Unix Technical Forum

SEO

vBulletin Search Engine Optimization


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > DB2

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:00 AM
Bob Stearns
 
Posts: n/a
Default Probably dumb question

I have a (somewhat complicated) query that returns the rows from a table
and its self join in the correct order. I want to call a procedure on
each of the returned rows, in the order returned. Is there any to do
this in straight sql or must I write an sql procedure with a cursor on
the select and issue the call while accessing rows through the cursor?

What I'm trying to do (as those of you that follow comp.databases.theory
will remember) is to create (and maintain) a sorted tree from an
unsorted one.

What I'd like (I'm making this syntax up from wishful thinking) is
something like:

for each row in (select ...) call add_location2(subx.entity_id,
subx.loc_id, subx.namex, supx.loc_id)

query follows (after Joe Celko in _Trees and Hierarchies in SQL for
Smarties_, p51):

select subx.entity_id, subx.loc_id, subx.namex, supx.loc_id
from is3.locations as supx,
is3.locations as subx
where subx.leftx between supx.leftx and supx.rightx
and supx.loc_id<>subx.loc_id
and not exists
(select *
from is3.locations as midx
where midx.leftx between supx.leftx and supx.rightx
and subx.leftx between midx.leftx and midx.rightx
and midx.loc_id not in (supx.loc_id, subx.loc_id))
order by subx.leftx

The procedure (ibid, pp 78-79) modified to create a sorted (by namex) tree:

create procedure add_location2(in ent integer,
in new_id integer,
in new_name varchar(50),
in under integer)
language sql
modifies sql data

begin
declare under_lft integer;
declare under_rgt integer;
declare parent_level smallint;
declare sib_lft integer;
declare sib_rgt integer;
declare my_lft integer;
declare my_rgt integer;

set schema nullid;

select leftx, rightx, levelx into under_lft, under_rgt,
parent_level
from locations2
where loc_id = under;
and leftx between under_lft and under_rgt
and namex<new_name
order by namex desc
fetch first 1 row only;

if(sib_rgt is null) then begin
set my_lft = under_lft+1;
set my_rgt = under_lft+2;
end;
else begin
set my_lft = sib_rgt+1;
set my_rgt = sib_rgt+2;
end;
end if;

update locations2
set leftx = case
when leftx >= my_rgt-1 then leftx+2
else leftx
end,
rightx = case
when rightx >= my_rgt-1 then rightx+2
else rightx
end;

insert into locations2 values(new_id,new_name,my_lft,my_rgt,ent,
null, parent_level+1);

end
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:00 AM
Serge Rielau
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

Bob Stearns wrote:
> I have a (somewhat complicated) query that returns the rows from a table
> and its self join in the correct order. I want to call a procedure on
> each of the returned rows, in the order returned. Is there any to do
> this in straight sql or must I write an sql procedure with a cursor on
> the select and issue the call while accessing rows through the cursor?
>
> What I'm trying to do (as those of you that follow comp.databases.theory
> will remember) is to create (and maintain) a sorted tree from an
> unsorted one.
>
> What I'd like (I'm making this syntax up from wishful thinking) is
> something like:
>
> for each row in (select ...) call add_location2(subx.entity_id,
> subx.loc_id, subx.namex, supx.loc_id)
>
> query follows (after Joe Celko in _Trees and Hierarchies in SQL for
> Smarties_, p51):
>
> select subx.entity_id, subx.loc_id, subx.namex, supx.loc_id
> from is3.locations as supx,
> is3.locations as subx
> where subx.leftx between supx.leftx and supx.rightx
> and supx.loc_id<>subx.loc_id
> and not exists
> (select *
> from is3.locations as midx
> where midx.leftx between supx.leftx and supx.rightx
> and subx.leftx between midx.leftx and midx.rightx
> and midx.loc_id not in (supx.loc_id, subx.loc_id))
> order by subx.leftx
>
> The procedure (ibid, pp 78-79) modified to create a sorted (by namex) tree:
>
> create procedure add_location2(in ent integer,
> in new_id integer,
> in new_name varchar(50),
> in under integer)
> language sql
> modifies sql data
>
> begin
> declare under_lft integer;
> declare under_rgt integer;
> declare parent_level smallint;
> declare sib_lft integer;
> declare sib_rgt integer;
> declare my_lft integer;
> declare my_rgt integer;
>
> set schema nullid;
>
> select leftx, rightx, levelx into under_lft,
> under_rgt, parent_level
> from locations2
> where loc_id = under;
> and leftx between under_lft and under_rgt
> and namex<new_name
> order by namex desc
> fetch first 1 row only;
>
> if(sib_rgt is null) then begin
> set my_lft = under_lft+1;
> set my_rgt = under_lft+2;
> end;
> else begin
> set my_lft = sib_rgt+1;
> set my_rgt = sib_rgt+2;
> end;
> end if;
>
> update locations2
> set leftx = case
> when leftx >= my_rgt-1 then leftx+2
> else leftx
> end,
> rightx = case
> when rightx >= my_rgt-1 then rightx+2
> else rightx
> end;
>
> insert into locations2 values(new_id,new_name,my_lft,my_rgt,ent,
> null, parent_level+1);
>
> end

You could use an dynmaoci compound statement (BEGIN ATOMIC ... END) with
a FOR and a CALL in DB2 for LUW V8.2.
In DB2 V8.1.4 and higher you could also use a correlated TABLE function
if you want inlining.
Heck you could even make that a correlated table function feeding the
FOR loop as the outer of the join. But that would be mean since you have
to rely on DB2's optimizer not kicking out the nested ORDER BY.

