" FROM groups g LEFT OUTER JOIN groupPersonAssociation gpa ON ggpa.groupID = g.groupID LEFT OUTER JOIN person p ON p.personID = gpa.personID GROUP BY g.groupName ORDER BY g.groupName, fullNameJust in case someone else is going through this same desire.
HTH,
^_^
-
using outer joins if the two column is null? Use only (+)
Hi all
create the table xxc_tr_num (tl_number number, tr_no number tl_no_id);
insert into xxc_tr_num values (123,100,222);
insert into xxc_tr_num values (124,100,333);
create the table xxc_od_tab (tl_number number, tl_id number);
insert into xxc_od_tab values (123,001);
insert into xxc_od_tab values (null, null);
create table xxc_oth_tab (name varchar2 (10), number of tl_id);
insert into xxc_oth_tab values('abc',,001);
insert into xxc_oth_tab values (null, null);
Wait it out put
tr_no tl_no_id name
100 222 abc
100 333
using outer joins if the two column is null? use only please of outer joins
And I tried to use outer joins on both tl_id column but not get values and I use have County (tr_no ) > 1
Rajesh123 wrote:
Thank you Kiss it is not possible to use having clause?
You need to understand the functioning of the group. If you will not be asked this question.
Check this box
SQL> select tr_no, 2 tl_no_id, 3 count(*) 4 from xxc_tr_num a, 5 xxc_od_tab b, 6 xxc_oth_tab c 7 where a.tl_number = b.tl_number(+) 8 and b.tl_id = c.tl_id(+) 9 group 10 by tr_no 11 , tl_no_id; TR_NO TL_NO_ID COUNT(*) ---------- ---------- ---------- 100 333 1 100 222 1See what returns the count? You have grouped according to TR_NO and TL_NO_ID. You must take into consideration the TL_NO_ID just put COUNT (TR_NO) does not increase the NUMBER of the whole group. To get the NUMBER on the whole group, I used the analytical function and did. Like this, see the number of the analytical function here
SQL> select tr_no, 2 tl_no_id, 3 count(*), 4 count(*) over(partition by tr_no) 5 from xxc_tr_num a, 6 xxc_od_tab b, 7 xxc_oth_tab c 8 where a.tl_number = b.tl_number(+) 9 and b.tl_id = c.tl_id(+) 10 group 11 by tr_no 12 , tl_no_id; TR_NO TL_NO_ID COUNT(*) COUNT(*)OVER(PARTITIONBYTR_NO) ---------- ---------- ---------- ------------------------------ 100 222 1 2 100 333 1 2So to answer your question, yes you can't do in the HAVING clause...
-
Hi all
I use under version
Connected to Oracle Database 11g Express Edition Release 11.2.0.2.0
SQL > SELECT E.ENAME,.
2 D.DEPTNO,
3 D.LOC
4. TO EMP E,.
DEPT 5 D
6. WHERE = E.DEPTNO D.DEPTNO (+);
ENAME, DEPTNO LOC
---------- ------ -------------
DALLAS SMITH 20
ALLEN 30 CHICAGO
WARD 30 CHICAGO
20 DALLAS JONES
MARTIN 30 CHICAGO
BLAKE 30 CHICAGO
CLARK 10 NEW YORK
SCOTT 20 DALLAS
THE 10 NEW YORK KING
TURNER 30 CHICAGO
20 DALLAS ADAMS
JAMES 30 CHICAGO
FORD 20 DALLAS
MILLER 10 NEW YORK
40 BOSTON
15 selected lines
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SQL > SELECT E.ENAME,.
