January 27, 2013 at 11:25 pm
Hi all,
this is the first time am working on stored procedures, I need to make changes to the existing SP and to use new altered SP in my reports.
Can anybody explain the follwing SP, then I may able to make changes to that and use.
How can I go with this SP's while creating or modifying.
please help me
Create PROCEDURE [dbo].[getNotificateProduct]
@search as varchar(1000),
@store as varchar(50),
@lan as varchar(2)
AS
BEGIN
Declare @haku varchar(50)
declare @temp as table (ParameterCaption varchar(100), ParameterValue varchar(100))
IF substring(@search, LEN(@search),1)<>';'
SET @search = @search + ';'
while CHARINDEX(';',@search)>0
BEGIN
SET @haku=UPPER(LTRIM(cast(substring(@search,0, charindex(';',@search)) as varchar(50))))
INSERT INTO @temp
SELECT CASE
WHEN @lan ='FI' THEN
[Material_FI]
WHEN @lan ='EN' THEN
[Material_EN]
END AS ParameterCaption,
'[Material DIM].[Material FI].&['+ CAst([DimCubeProduct].[ProductKey] as varchar(50))+ ']' AS ParameterValue
FROM [DimCubeProduct] INNER JOIN
FactStoreQualityNotification ON [DimCubeProduct].[ProductKey] = FactStoreQualityNotification.[ProductKey] AND
Charindex(Cast(FactStoreQualityNotification.StoreKey as varchar(5)),@store)>0
WHERE (@haku = '') OR
(
(@lan='FI' AND CHARINDEX(@haku, UPPER([Material_FI])) > 0)
OR
(@lan='EN' AND CHARINDEX(@haku, UPPER([Material_EN])) > 0)
)
ORDER BY [ProductID]
SET @search = substring(@search, charindex(';',@search)+1, LEN(@search) - 0)
end
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM @temp
END
GO
Thanks,
Niha
January 27, 2013 at 11:46 pm
It would appear that a table variable is being populated based on a While Loop. The While Loop is based on the comma separated values that come in the @Search variable. The @Haku variable contains the "element" of the @Search string that is currently being worked on.
Personally, I'd split the @Search string using a decent non-looping splitter and do the whole stored rocedure as a single, set-based query (single query does not always constitute set-based).
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 28, 2013 at 12:32 am
niha.736 (1/27/2013)
How can I go with this SP's while creating or modifying.
if exists (select 1 from sysobjects where name = 'getNotificateProduct')
DROP PROCEDURE [dbo].[getNotificateProduct]
GO
Create PROCEDURE [dbo].[getNotificateProduct]
(
)
begin
....
....
end
IS this what your are asking ?
-------Bhuvnesh----------
I work only to learn Sql Server...though my company pays me for getting their stuff done;-)
January 28, 2013 at 10:18 am
Bhuvnesh (1/28/2013)
niha.736 (1/27/2013)
How can I go with this SP's while creating or modifying.
if exists (select 1 from sysobjects where name = 'getNotificateProduct')
DROP PROCEDURE [dbo].[getNotificateProduct]
GO
Create PROCEDURE [dbo].[getNotificateProduct]
(
)
begin
....
....
end
IS this what your are asking ?
ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[getNotificateProduct]
...
will replace the text of the existing procedure with the next text you specify.
DROP will also drop all permissions and other things related to the proc (extended properties, etc.). That may not be a good idea in your environment.
SQL DBA,SQL Server MVP(07, 08, 09) A socialist is someone who will give you the shirt off *someone else's* back.
January 30, 2013 at 5:37 pm
I added some comments to your proc, and fixed the layout, formatting, capitalization - all of which was horrifying to begin with. Pick a coding standard and then use it. I don't care what you pick, but use it consistently. I've shown you the "capitalize all keywords" coding style, which I personally hate, but I'm making the point that if it's consistent, even if you hate that style, it's more readable. Also, be careful about your tabs and what you put on each line. DON'T use things you don't need, like the BEGIN and END for the proc itself - completely unneeded and doing nothing but cluttering up the screen. Anyway, the comments explain how the procedure works. This is not a very complicated proc, but the horrible style was making it very hard to read.
CREATE PROCEDURE dbo.getNotificateProduct
@search VARCHAR(1000), -- multi-values ('value1;value2;value3;')
@store VARCHAR(50),
@lan VARCHAR(2) -- only 'FI' and 'EN' are valid here
AS
DECLARE @haku VARCHAR(50) --loop variable to hold single values from @search
-- table for building result set
DECLARE @temp TABLE (ParameterCaption VARCHAR(100), ParameterValue VARCHAR(100))
--if the incoming string doesn't end with a ; then add one
IF SUBSTRING(@search, LEN(@search),1)<>';'
SET @search = @search + ';'
--initialize the loop control variable - this is a "chopping" loop,
--where each iteration consumes a portion of the string and you continue
--until there's no more string to consume (when a semicolon can not be found)
--this is not written in the normal way - it would be better to update a position
--variable, than to continuously update the value of a potentially really long string
WHILE CHARINDEX(';',@search)>0 BEGIN
--grab everything from the beginning of the string to the first semicolon,
--removing leading spaces and converting to upper-case. This is the search string.