Cheres
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:00 AM
Bob Stearns
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

Serge Rielau wrote:
> Bob Stearns wrote:
>
>> I have a (somewhat complicated) query that returns the rows from a
>> table and its self join in the correct order. I want to call a
>> procedure on each of the returned rows, in the order returned. Is
>> there any to do this in straight sql or must I write an sql procedure
>> with a cursor on the select and issue the call while accessing rows
>> through the cursor?
>>
>> What I'm trying to do (as those of you that follow
>> comp.databases.theory will remember) is to create (and maintain) a
>> sorted tree from an unsorted one.
>>
>> What I'd like (I'm making this syntax up from wishful thinking) is
>> something like:
>>
>> for each row in (select ...) call add_location2(subx.entity_id,
>> subx.loc_id, subx.namex, supx.loc_id)
>>
>> query follows (after Joe Celko in _Trees and Hierarchies in SQL for
>> Smarties_, p51):
>>
>> select subx.entity_id, subx.loc_id, subx.namex, supx.loc_id
>> from is3.locations as supx,
>> is3.locations as subx
>> where subx.leftx between supx.leftx and supx.rightx
>> and supx.loc_id<>subx.loc_id
>> and not exists
>> (select *
>> from is3.locations as midx
>> where midx.leftx between supx.leftx and supx.rightx
>> and subx.leftx between midx.leftx and midx.rightx
>> and midx.loc_id not in (supx.loc_id, subx.loc_id))
>> order by subx.leftx
>>
>> The procedure (ibid, pp 78-79) modified to create a sorted (by namex)
>> tree:
>>
>> create procedure add_location2(in ent integer,
>> in new_id integer,
>> in new_name varchar(50),
>> in under integer)
>> language sql
>> modifies sql data
>>
>> begin
>> declare under_lft integer;
>> declare under_rgt integer;
>> declare parent_level smallint;
>> declare sib_lft integer;
>> declare sib_rgt integer;
>> declare my_lft integer;
>> declare my_rgt integer;
>>
>> set schema nullid;
>>
>> select leftx, rightx, levelx into under_lft,
>> under_rgt, parent_level
>> from locations2
>> where loc_id = under;
>> and leftx between under_lft and under_rgt
>> and namex<new_name
>> order by namex desc
>> fetch first 1 row only;
>>
>> if(sib_rgt is null) then begin
>> set my_lft = under_lft+1;
>> set my_rgt = under_lft+2;
>> end;
>> else begin
>> set my_lft = sib_rgt+1;
>> set my_rgt = sib_rgt+2;
>> end;
>> end if;
>>
>> update locations2
>> set leftx = case
>> when leftx >= my_rgt-1 then leftx+2
>> else leftx
>> end,
>> rightx = case
>> when rightx >= my_rgt-1 then rightx+2
>> else rightx
>> end;
>>
>> insert into locations2 values(new_id,new_name,my_lft,my_rgt,ent,
>> null, parent_level+1);
>>
>> end

>
> You could use an dynmaoci compound statement (BEGIN ATOMIC ... END) with
> a FOR and a CALL in DB2 for LUW V8.2.
> In DB2 V8.1.4 and higher you could also use a correlated TABLE function
> if you want inlining.
> Heck you could even make that a correlated table function feeding the
> FOR loop as the outer of the join. But that would be mean since you have
> to rely on DB2's optimizer not kicking out the nested ORDER BY.
>
> Cheres
> Serge

I need a little better pointer to "correlated TABLE function" (I'm
currently running 8.1.5). I couldn't find a useful reference at the
Information center using these keywords an I am sufficiently ignorant of
the subject that no further keywords occurred to me. Or a sample
skeleton example of the statement you are thing of would do. I can (I
think) fill in the blanks.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:00 AM
Serge Rielau
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

Bob Stearns wrote:
> I need a little better pointer to "correlated TABLE function" (I'm
> currently running 8.1.5). I couldn't find a useful reference at the
> Information center using these keywords an I am sufficiently ignorant of
> the subject that no further keywords occurred to me. Or a sample
> skeleton example of the statement you are thing of would do. I can (I
> think) fill in the blanks.

