![]() |
Normally when I build a query with LEFT JOINs I have a previously mentioned table on the left side of the equal the table in the LEFT JOIN on the right side of it. In analyzing queries that a 3rd party app is executing I see something like the following:
22 Apr 2016
| 1 comment
,
|
![]() |
I am experiencing efficiency issues when using multiple left out joins in queries. I can resolve this by breaking up the existing query into smaller queries but I would like to know technical reasons why Left Outer Joins would experience efficiency issues.
20 Nov 2015
| 1 comment
,
|
![]() |
My data looks something like this:
14 Oct 2015
| 7 comments
,
|
![]() |
Hello,
04 Jun 2015
| 3 comments
,
|
![]() |
Hi
20 May 2015
| 1 comment
,
|
![]() |
I am trying to perform a sum based on multiple values in a table.
24 Apr 2015
| 9 comments
,
|
![]() |
Hi!. I have the following query: create multiset volatile table newTable, no log as ( SELECT so.*, pu.* FROM db.table1 so left outer join db.table2 pu on so.id = pu.id ) with data primary index(id) on commit preserve rows; Which throws the following error when run:
08 Apr 2015
| 1 comment
,
|
![]() |
Consider two tables ,one has COLUMN_A defined as a VARCHAR(100) and the other has COLUMN_A defined as an INTEGER. When joining these two tables via COLUMN_A what does the optimizer have to do in order to accomplish the join?Convert VARCHAR to INTEGER or convert INTEGER to VARCHAR? thanks.
08 Dec 2014
| 1 comment
,
|
![]() |
Hello,
04 Dec 2014
| 3 comments
,
|
![]() |
SELECT
19 Nov 2014
| 4 comments
,
|
![]() |
Hi all. We use PDCR to archive our DBQL tables - the primary index on the tables is (logdate,procid,queryid) and they are partitioned by logdate.
22 Aug 2014
,
|
![]() |
UPDATE db.source
SET
region= CASE WHEN b.title_rw LIKE '%East%' THEN 'East' WHEN b.title_rw LIKE '%Central%' THEN 'Central' WHEN b.title_rw LIKE '%West%' THEN 'West' else 'Region N/A' END
from db.source a
22 Jul 2014
| 2 comments
,
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
Overview of Unity Source Link
Unity Source Link (USL) allows reads and joins from an external or foreign database to Teradata Database without requiring data replication in the Teradata data warehouse. USL can be used to:
03 Oct 2013
,
|
![]() |
Table A has the value
02 Oct 2013
| 9 comments
,
|
![]() |
Hi All,
15 Jul 2013
| 3 comments
,
|
![]() |
Hi, Need help on the following scenario. Consider the following dataset transaction created_date closed_date 1 1-jan-2011 5-jan-2011 2 2-jan-2011 10-jan-2011 3 5-jan-2011 5-feb-2011 4 10-jan-2011 6-mar-2011
29 Mar 2012
| 1 comment
,
|
![]() |
Hello everyone, I have SQL question, about how does having a filter condition like (say) prod_cat = 7980 in the following two conditions will be treated 1. In a where clause of multiple joins something like a inner join b on [join cond]
11 Jan 2012
| 1 comment
,
|
![]() |
I am relatively new to using geo functions but I want to make sure my places dimension table does not have any duplicates by doing a delta operation from the freshly geocoded records in my staging table. First, I attempted to do a left outer join on the point_geo column:
08 Sep 2011
,
|
![]() |
Is there any other way of reliably tell the optimizer to use the PPI other than hard-coding the minimal/maximal value (date) in a following case? Here is a DDL for a big table with customer transactions: transaction_table
11 Jul 2011
| 2 comments
,
|
![]() |
I have TABLE A and TABLE B I'm trying to select reg_no.... inner join ON A.id=B.id1,Id2,Id3......Id20. And i have 3 conditions in Where clause. I'm writing as I have 7 millions of rows, but after where clause, rows are not more than few thousands can any one plz suggest me whether i'm doing right or any other simple way for my problem. sample query: SELECT reg_no
21 Feb 2011
| 5 comments
,
|
![]() |
Hi, Does anyone know of a better way to do a table join on a string ignoring the case other than doing something like: join on lower(a.str_col) = lower(b.str_col) Thanks,
20 Apr 2010
| 4 comments
,
|
![]() |
I'm relatively new to database development in general and I've got a question related to the use of CASE statements when joining tables. Here's the situation I'm faced with. I have a table (T1) that looks like this: And another table (T2) that looks like this: As you can see the keys in T2 are not always the same as T1 (don't ask why). But I need to use as many of the keys as I can in the join. What I coded is this:
30 Mar 2010
| 1 comment
,
|
![]() |
Hi ALL, I have a simple question. Is it important the order of joind tables? What's better?: select ... from large_Table lt inner join medium_table mt inner join small_table st or?: select ... from small_Table st inner join medium_table mt
04 Mar 2010
| 2 comments
,
|