2 D.DEPTNO,
3 D.LOC
4. TO EMP E
5 LEFT OUTER JOIN
D 6 DEPT
7. THE E.DEPTNO = D.DEPTNO;
ENAME, DEPTNO LOC
---------- ------ -------------
MILLER 10 NEW YORK
THE 10 NEW YORK KING
CLARK 10 NEW YORK
FORD 20 DALLAS
20 DALLAS ADAMS
SCOTT 20 DALLAS
20 DALLAS JONES
DALLAS SMITH 20
JAMES 30 CHICAGO
TURNER 30 CHICAGO
BLAKE 30 CHICAGO
MARTIN 30 CHICAGO
WARD 30 CHICAGO
ALLEN 30 CHICAGO
14 selected lines
My doubt is both are same query is the same, is in ansi format and is in the format of the Oracle,.
but the results are different.
For the first query null is coming for unmatched records in the dept table
but in the second query, it does not come
Thank you
Hello
2947022 wrote:
Hi all
I use under version
Connected to Oracle Database 11g Express Edition Release 11.2.0.2.0
SQL > SELECT E.ENAME,.
2 D.DEPTNO,
3 D.LOC
4. TO EMP E,.
DEPT 5 D
6. WHERE = E.DEPTNO D.DEPTNO (+);
ENAME, DEPTNO LOC
---------- ------ -------------
DALLAS SMITH 20
ALLEN 30 CHICAGO
WARD 30 CHICAGO
20 DALLAS JONES
MARTIN 30 CHICAGO
BLAKE 30 CHICAGO
CLARK 10 NEW YORK
SCOTT 20 DALLAS
THE 10 NEW YORK KING
TURNER 30 CHICAGO
20 DALLAS ADAMS
JAMES 30 CHICAGO
FORD 20 DALLAS
MILLER 10 NEW YORK
40 BOSTON
15 selected lines
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SQL > SELECT E.ENAME,.
2 D.DEPTNO,
3 D.LOC
4. TO EMP E
5 LEFT OUTER JOIN
D 6 DEPT
7. THE E.DEPTNO = D.DEPTNO;
ENAME, DEPTNO LOC
---------- ------ -------------
MILLER 10 NEW YORK
THE 10 NEW YORK KING
CLARK 10 NEW YORK
FORD 20 DALLAS
20 DALLAS ADAMS
SCOTT 20 DALLAS
20 DALLAS JONES
DALLAS SMITH 20
JAMES 30 CHICAGO
TURNER 30 CHICAGO
BLAKE 30 CHICAGO
MARTIN 30 CHICAGO
WARD 30 CHICAGO
ALLEN 30 CHICAGO
14 selected lines
My doubt is both are same query is the same, is in ansi format and is in the format of the Oracle,.
but the results are different.
For the first query null is coming for unmatched records in the dept table
but in the second query, it does not come
Thank you
In fact, these requests are not the same.
The first is to find all the lines of the Department, with the corresponding lines of PGE (when there are). This is equivalent to «FROM dept LEFT OUTER JOIN emp...» ».
The second is to find all the rows in the emp of the lines of the Department (when there are any). This is equivalent to «...» WHERE e.deptno = d.deptno (+).
-
Hi, I have a problem with my query:
SELECT t1.step, t2.name FROM RIGHT JOIN t1 t2 ON t2.step = t1.step
I have two tables, small t1 and t2 great.
table T1 (7 lines):
name of the step
1 a
2B
3 C
4 D
5 e
$4
7 g
table T2 (10000 lines);
name of the step ID
100 1A
101 2B
102 3 c
103 4 D
104 5th
105 1A
106 2 b
107 3 c
108 d 4
109 5 e
110 1A
111 2B
112 3 c
113 4 D
114 5 e
115 1A
116 2B
117 c 3
118 d 4
119 5th
… … ..
I want external right to join them, and have values in t2.name NULL and the range of steps (1-7).
My query returns this:
name of the step
1 a
2B
3 C
4 D
5 e
1 a
2B
3 C
4 D
5 e
1 a
2B
3 C
4 D
5 e
....
Thank you.