Here you go. Check e.g. listing 4 and 5:
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerwork...dm-0411rielau/
FP5 will do the job.

Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:00 AM
Bob Stearns
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

Serge Rielau wrote:
> Bob Stearns wrote:
>
>> I need a little better pointer to "correlated TABLE function" (I'm
>> currently running 8.1.5). I couldn't find a useful reference at the
>> Information center using these keywords an I am sufficiently ignorant
>> of the subject that no further keywords occurred to me. Or a sample
>> skeleton example of the statement you are thing of would do. I can (I
>> think) fill in the blanks.

>
> Here you go. Check e.g. listing 4 and 5:
> http://www-128.ibm.com/developerwork...dm-0411rielau/
>
> FP5 will do the job.
>
> Cheers
> Serge

Thank you. I have my homework for the {day, week, month, year}. That is
some powerful sql code. Out of curiosity, how long did you work on these
codes to get the elegant results you did? In other words, is there any
hope for a beginner to learn to do this level of work in 5 years?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:00 AM
Serge Rielau
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

Bob Stearns wrote:
> Serge Rielau wrote:
>
>> Bob Stearns wrote:
>>
>>> I need a little better pointer to "correlated TABLE function" (I'm
>>> currently running 8.1.5). I couldn't find a useful reference at the
>>> Information center using these keywords an I am sufficiently ignorant
>>> of the subject that no further keywords occurred to me. Or a sample
>>> skeleton example of the statement you are thing of would do. I can (I
>>> think) fill in the blanks.

>>
>>
>> Here you go. Check e.g. listing 4 and 5:
>> http://www-128.ibm.com/developerwork...dm-0411rielau/
>>
>> FP5 will do the job.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Serge

>
> Thank you. I have my homework for the {day, week, month, year}. That is
> some powerful sql code. Out of curiosity, how long did you work on these
> codes to get the elegant results you did? In other words, is there any
> hope for a beginner to learn to do this level of work in 5 years?

Sure it can be doen in 5 years, but keep in mind that I did "nothing
but". The majority of my job has been to undertand SQL, implement it
into DB2 and devise new language. I'd guess it took 3-4 years to become
proficient. The rest is begging for resources. There are always more
ideas than there are developers to execute ;-)
By comparison I'm clueless about administrating DB2 or Java.

Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:01 AM
Bob Stearns
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

Serge Rielau wrote:

> Bob Stearns wrote:
>
>> I need a little better pointer to "correlated TABLE function" (I'm
>> currently running 8.1.5). I couldn't find a useful reference at the
>> Information center using these keywords an I am sufficiently ignorant
>> of the subject that no further keywords occurred to me. Or a sample
>> skeleton example of the statement you are thing of would do. I can (I
>> think) fill in the blanks.

>
> Here you go. Check e.g. listing 4 and 5:
> http://www-128.ibm.com/developerwork...dm-0411rielau/
>
> FP5 will do the job.
>
> Cheers
> Serge

If I've understood the example (only possible, not probable, given that
I've only studied it and the relevant parts of the SQL Reference for 4
hours), I would have to change the function add_location2 to a table
function in order to use it in a construct similar to your listing 4. Is
that correct?

Another question: your sql statement apparently depends on the select
for itemlist being done "before" the new_ol_local function being called.
Is forced by the order of the phrases or is the optimizer smart enough
to see the dependency?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:01 AM
Serge Rielau
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

Bob Stearns wrote:
> Another question: your sql statement apparently depends on the select
> for itemlist being done "before" the new_ol_local function being called.
> Is forced by the order of the phrases or is the optimizer smart enough
> to see the dependency?

A table function which MODFIES SQL DATA must be correlated to all the
join parters. This forces it to be the last (inner most) to start executing.
IFF there is a read/wrote conflict the optimizer will detect it and
ensure that the outer of the join have complete before the table
function is allowed to start.
To get good performance any sort of conflicts should be avoided.

Cheers
Serge

--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:01 AM
--CELKO--
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

>> I want to call a procedure on each of the returned rows, in the order returned. <<

SQL is a set-oriented language!!! Let's get back to the basics of an
RDBMS. Rows are not records; fields are not columns; tables are not
files; there is no sequential access or ordering in an RDBMS, so
"first", "next" and "last" are totally meaningless.

We need more info ..

Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 05:01 AM
Bob Stearns
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Probably dumb question

--CELKO-- wrote:
>>>I want to call a procedure on each of the returned rows, in the order returned. <<

>
>
> SQL is a set-oriented language!!! Let's get back to the basics of an
> RDBMS. Rows are not records; fields are not columns; tables are not
> files; there is no sequential access or ordering in an RDBMS, so
> "first", "next" and "last" are totally meaningless.
>
> We need more info ..
>

Look back at my message of 10/05/2005, 11:41PM, which started this
thread. It gives the complete sql, function, and reasoning of why I
think I have to process the given rows in a given order.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
UnixAdminTalk.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568