#SQL

I would like to start a discussion regarding Caché Objects and Caché SQL.

It is my understanding that the creators of Caché Objects see Caché SQL as the reporting arm of Objects and as such SQL is essential to Caché Objects.

I once met a Caché Objects programmer who was writing code to $Order through the Globals because that person thought that Caché SQL was too slow and inefficient. I attempted to convince the person otherwise.

So, what say you? Is SQL essential to Caché Objects?

Or

I have a query string that I am creating programmatically, based on some user inputs. The user might search on 5 fields, or 8 fields, or no fields.

In my sql statment, some of these fields require parameters in the %Execute statement.

For example:

if user picks lastname, sql = "select * from person where lastname = ?"

if user also picks age, sql = "select * from person where lastname=? and age > ?"

I then have these lines of code to create my result set:

set statement = %SQL.Statement

statement.%Prepare

I am experimenting with Relationships, both Parent to Child and One to Many.

I have done some SQL look-ups and have searched through the documentation, however not in a lot detail, but wonder if there are more and better ways to access both sides of Relationships through SQL?

Thank you in advance for any help provided.

Is there a way I can call %Save() on a %Persistent object and at the same time prevent indices from being built?

I have written below method inbound adapter myAdapter Extends Ens.InboundAdapter [ ProcedureBlock ] returns -400

Kindly help me on the below points

1)Concatenate the Date column and Time column.

2)Get the current date only without time.

3)Find the current age using DOB column.

Since IRIS 2020.1, changed the way how embedded SQL compiled. Now it compiles upon the first execution of such queries.

Is there any way, I could switch that feature back to the previous behavior, or get some more control over it?

Hi!

Is there a method in a persistent class that can return the current number of records/persistent objects in it?

Hi,

The following sql statement is working through the SMP but couldn't make it work through the code.

The table is a linked table to oracle db.

Tried to change the date property in the linked table class from %Date to %String and also tried using %SQL.Statement and %Library.ResultSet

this work through SMP:

INSERT INTO PACKAGE.SOME_TABLE_NAME

(EFFECTIVE_START_DATE,MORE,DATA,HERE)

VALUES (to_date ('2018-04-01','yyyy-mm-dd'),123,456,789)

In the code i'm using '?' in the statement for the parameters.

Hello All

I'm running into an issue performing UPDATES that I'm not getting on INSERTS. It's probably obvious, but I'm just not seeing it and could use a little help.

I'm going over an HL7 message and depending upon varying criteria, the relevent variables will get items added to them like the following:

Set patientId = pRequest.GetValueAt("PID:3")
Set sqlColumns = sqlColumns_",patient_id"
Set sqlValues = sqlValues_",?"
Set par($i(p)) = patientId

After compiling the variables, I check to see if accession number is found in the table.

I have an SQL text index defined like this

Index TextIndex On (Text) As %iFind.Index.Basic(IGNOREPUNCTUATION = 1, INDEXOPTION = 0, LANGUAGE = "en", LOWER = 1);

If I run a query like this:

SELECT
Text
FROM Post
WHERE %ID %FIND search_index("TextIndex",'ABC')

I get 20 results with posts containing the term ABC.

But each post can contain the term ABC several times.

This might be more of a math problem than a Caché question.
I have a SQL query that joins two tables. I want to assign a unique ID to each row of the product table.

Hi All,

I am having an SQL query (mentioned below). When I am running this query it is taking 90 min to retrieve all records (approx 1 million records).

Fetching data from 5 tables using inner join in cache. Relative cost displaying 10 million

I wan to confirm How this query can be optimized

Hi! I have a complex SQL select query which I execute via %ResultSet. It also includes a UNION. The select statement within the union should only be done when an external parameter is set, and I'm not sure of way of doing that within SQL, other than something like

SELECT FOO FROM BAR

WHERE (some conditions)

UNION

SELECT FOO2 FROM BAR2

WHERE :doUnion = 1 AND (some conditions)

...this works, but I don't think it's particularly optimal as I believe it will still execute the second SELECT regardless of :doUnion. It's also sort of hard to read...