So there is indeed a key score in T2, it is "ROW_NR", and we can do this:
select t1.col_nr , t2.row_nr , t1.sheet_name , t1.cell , t1.column_name , t2.string_val from t1 left outer join t2 partition by (t2.row_nr) on t2.col_nr = t1.col_nr ; -
ORA-01719: outer join operator (+) not allowed in operand of GOLD or IN
I'm migrating a stored procedure (package) in Oracle 11 g. The SQL has an outer join, combined with a "GOLD":
Select a.row1, a.row2, b.row3, b.row4, c.row5, c.row6
schema1.table1 a, schema1.table2 b, schema2.table3 c
where
((c.orgunit = a.org (+) and b.newaccount (+) and TO_CHAR(c.createdatetime,'MM/DD/YYYY = c.account and c.feed = 'FOO' ') = TO_CHAR (SYSDATE, ' DD/MM/YYYY'))
or
((c.feed = 'BAR' and c.orgunit = a.org (+) and c.account b.newaccount (+) and TO_CHAR(c.createdatetime,'MM/DD/YYYY =') = TO_CHAR (SYSDATE, ' DD/MM/YYYY'));
The error is:
ORA-01719: outer join operator not allowed in operand of GOLD or IN
* Cause: Outer join appears in a clause or.
* Action: If A and B are predicates, to achieve the effect of (has or B).
I do not understand how to apply the suggested action to my query above. Can anyone provide a solution or a workaround?
Thank you.
your base table is c, a and b must be attached to the left
Select a.row1, a.row2, b.row3, b.row4, c.row5, c.row6
of schema2.table3 c
Join schema1.table1 left a c.orgunit on = a.org
c.account left join schema1.table2 b = b.newaccount
where c.createdatetime > = trunc (sysdate)
and c.createdatetime<>
and (c.feed = 'FOO' or c.feed = 'BAR');
-
Hi gurus,
Left outer join:
-------------------
Select * from A LEFT OUTER JOIN B on A.col = B.col;
by definition, a left outer join brings the rows that match the join condition and lines not corresponding to table A.
My question here is "corresponding to B and no matching rows in A" is that nothing, but... SELECT * FROM A;
can someone pls clarity...
Thank you.
Imagine that you had:
TableA
COLUMN1 COLUMN2
'A' 1
'B' 2
'C' 3
TABLEB
COLUMN1 COLUMN2
'A' 'X1'
'A' 'X2'
'B' 'Y'
'D' 'Z'
SELECT * FROM TABLEA;
A 1
B 2
C 3
Now, if you want to join (first column is either in table A or B, (deuxieme from tableA, third table B)
SELECT * FROM TABLEA A JOIN TABLEB B ON (A.COLUMN1 = B.COLUMN1)
A 1 X 1
A 1 X 2
B 2 Y
SELECT * FROM TABLE LEFT B EXTERNAL ON (A.COLUMN1 = B.COLUMN1) JOIN TABLE
A 1 X 1
A 1 X 2
B 2 Y
C 3 {null}
SELECT * FROM TABLE A TABLE RIGHT OUTER JOIN B (A.COLUMN1 = B.COLUMN1)
A 1 X 1
A 1 X 2
B 2 Y
D {null} Z
SELECT * FROM TABLE A TABLE FULL OUTER JOIN B (A.COLUMN1 = B.COLUMN1)
A 1 X 1
A 1 X 2
B 2 Y
C 3 {null}
D {null} Z
HTH
-
How to manage the update/insert in display with Outer Join object?
Hello
I have a problem in the treatment of update/insert in the original Version that contains two EOs with right outer join. The first EO values are inserted before and I want if second values EO already exists, it will update and if not a new record created.
Error when I commit after entering values is: ' entity line with null key is not found in SecondEO. "
What is the solution?
Thank you
Hello
Make sure that your view object, you have included the key attributes of the two entity objects.
Kind regards
Saif Khan.
-
Outer joins are equijoins and?
