Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Database & SysAdmin
  3. Database
  4. OR in a JOIN

OR in a JOIN

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Database
databasesql-serversysadminalgorithmsregex
29 Posts 7 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C Chris Meech

    It's similar to what other's have suggested except that it's a union of the two result sets, which should eliminate any duplicates.

    Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]

    P Offline
    P Offline
    PIEBALDconsult
    wrote on last edited by
    #18

    Chris Meech wrote:

    should eliminate any duplicates.

    Except it doesn't. I have added some clarification and sample data to my post.

    C 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • P Paul Conrad

      If it is possible, that would be cool so there can be a data set to test against and see what the expected results are :)

      ""Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon

      P Offline
      P Offline
      PIEBALDconsult
      wrote on last edited by
      #19

      I added it to the post with some clarification.

      P 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • P PIEBALDconsult

        I added it to the post with some clarification.

        P Offline
        P Offline
        Paul Conrad
        wrote on last edited by
        #20

        Coolness! I will check it out soon and see if there's anything I can add to this thread in terms of a solution :)

        ""Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • P PIEBALDconsult

          I'm having some trouble with a JOIN that involves an OR (in SQL Server). For example:

          SELECT *
          FROM TableA A
          INNER JOIN TableB B
          ON A.Field1=B.Field1
          OR A.Field2=B.Field2

          Quite correctly this produces two output rows for each row in TableA that matches TableB via both Field1 and Field2* -- but for this JOIN I want to output only one row when both match (preferably the result of the Field1 match, and only report the Field2 match if Field1 doesn't match). * Clarification -- when it matches two rows in TableB; one via Field1 and the other via Field2. I haven't done much searching for pointers because I don't think it's possible, however I'm posting here just in case someone here knows of a way or a simple (SQL only) work-around. Edit -- Here's an example:

          SELECT * FROM TableA

          ID Field1 Field2


          10 A E
          11 E D
          12 A D

          SELECT * FROM TableB

          ID Field1 Field2


          20 A B
          21 C D

          10 will match only 20 ; 11 will match only 21 ; 12 will match both 20 and 21 -- so I want 20.

          ID Field1 Field2 ID Field1 Field2
          10 A E 20 A B <-- I want this row
          11 E D 21 C D <-- I want this row
          12 A D 20 A B <-- I want this row
          12 A D 21 C D <-- I don't want this row

          Luc's and pmpdesign's suggestions yield the same output. Here's a variation of Bernhard's suggestion, which seems to work:

          WITH cte1 AS
          (
          SELECT A.ID aID
          , A.Field1 aField1
          , A.Field2 aField2
          , B.ID bID
          , B.Field1 bField1
          , B.Field2 bField2
          FROM TableA A
          INNER JOIN TableB B
          ON A.Field1=B.Field1
          )
          , cte2 AS
          (
          SELECT A.ID aID
          , A.Field1 aField1
          , A.Field2 aField2
          , B.ID bID
          , B.Field1 bField1
          , B.Field2 bField2
          FROM TableA A
          INNER JOIN TableB B
          ON A.Field2=B.Field2
          )
          SELECT *
          FROM cte1
          UNION ALL
          SELECT C2.*
          FROM cte2 C2
          LEFT OUTER JOIN cte1 C1
          ON C2.aID=C1.aID
          WHERE C1.aID IS NULL

          P Offline
          P Offline
          Paul Conrad
          wrote on last edited by
          #21

          PIEBALDconsult wrote:

          so I want 20

          Do you want 20 in both rows with the Id from Table A being 10, and 12?

          ""Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon

          P 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • P PIEBALDconsult

            Chris Meech wrote:

            should eliminate any duplicates.

            Except it doesn't. I have added some clarification and sample data to my post.

            C Offline
            C Offline
            Chris Meech
            wrote on last edited by
            #22

            It will remove the duplicates of the resultant set, but now that I've read your example, that is not quite what you are after. In your example once the row with ID 12 from table A matched on FieldA for the row with ID 20, you don't want to include it anymore where it might match on FieldB.

            Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • P Paul Conrad

              PIEBALDconsult wrote:

              so I want 20

              Do you want 20 in both rows with the Id from Table A being 10, and 12?

              ""Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon

              P Offline
              P Offline
              PIEBALDconsult
              wrote on last edited by
              #23

              Yes.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • P PIEBALDconsult

                I'm having some trouble with a JOIN that involves an OR (in SQL Server). For example:

                SELECT *
                FROM TableA A
                INNER JOIN TableB B
                ON A.Field1=B.Field1
                OR A.Field2=B.Field2

                Quite correctly this produces two output rows for each row in TableA that matches TableB via both Field1 and Field2* -- but for this JOIN I want to output only one row when both match (preferably the result of the Field1 match, and only report the Field2 match if Field1 doesn't match). * Clarification -- when it matches two rows in TableB; one via Field1 and the other via Field2. I haven't done much searching for pointers because I don't think it's possible, however I'm posting here just in case someone here knows of a way or a simple (SQL only) work-around. Edit -- Here's an example:

                SELECT * FROM TableA

                ID Field1 Field2


                10 A E
                11 E D
                12 A D

                SELECT * FROM TableB

                ID Field1 Field2


                20 A B
                21 C D

                10 will match only 20 ; 11 will match only 21 ; 12 will match both 20 and 21 -- so I want 20.

