SQL select only rows with max value on a column

I have this table for documents (simplified version here):

+------+-------+--------------------------------------+
| id   | rev   | content                              |
+------+-------+--------------------------------------+
| 1    | 1     | ...                                  |
| 2    | 1     | ...                                  |
| 1    | 2     | ...                                  |
| 1    | 3     | ...                                  |
+------+-------+--------------------------------------+

How do I select one row per id and only the greatest rev?
With the above data, the result should contain two rows: [1, 3, ...] and [2, 1, ..] . I'm using MySQL .

Currently I use checks in the while loop to detect and over-write old revs from the resultset. But is this the only method to achieve the result? Isn't there a SQL solution?

Update
As the answers suggest, there is a SQL solution, and here a sqlfiddle demo.

Update 2
I noticed after adding the above sqlfiddle, the rate at which the question is upvoted has surpassed the upvote rate of the answers. That has not been the intention! The fiddle is based on the answers, especially the accepted answer.


At first glance...

All you need is a GROUP BY clause with the MAX aggregate function:

SELECT id, MAX(rev)
FROM YourTable
GROUP BY id

It's never that simple, is it?

I just noticed you need the content column as well.

This is a very common question in SQL: find the whole data for the row with some max value in a column per some group identifier. I heard that a lot during my career. Actually, it was one the questions I answered in my current job's technical interview.

It is, actually, so common that StackOverflow community has created a single tag just to deal with questions like that: greatest-n-per-group.

Basically, you have two approaches to solve that problem:

Joining with simple group-identifier, max-value-in-group Sub-query

In this approach, you first find the group-identifier, max-value-in-group (already solved above) in a sub-query. Then you join your table to the sub-query with equality on both group-identifier and max-value-in-group :

SELECT a.id, a.rev, a.contents
FROM YourTable a
INNER JOIN (
    SELECT id, MAX(rev) rev
    FROM YourTable
    GROUP BY id
) b ON a.id = b.id AND a.rev = b.rev

Left Joining with self, tweaking join conditions and filters

In this approach, you left join the table with itself. Equality, of course, goes in the group-identifier . Then, 2 smart moves:

  • The second join condition is having left side value less than right value
  • When you do step 1, the row(s) that actually have the max value will have NULL in the right side (it's a LEFT JOIN , remember?). Then, we filter the joined result, showing only the rows where the right side is NULL .
  • So you end up with:

    SELECT a.*
    FROM YourTable a
    LEFT OUTER JOIN YourTable b
        ON a.id = b.id AND a.rev < b.rev
    WHERE b.id IS NULL;
    

    Conclusion

    Both approaches bring the exact same result.

    If you have two rows with max-value-in-group for group-identifier , both rows will be in the result in both approaches.

    Both approaches are SQL ANSI compatible, thus, will work with your favorite RDBMS, regardless of its "flavor".

    Both approaches are also performance friendly, however your mileage may vary (RDBMS, DB Structure, Indexes, etc.). So when you pick one approach over the other, benchmark. And make sure you pick the one which make most of sense to you.


    My preference is to use as little code as possible...

    You can do it using IN try this:

    SELECT * 
    FROM t1 WHERE (id,rev) IN 
    ( SELECT id, MAX(rev)
      FROM t1
      GROUP BY id
    )
    

    to my mind it is less complicated... easier to read and maintain.


    Yet another solution is to use a correlated subquery:

    select yt.id, yt.rev, yt.contents
        from YourTable yt
        where rev = 
            (select max(rev) from YourTable st where yt.id=st.id)
    

    Having an index on (id,rev) renders the subquery almost as a simple lookup...

    Following are comparisons to the solutions in @AdrianCarneiro's answer (subquery, leftjoin), based on MySQL measurements with InnoDB table of ~1million records, group size being: 1-3.

    While for full table scans subquery/leftjoin/correlated timings relate to each other as 6/8/9, when it comes to direct lookups or batch ( id in (1,2,3) ), subquery is much slower then the others (Due to rerunning the subquery). However I couldnt differentiate between leftjoin and correlated solutions in speed.

    One final note, as leftjoin creates n*(n+1)/2 joins in groups, its performance can be heavily affected by the size of groups...

    链接地址: http://www.djcxy.com/p/16888.html

    上一篇: 如何删除日期时间值(SQL Server)的时间部分?

    下一篇: SQL只选择列上具有最大值的行