Manual says Yes, but I think their only equijoins, insofar as the matched data and include other data as well. so technically should not fall outside the category of the equijoins?
Hello
Outer joins can be are equijoins. In other words, some outer joins are of equijoins, others are not.
-
Hello
I have a requirement in which I need to get data from a third table where a date of the third table is higher than a date in the second array.
Ex:
SELECT t1.column1, t3.column2 FROM t1, t2, t3 WHERE t1.id = t2.foreign_id AND t1.id ( + ) = t3.foreign_id AND t3.some_date_column > t2.another_date_column
However, using the query above returns no results if the date condition is not met. I still need to show t1.column1 and a null t3.column2.
How should I do this?
Thank you
Allen
Edit: Added information about the requirement.
Hi Allen
- SELECT t1.column1, t3.column2
- T1, t2, t3
- WHERE t1.id = t2.foreign_id
- AND t1.id = t3.foreign_id (+)
- AND t3.some_date_column (+) > t2.another_date_column
I guess that this t1.column1 must not be null. Or am I wrong? The + sign must be placed on the side where draws are accepted. You must repeat it for each condition on the table.
Alternativlely you can use the LEFT OUT JOIN syntax. If the two columns are allowed null you need a FULL OUTER JOIN.
BTW: The join to t2 is not required if a refefernce constraint forced.
-
Bad result in a left outer join in 12.1.0.2
Hallo,
We discovered a strange behaviour in a query. The query provides values in a column of outer join where there is no corresponding value in the table is attached to the outside.
When you expand this request by the "ORDER BY" then this query gives the correct result.
Example:
SQL > desc tb_a
Name Null? Typ
-------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
ID NOT NULL NUMBER (19)SQL > desc tb_b
Name Null? Typ
-------------------------------------------- ----------------------------
CLOSED NOT NULL NUMBER (1)
ID NOT NULL NUMBER (19)CCS_APPLICATION@icw01> select * from tb_a where id in (4148,4141,4195);
ID
----------
4148
4141
4195CCS_APPLICATION@icw01> select * from tb_b where id in (4148,4141,4195);
INTERNAL ID
---------- ----------
4148 0CCS_APPLICATION@icw01> SELECT
2 b.id AS b_id,
3 a.id AS a_id,
4 b.closed AS b_closed
5
6 tb_a a
7 LEFT OUTER JOIN tb_b b ON a.id = b.id
8 WHERE a.id IN (4148, 4195, 4141)
9 ORDER BY ASC a.id
10;B_ID ALLOCATION A_ID B_CLOSED
---------- ---------- ----------
4141
4148 4148 0
4195CCS_APPLICATION@icw01> SELECT
2 b.id AS b_id,
3 a.id AS a_id,
4 b.closed AS b_closed
5
6 tb_a a
7 LEFT OUTER JOIN tb_b b ON a.id = b.id
8 WHERE a.id IN (4148, 4195, 4141)
9 - ORDER BY ASC a.id
10;B_ID ALLOCATION A_ID B_CLOSED
---------- ---------- ----------
4148 4148 0
4141 4141
4195 4195instance parameter:
VALUE OF TYPE NAME
------------------------------------ ----------- ------------------------------
compatible string 12.1.0.2.0
optimizer_features_enable string 12.1.0.2
After ""alter system set optimizer_features_enable = ' 11.2.0.4 ';" the query provides the correct result in both cases (ordered and unordered).
Now the final question: is this a bug?
1480970 wrote:
Hallo! Yes, I searched the Support of Oracle. I found some similar entries, but not an exact match. To fix some issues
with 12.1.0.2.
There is another interesting clue when look you on the execution plan:
Note
-----
-the dynamic statistics used: dynamic sampling (level = 2)
- This is an adaptation plan
We have disabled (= FALSE) optimizer_adaptive_features and the query provides the correct values.
This could be a solution for us.