                ID Field1 Field2 ID Field1 Field2
                10 A E 20 A B <-- I want this row
                11 E D 21 C D <-- I want this row
                12 A D 20 A B <-- I want this row
                12 A D 21 C D <-- I don't want this row

                Luc's and pmpdesign's suggestions yield the same output. Here's a variation of Bernhard's suggestion, which seems to work:

                WITH cte1 AS
                (
                SELECT A.ID aID
                , A.Field1 aField1
                , A.Field2 aField2
                , B.ID bID
                , B.Field1 bField1
                , B.Field2 bField2
                FROM TableA A
                INNER JOIN TableB B
                ON A.Field1=B.Field1
                )
                , cte2 AS
                (
                SELECT A.ID aID
                , A.Field1 aField1
                , A.Field2 aField2
                , B.ID bID
                , B.Field1 bField1
                , B.Field2 bField2
                FROM TableA A
                INNER JOIN TableB B
                ON A.Field2=B.Field2
                )
                SELECT *
                FROM cte1
                UNION ALL
                SELECT C2.*
                FROM cte2 C2
                LEFT OUTER JOIN cte1 C1
                ON C2.aID=C1.aID
                WHERE C1.aID IS NULL

                L Offline
                L Offline
                Luc Pattyn
                wrote on last edited by
                #24

                Your modified message is much clearer. And this is what works for me:

                SELECT * FROM TableA A INNER JOIN TableB B ON A.Field1=B.Field1
                UNION ALL
                SELECT * FROM TableA A INNER JOIN TableB B ON A.Field2=B.Field2
                WHERE NOT A.ID IN (SELECT A.ID FROM TableA A INNER JOIN TableB B ON A.Field1=B.Field1)

                just 3 SELECTs, no LEFT PS: I failed to get it to work with a CTE on SQL Server... :)

                Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

                B 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • P PIEBALDconsult

                  I'm having some trouble with a JOIN that involves an OR (in SQL Server). For example:

                  SELECT *
                  FROM TableA A
                  INNER JOIN TableB B
                  ON A.Field1=B.Field1
                  OR A.Field2=B.Field2

                  Quite correctly this produces two output rows for each row in TableA that matches TableB via both Field1 and Field2* -- but for this JOIN I want to output only one row when both match (preferably the result of the Field1 match, and only report the Field2 match if Field1 doesn't match). * Clarification -- when it matches two rows in TableB; one via Field1 and the other via Field2. I haven't done much searching for pointers because I don't think it's possible, however I'm posting here just in case someone here knows of a way or a simple (SQL only) work-around. Edit -- Here's an example:

                  SELECT * FROM TableA

                  ID Field1 Field2


                  10 A E
                  11 E D
                  12 A D

                  SELECT * FROM TableB

                  ID Field1 Field2


                  20 A B
                  21 C D

                  10 will match only 20 ; 11 will match only 21 ; 12 will match both 20 and 21 -- so I want 20.

                  ID Field1 Field2 ID Field1 Field2
                  10 A E 20 A B <-- I want this row
                  11 E D 21 C D <-- I want this row
                  12 A D 20 A B <-- I want this row
                  12 A D 21 C D <-- I don't want this row

                  Luc's and pmpdesign's suggestions yield the same output. Here's a variation of Bernhard's suggestion, which seems to work:

                  WITH cte1 AS
                  (
                  SELECT A.ID aID
                  , A.Field1 aField1
                  , A.Field2 aField2
                  , B.ID bID
                  , B.Field1 bField1
                  , B.Field2 bField2
                  FROM TableA A
                  INNER JOIN TableB B
                  ON A.Field1=B.Field1
                  )
                  , cte2 AS
                  (
                  SELECT A.ID aID
                  , A.Field1 aField1
                  , A.Field2 aField2
                  , B.ID bID
                  , B.Field1 bField1
                  , B.Field2 bField2
                  FROM TableA A
                  INNER JOIN TableB B
                  ON A.Field2=B.Field2
                  )
                  SELECT *
                  FROM cte1
                  UNION ALL
                  SELECT C2.*
                  FROM cte2 C2
                  LEFT OUTER JOIN cte1 C1
                  ON C2.aID=C1.aID
                  WHERE C1.aID IS NULL

                  J Offline
                  J Offline
                  Jorgen Andersson
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #25

                  Here's another way to do it:

