i am using informix DB , i need to get records that contain alpha [A-Za-z] character on last character
what i try is :
select * from table_name
where (SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='0' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='1' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='2' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='3' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='4' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='5' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='6' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='7' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='8' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='9') or (SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)=' ') or (SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)='') or (customer IS NULL)
is there are any way to write where SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)=alpha rather than write
SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='0' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='1' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='2' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='3' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='4' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='5' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='6' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='7' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='8' and SUBSTR(trim(customer),-1,1)!='9'
If you have a 'recent' version of Informix (anything over 12.10 should do) you can use regex_match():
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSGU8G_14.1.0/com.ibm.dbext.doc/ids_dbxt_544.htm
Something like :
> select * from table(set{'test','test1','tesT'})
where regex_match(unnamed_col_1, '[a-zA-Z]$');
unnamed_col_1
test
tesT
2 row(s) retrieved.
>
You can use the Informix MATCHES operator, that is supported in any version.
The query would be like this:
select * from table_name
where customer matches "*[A-Za-z]"
Related
I have the following select statement that works just fine:
select stock_master.stock_code, stk_stock_status, reorder_buyer, default_route_id, main_work_centre
from stock_master, bill_of_materials_header, production_routing
where stock_master.stock_code = bill_of_materials_header.stock_code
and bill_of_materials_header.default_route_id = production_routing.prh_route_id
and main_work_centre != "CNC";
and stock_group >= 3201 and stock_group <= 3299;
What I want to do is update the stk_stock_status to "M" for this condition, but can't seem to work out the correct syntax for the update command. Any pointers would be extremely helpful.
If stk_stock_status is instock_master table and this table has some ID column then convert your select into select that returns only identifiers which should be updated. It will look like:
UPDATE stock_master SET stk_stock_status = 'M' WHERE stk_stock_id IN
(
SELECT stk_stock_id
FROM stock_master, bill_of_materials_header, production_routing
WHERE stock_master.stock_code = bill_of_materials_header.stock_code
AND bill_of_materials_header.default_route_id = production_routing.prh_route_id
AND main_work_centre != 'CNC';
)
PS Do not use " for sting literals. It is allowed by Informix but not by SQL standard. Better use '.
I am using sqlite in one my ios project where among other columns there are two columns. one has country code for mobile dialing like +880 and other column has rest of the mobile number like 1912353697. Now i want to join values from these two columns and compare the result value against like +8801912353697 and if matches pull the corresponding name value in that table . what would be the right query. I have tried like SELECT name FROM CONTACT_LIST WHERE (SELECT mblDc || mbl FROM CONTACT_LIST) = "+8801617634317" ; but that does not work .
A help would be appreciated.
Try:
SELECT name FROM CONTACT_LIST
WHERE mblDc || mbl = "+8801617634317";
From SQLite documentation: The || operator is "concatenate" - it joins together the two strings of its operands.
please check
How to concatenate strings with padding in sqlite
using substr function we can do the job and the query should be like
SELECT name FROM CONTACT_LIST WHERE (mblDc || mbl) = "+8801617634317" ;
What does the symbol "*=" stand for in a SELECT statement? How does this affect the performance? Can we replace it with JOINS?
Thanks
STR
In some database systems,
SELECT ... FROM a, b WHERE a.field1 *= b.field2
is an old syntax for a LEFT OUTER JOIN:
SELECT ... FROM a LEFT JOIN b ON a.field1 = b.field2
Microsoft SQL Server, for example, considers the *= syntax to be deprecated since version 2005.
So yes, you can replace *= with a JOIN. In fact, you should. (I doubt that it affects performance in any relevant way, but your queries might stop working in newer versions of your database engine.)
In some implementations of SQL, a SELECT statement that has a assignment operator(=) can be used to create the relationship between a column heading and the expression that defines the values for the column.
So an example might be:
SELECT name = 'renamed_column_name'
FROM users
More Info:
Unfortunately the = operator can mean both assign and equality.
For assignment:
DECLARE #Counter INT;
SET #Counter = 1;
For equality:
The = is a equality operator states that the left side must equal the right side.
The could mean a value must equal the result returned by a subquery, or a variable must equal a literal, no matter the case... a = b means that a and b have to have the same value.
SELECT * FROM users LEFT JOIN posts ON users.id = posts.user_id
I have 14 fields which are similar and I search the string 'A' on each of them. I would like after that order by "position" field
-- some set in order to remove a lot of useless text
def col='col01'
select '&col' "Fieldname",
&col "value",
position
from oneTable
where &col like '%A%'
/
-- then for the second field, I only have to type two lines
def col='col02'
/
...
def col='col14'
/
Write all the fields which contains 'A'. The problem is that those field are not ordered by position.
If I use UNION between table, I cannot take advantage of the substitution variables (&col), and I have to write a bash in unix in order to make the replacement back into ksh. The problem is of course that database code have to be hard-coded in this script (connection is not easy stuff).