Looks like a pretty tight match for bug 18430870, even if it affects the two 12.1.0.1 and 12.1.0.2, which contradicts the Martin trial against 12.1.0.1.
The description of the bug mentions disabling "_projection_pushdown" (set to false) should also be a viable solution, perhaps if you want to give that a try and see if it is a different bug or not.
There are also a number of one-time fixes already available for download, maybe your version / platform is already covered, if the bug applies.
Randolf
-
Hi Experts,
I have a requirement that says - see the chart for the past 10 days, regardless the presence data table in fact.
Lets consider an example - Time_dim product, are my dimension tables, Purchase_Order is my fact table.I did it for external Purchase_Order in left RPD with TIME_DIM and inner join with the PRODUCT table. and execution of query of exit-
Select T.Date, P.item, count (distinct PO.order_no)
TIME_DIM t, PRODUCT P, PURCHASE_ORDER PO
where T.date_key = PO.date_key
and P.item = in. agenda
and P.item = 'laptop ';The query generated by OBIEE left outer join, but when the condition P.item = "Notebook" included in the query, and if there are no orders for this product in one of the date, that date will not come in the result set.
the query to be generated by the OBIEE is-
Select T.Date, PO.item, count (distinct PO.order_no)
TIME_DIM t,.
(SELECT P.ITEM, IN. ORDER_NO
PRODUCT P, PO PURCHASE_ORDER
WHERE P.item = in. agenda
and P.item = 'Laptop') IN.
WHERE T.date_key = PO.date_key (+);How to design the RPD to achieve this. All pray to advise on this. Thanks in advance.
Thank you
ChantalHello
You are on 11.1.1.7?
I would say that your condition can be made without using external and maintenance of product and the standard between the FACT dimension, time inner join join.
If you enable your property analysis OBIEE "Include Null values" will automatically return all the elements of time and product matching your filter (so you'll need to add a filter on 'Date' to limit it to the last 10 days or you will have a unique day of your time dimension).
If you filter then on "Laptop", even if there is not a single value in order for "Laptop" in the last 10 days, he will be there on the screen.
Easy, clean and you keep your inner join between the facts and Dimensions.
Take a look at this example, I just did on SampleApp 406:
Selection of 12 months (year 2010) and a customer (id = 89) and income. The model has only an inner join. I activate the option "Include Null values" and here is the result.
A line with cells only empty because there is not a single revenue for customer 89 in 2010. This is exactly your condition.
Honestly, do not touch your model using the outer join, you will have more side effects than benefits. Every single scan will do the outer join and you'll have a lot of data 'empty' return of the DB (more large data set containing just the null values) and probably you need the outer join in 15 to 25% of your analysis.
Keep things simple, it will be faster and easier to maintain.
Maybe you are looking for
-
How to change the battery of the hybrid tuner of TV Toshiba remote
Excuse me, I have a problem. I bought my toshiba several months ago hibrid tv tuner, and now I need to change the battery in the remote control. I do not understand how to remove battery because the conteiner for battery, in the bottom of the remote
-
Driver for HP 255 G3 laptop for Windows 7
I installed Windows 7 Pro 64 bit, on a laptop HP 255 G3. I need to know where can I find Windows 7 drivers for this model? HP WEB site offers only the drivers for Windows 8.1. Thanks for any help...
-
Hi all Can we invoke photograpique to select an image similar to the selection of a contact in the address book? Or you should use the fileexplorerdemo provided with JDE. But I need to display the thumbnails of the images not only the names of files.
-
Failure of Windows Update November 2013
After I downloaded all the latest update Windows, I noticed that all of the updates show 'chess' in the status column. I tried Mr. Fixit but no luck. My computer seems to work very well. Any ideas? I have a Dell PC with 8 GB memory and am under Wi
-
configurting acs user has readonly access to asdm
Hello How to set up a single user access only readonly GBA to asa through the asdm. Do not have permission to set up. Please help me