                  WITH CTE AS
                  (
                  SELECT A.ID aID
                  ,A.Field1 aField1
                  ,A.Field2 aField2
                  ,CASE WHEN L.ID IS NULL THEN R.ID ELSE L.ID end bID
                  ,CASE WHEN L.Field1 IS NULL THEN R.field1 ELSE L.Field1 END bField1
                  ,CASE WHEN L.Field2 IS NULL THEN R.Field2 ELSE L.Field2 END bField2
                  FROM TableB L
                  right OUTER JOIN TableA A
                  ON l.field1 = a.field1
                  left OUTER JOIN TableB R
                  ON a.field2 = r.field2
                  )
                  SELECT aID
                  ,aField1
                  ,aField2
                  ,bID
                  ,bField1
                  ,bField2
                  FROM CTE
                  WHERE bid IS NOT null

                  The plan indicates that it should be faster, but that's with dummy data. I'm curious about the performance with real data.

                  Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions

                  L 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • J Jorgen Andersson

                    Here's another way to do it:

                    WITH CTE AS
                    (
                    SELECT A.ID aID
                    ,A.Field1 aField1
                    ,A.Field2 aField2
                    ,CASE WHEN L.ID IS NULL THEN R.ID ELSE L.ID end bID
                    ,CASE WHEN L.Field1 IS NULL THEN R.field1 ELSE L.Field1 END bField1
                    ,CASE WHEN L.Field2 IS NULL THEN R.Field2 ELSE L.Field2 END bField2
                    FROM TableB L
                    right OUTER JOIN TableA A
                    ON l.field1 = a.field1
                    left OUTER JOIN TableB R
                    ON a.field2 = r.field2
                    )
                    SELECT aID
                    ,aField1
                    ,aField2
                    ,bID
                    ,bField1
                    ,bField2
                    FROM CTE
                    WHERE bid IS NOT null

                    The plan indicates that it should be faster, but that's with dummy data. I'm curious about the performance with real data.

                    Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions

                    L Offline
                    L Offline
                    Luc Pattyn
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #26

                    Interesting. IMO it can be simplified further, as the CTE isn't really necessary, so I now have:

                    SELECT A.ID aID
                    ,A.Field1 aField1
                    ,A.Field2 aField2
                    ,CASE WHEN L.ID IS NULL THEN R.ID ELSE L.ID end bID
                    ,CASE WHEN L.ID IS NULL THEN R.field1 ELSE L.Field1 END bField1
                    ,CASE WHEN L.ID IS NULL THEN R.Field2 ELSE L.Field2 END bField2
                    FROM TableB L
                    RIGHT OUTER JOIN TableA A ON L.Field1 = A.Field1
                    LEFT OUTER JOIN TableB R ON A.Field2 = R.Field2
                    WHERE L.ID IS NOT NULL OR R.ID IS NOT NULL

                    I have your cases depend on the ID field, not the other fields (where null might be valid) :)

                    Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

                    J 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • L Luc Pattyn

                      Interesting. IMO it can be simplified further, as the CTE isn't really necessary, so I now have:

                      SELECT A.ID aID
                      ,A.Field1 aField1
                      ,A.Field2 aField2
                      ,CASE WHEN L.ID IS NULL THEN R.ID ELSE L.ID end bID
                      ,CASE WHEN L.ID IS NULL THEN R.field1 ELSE L.Field1 END bField1
                      ,CASE WHEN L.ID IS NULL THEN R.Field2 ELSE L.Field2 END bField2
                      FROM TableB L
                      RIGHT OUTER JOIN TableA A ON L.Field1 = A.Field1
                      LEFT OUTER JOIN TableB R ON A.Field2 = R.Field2
                      WHERE L.ID IS NOT NULL OR R.ID IS NOT NULL

                      I have your cases depend on the ID field, not the other fields (where null might be valid) :)

                      Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

                      J Offline
                      J Offline
                      Jorgen Andersson
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #27

                      I'm getting identical plans, but your version is prettier. :-)

                      Light moves faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak. List of common misconceptions

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • L Luc Pattyn

                        Your modified message is much clearer. And this is what works for me:

                        SELECT * FROM TableA A INNER JOIN TableB B ON A.Field1=B.Field1
                        UNION ALL
                        SELECT * FROM TableA A INNER JOIN TableB B ON A.Field2=B.Field2
                        WHERE NOT A.ID IN (SELECT A.ID FROM TableA A INNER JOIN TableB B ON A.Field1=B.Field1)

                        just 3 SELECTs, no LEFT PS: I failed to get it to work with a CTE on SQL Server... :)

                        Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

                        B Offline
                        B Offline
                        Bernhard Hiller
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #28

                        That's actually my solution posted above - UNION vs. UNION ALL does not make a difference here, because both queries select all columns from the same table.

                        L 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • B Bernhard Hiller

                          That's actually my solution posted above - UNION vs. UNION ALL does not make a difference here, because both queries select all columns from the same table.

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          Luc Pattyn
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #29

                          Sorry, I missed your post, yes it is the same. Good work! :)

                          Luc Pattyn [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • World
                          • Users
                          • Groups