If I use a REFCURSOR with OPEN, I cannot group the results sets together. I have only one request and cannot make an UNION of then. (print refcursor1 union refcursor2; print refcursor1+refcursor2 raise an exception, select * from refcursor1 union select * from refcursor2, does not work also).
How can concatenate results into one big "REFCURSOR"? Or use a union between two distinct run ('/') of my request, something like holding the request while typing new definition of variables?
Thank you for any advice.
Does this answer your question ?
CREATE TABLE #containingAValueTable
(
FieldName VARCHAR(10),
FieldValue VARCHAR(1000),
position int
)
def col='col01'
INSERT INTO #containingAValueTable
(
FieldName , FieldValue, position
)
SELECT '&col' "Fieldname",
&col "value",
position
FROM yourTable
WHERE &col LIKE '%A%'
/
-- then for the second field, I only have to type two lines
def col='col02'
INSERT INTO...
/
def col='col14'
/
select * from #containingAValueTable order by postion
DROP #containingAValueTable
But I'm not totally sure about your use of the 'substitution variable' called "col" (and i only have SQL Server to test my request so I used explicit field names)
edit : Sorry for the '#' charcater, we use it so often in SQL Server for temporaries, I didn't even know it was SQL Server specific (moreover I think it's mandatory in sql server for creating temporary table). Whatever, I'm happy I could be useful to you.
I'm trying to populate a TDBGrid with the results of the following TQuery against the file Journal.db:
select * from Journal
where Journal.where = "RainPump"
I've tried both Journal."Where" and Journal.[Where] to no avail.
I've also tried: select Journal.[Where] as "Location" with the same result.
Journal.db is a file created by a third party and I am unable to change the field names.
The problem is that the field I'm interested in is called 'where' and understandably causes the above error. How do I reference this field without causing the BDE (presumably) to explode?
Aah, I'm loving delphi again... I found a workaround. The TQuery component has the Filter property :-)
I omitted the "Where=" where clause from the query whilst still keeping all the other 'and' conditions.
I set the Filter property to "Where = 'RainPump'".
I set the Filtered property to True and life is good again.
I'm still wondering if there's a smarter way to do this using this old technology but if it's stupid and it works, then it's not stupid.
I'm afraid that someone reading this thread will get the impression that the BDE SQL engine cannot handle the query:
select * from Journal where Journal."Where" = "RainPump"
and will waste their time unnecessarily circumlocuting around it.
In fact this construction works fine. The quotes around "Where" keeps the BDE from interpreting it as a keyword, just as you would expect.
I don't know what is wrong in Baldric's particular situation, or what he tried in what order. He describes the problem as querying a *.db table, but his SQL error looks more like something you'd get in passthrough mode. Or, possibly he simplified his code for submission, thus eliminating the true cause of the error.
My tests performed with:
BDE v.5.2 (5.2.0.2)
Paradox for Windows v. 7 (32b)
Delphi 5.0 (5.62)
Various versions of the statement that succeed:
select * from Journal D0 where D0."Where" = "RainPump"
select * from Journal where Journal."Where" = "RainPump"
select * from ":common:Journal" D0 where D0."Where" = "RainPump"
select * from ":common:Journal" where ":common:Journal"."Where" = "RainPump"
select * from :common:Journal where Journal."Where" = "RainPump"
select * from ":common:Journal" D0 where D0."GUMPIK" = 3
select * from ":common:Journal" where ":common:Journal"."GUMPIK" = 3
select * from :common:Journal where Journal."GUMPIK" = 3
Versions of the statement that look correct but fail with "Invalid use of keyword":
select * from ":common:Journal" where :common:Journal."Where" = "RainPump"
select * from :common:Journal where :common:Journal."Where" = "RainPump"
select * from ":common:Journal" where :common:Journal."GUMPIK" = 3
select * from :common:Journal where :common:Journal."GUMPIK" = 3
-Al.
You can insert the resultset into a new table with "values" (specifying no column names) where you have given your own column names in the new table and then do a select from that table, Using a TQuery, something like:
Query1.sql.clear;
query1,sql.add('Insert into newtable values (select * from Journal);');
query1.sql.add('Select * from newtable where newcolumn = "Rainpump";');
query1.open;
Rewrite it like this, should work:
select * from Journal where Journal.[where] = "RainPump"
Me, I'd rename the awkward column.
In MySQL, table/column names can be enclosed in `` (the angled single quotes). I'm not sure what the BDE allows, but you could try replacing [where] with `where`
select * from Journal where Journal."where" = "RainPump"
Ok, so naming columns after keyboards is bad in ANY SQL system. Would you name a column "select" or "count" or "alter" or "table" or perhaps just for the fun of it "truncate" or "drop"? I would hope not.
Even if you build in the work around for this instance you are creating a mine field for whomever comes after you. Do what mj2008 said and rename the bloody column.
Allowing this column name to persist is the worst example of someone who is building a system and would get you on the poop list for any project manager.