SET @haku = UPPER(LTRIM(CAST(SUBSTRING(@search,0, CHARINDEX(';',@search)) AS VARCHAR(50))))
--load rows into the temp table for the current search string,
--using the proper column for the language - two separate queries would actually be faster here
INSERT INTO @temp
SELECT CASE
WHEN @lan ='FI' THEN Material_FI
WHEN @lan ='EN' THEN Material_EN
END AS ParameterCaption,
'[Material DIM].[Material FI].&['+ CAST([DimCubeProduct].[ProductKey] AS VARCHAR(50))+ ']' AS ParameterValue
FROM DimCubeProduct --this is your main table
INNER JOIN FactStoreQualityNotification --this is your join (right) table
ON DimCubeProduct.ProductKey = FactStoreQualityNotification.ProductKey -- a JOIN condition
AND CHARINDEX(CAST(FactStoreQualityNotification.StoreKey AS VARCHAR(5)),@store) > 0 -- another JOIN condition
WHERE (@haku = '') OR -- where clause in the form of "A OR (B OR C)" - do you need the parens?
((@lan='FI' AND CHARINDEX(@haku, UPPER(Material_FI)) > 0)
OR
(@lan='EN' AND CHARINDEX(@haku, UPPER(Material_EN)) > 0))
ORDER BY ProductID
--chop off the 'front' of the string before we re-iterate - this is the "update the loop control variable" step
SET @search = SUBSTRING(@search, CHARINDEX(';',@search)+1, LEN(@search) - 0)
END
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM @temp --wrong - you created the columns up at the top, you can't name them?! Don't use *
--Also, if you loaded the correct data into the temp table you would gain performance by eliminating Distinct keyword
For the inner portion of the loop, I would re-write that to have an "IF @lan='FI'" if-else block, and have a query for each language separately. For the 'FI' language, it would look like this...
INSERT INTO @temp
SELECT distinct Material_FI,
'[Material DIM].[Material FI].&['+ CAST([DimCubeProduct].[ProductKey] AS VARCHAR(50))+ ']'
FROM DimCubeProduct dcp --this is your main table
INNER JOIN FactStoreQualityNotification fsqn --this is your join (right) table
ON dcp.ProductKey = fsqn.ProductKey -- a JOIN condition
AND CHARINDEX(CAST(fsqn.StoreKey AS VARCHAR(5)),@store) > 0 -- another JOIN condition
WHERE (@haku = '')
OR (CHARINDEX(@haku, UPPER(Material_FI)) > 0)
ORDER BY ProductID
This is a query which will be much easier to optimize. Since the old "CASE" portion caused different columns to be retrieved, covering indexes and other issues could cause the optimizer to pick a bad plan. With both queries separated, the optimizer can pick different plans for each one, and that should improve the performance overall. The old query isn't always bad, but it's bad more often than the new style I'm proposing. I used table aliases to make the join conditions easier to read.
February 11, 2013 at 2:58 pm
You should probably thank me for that...
February 11, 2013 at 3:30 pm
DON'T use things you don't need, like the BEGIN and END for the proc itself - completely unneeded and doing nothing but cluttering up the screen.
Actually begin and end serve a VERY valid purpose within a proc. They very clearly define the beginning and the end. Yes it probably appears as a little overkill but it forces you to indent the code that is the body of the proc making it more clear in a large script what is what.
_______________________________________________________________
Need help? Help us help you.
Read the article at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/ for best practices on asking questions.
Need to split a string? Try Jeff Modens splitter http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Tally+Table/72993/.
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 1 – Converting Rows to Columns - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/T-SQL/63681/
Cross Tabs and Pivots, Part 2 - Dynamic Cross Tabs - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Crosstab/65048/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 1) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69953/
Understanding and Using APPLY (Part 2) - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/APPLY/69954/
February 11, 2013 at 4:05 pm
Sean Lange (2/11/2013)
DON'T use things you don't need, like the BEGIN and END for the proc itself - completely unneeded and doing nothing but cluttering up the screen.
Actually begin and end serve a VERY valid purpose within a proc. They very clearly define the beginning and the end. Yes it probably appears as a little overkill but it forces you to indent the code that is the body of the proc making it more clear in a large script what is what.
That's FALSE. Since you can have an unlimited number of BEGIN/END combinations in a proc, they clearly don't define the beginning and the end of the proc, even if you want them to (and you can't prevent someone from later adding code before the first BEGIN or after the last END, which is reason enough to NEVER consider "BEGIN" and "END" as "defining the beginning/end of a proc").
The block created by BEGIN/END adds restrictions on variable use, etc., outside that block, so you're just inviting errors with an unnecessary BEGIN/END.
Furthermore, indenting unconditional code in a proc makes no sense and wastes space. The required:
GO
CREATE PROCEDURE
within a script full of procs will inherently delineate the start and end of procs. Too many people over-indent as it is, making the code very hard to read.
SQL DBA,SQL Server MVP(07, 08, 09) A socialist is someone who will give you the shirt off *someone else's* back.
February 11, 2013 at 4:11 pm
Sean Lange (2/11/2013)
DON'T use things you don't need, like the BEGIN and END for the proc itself - completely unneeded and doing nothing but cluttering up the screen.
Actually begin and end serve a VERY valid purpose within a proc. They very clearly define the beginning and the end. Yes it probably appears as a little overkill but it forces you to indent the code that is the body of the proc making it more clear in a large script what is what.
BWAA-HAAA!!! That's precisely why I don't use it. I hate to be forced to do anything and I can't see burning the horizontal space by indenting virtually the whole proc by one tab.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 11, 2013 at 4:23 pm
Sean Lange (2/11/2013)
DON'T use things you don't need, like the BEGIN and END for the proc itself - completely unneeded and doing nothing but cluttering up the screen.
Actually begin and end serve a VERY valid purpose within a proc. They very clearly define the beginning and the end. Yes it probably appears as a little overkill but it forces you to indent the code that is the body of the proc making it more clear in a large script what is what.
I find no reason to indent the first level of a proc. All that does is eat screen space.
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply