What is the best way to include an input param in the `WHERE` clause but exclude it if it is null?

There are a number of ways I believe, but I can&#39;t seem to remember then.

Also could I use the `COALESCE()`? But I think this is only for SELECTing values?

Edit
---

To clarify, let&#39;s say a variable called `@code =&quot;1&quot;` then my where would be `Where type=&#39;B&#39; AND code = @code` but if `@code is null` then I only want `Where type=&#39;B&#39;` - notice the missing `code = @code`.


Checking an input param if not Null and using it in where in SQL Server

Can the following query be modified to return all records if the `?` is null?

    SELECT NAME, SURNAME FROM MY_TABLE WHERE NAME = ?;



sql query if parameter is null select all

There is a column in options that hold an integer. I want to select the row only if that value % 2 = 1.

I know this can be done in 2 queries but is it possible to do it in 1?

Selecting rows where remainder (modulo) is 1 after division by 2?

I am using oracle database. i want to execute one query to check the data between two dates.


    NAME               START_DATE    
    -------------    ------------- 
    Small Widget       15-JAN-10 04.25.32.000000 PM      
    Product 1          17-JAN-10 04.31.32.000000 PM  

  

    select * from &lt;TABLENAME&gt; where start_date  
    BETWEEN &#39;15-JAN-10&#39; AND &#39;17-JAN-10&#39;

But I dont get any results from above query. I think I have to use &quot;like&quot; and &quot;%&quot;. But I dont know where to use them. Please throw some lights on this. 

thanks in advance.

Oracle date &quot;Between&quot; Query

Here is my code:
 
     SELECT table1.f_id  FROM table1 WHERE table1.f_com_id = &#39;430&#39; AND      
     table1.f_status = &#39;Submitted&#39; 
     INNER JOIN table2
     ON table2.f_id = table1.f_id
     where table2.f_type = &#39;InProcess&#39;

I need information from `table1` as all the id associated with `f_com_id` as 430 and status as submitted and the type should be only in process which is stored in other table(`table2`)

`f_id` is `p_key` and `f_key` in both the tables.  
But this giving me errors, I think I am placing the `WHERE` clause wrong, how to fix it.?

&gt;Error msg: #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near &#39;INNER JOIN table2
ON table2.f_id = &#39; at line 2 

MySql Inner Join with WHERE clause

What is the difference between `HAVING` and `WHERE` in an `SQL SELECT` statement?

EDIT: I have marked Steven&#39;s answer as the correct one as it contained the key bit of information on the link:

&gt; When `GROUP BY` is not used, `HAVING` behaves like a `WHERE` clause

The situation I had seen the `WHERE` in did not have `GROUP BY` and is where my confusion started. Of course, until you know this you can&#39;t specify it in the question.

What is the difference between HAVING and WHERE in SQL?

Why do you need to place columns you create yourself (for example `select 1 as &quot;number&quot;`) after `HAVING` and not `WHERE` in MySQL?

And are there any downsides instead of doing `WHERE 1` (writing the whole definition instead of a column name)?

WHERE vs HAVING

I have the following two tables:

    1. Lecturers (LectID, Fname, Lname, degree).
    2. Lecturers_Specialization (LectID, Expertise).

I want to find the lecturer with the most Specialization.
When I try this, it is not working:

    SELECT
      L.LectID, 
      Fname, 
      Lname 
    FROM Lecturers L, 
         Lecturers_Specialization S
    WHERE L.LectID = S.LectID
    AND COUNT(S.Expertise) &gt;= ALL (SELECT
      COUNT(Expertise)
    FROM Lecturers_Specialization
    GROUP BY LectID);

But when I try this, it works:

    SELECT
      L.LectID,
      Fname,
      Lname 
    FROM Lecturers L,
         Lecturers_Specialization S
    WHERE L.LectID = S.LectID
    GROUP BY L.LectID,
             Fname,
             Lname 
    HAVING COUNT(S.Expertise) &gt;= ALL (SELECT
      COUNT(Expertise)
    FROM Lecturers_Specialization
    GROUP BY LectID); 

What is the reason? Thanks.

SQL - HAVING vs. WHERE

I need to retrieve all default settings from the settings table but also grab the character setting if exists for x character. 

But this query is only retrieving those settings where character is = 1, not the default settings if the user havent setted anyone.

    SELECT `settings`.*, `character_settings`.`value`
    FROM (`settings`)
    LEFT JOIN `character_settings` 
    ON `character_settings`.`setting_id` = `settings`.`id`
    WHERE `character_settings`.`character_id` = &#39;1&#39;  

So i should need something like this:

    array(
        &#39;0&#39; =&gt; array(&#39;somekey&#39; =&gt; &#39;keyname&#39;, &#39;value&#39; =&gt; &#39;thevalue&#39;),
        &#39;1&#39; =&gt; array(&#39;somekey2&#39; =&gt; &#39;keyname2&#39;),
        &#39;2&#39; =&gt; array(&#39;somekey3&#39; =&gt; &#39;keyname3&#39;)
    )
Where key 1 and 2 are the default values when key 0 contains the default value with the character value.

Left Join With Where Clause

Is there a way to detect if a value is a number in a MySQL query? Such as

    SELECT * 
    FROM myTable 
    WHERE isANumber(col1) = true

Detect if value is number in MySQL

After reading it, this is *not* a duplicate of [Explicit vs Implicit SQL Joins][1].
The answer may be related (or even the same) but the **question** is different.

---

What is the difference and what should go in each?

If I understand the theory correctly, the query optimizer should be able to use both interchangeably.


  [1]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/44917/explicit-vs-implicit-sql-joins

SQL JOIN - WHERE clause vs. ON clause

I have two tables I want to join.

I want all of the categories in the categories table and also all of the categories subscribed to by a user in the category_subscriptions table.

essentially this is my query so far:

    SELECT *
    FROM categories
    LEFT JOIN user_category_subscriptions 
         ON user_category_subscriptions.category_id = categories.category_id
    
This works fine however I want to add a where clause on the end of the query which then essentially makes it an inner/equi join.

       SELECT *
        FROM categories
        LEFT JOIN user_category_subscriptions 
             ON user_category_subscriptions.category_id = categories.category_id 
       WHERE user_category_subscriptions.user_id = 1

How do I get all the categories as well as all the categories subscribed to by a particular user using only one query?

category_id being a key in both categories table and user_category_subscriptions. user_id residing in the  user_category_subscriptions table.

thanks


MySQL join with where clause

Let&#39;s say I have a table called *PEOPLE* having three columns, *ID*, *LastName*, and *FirstName*. None of these columns are indexed.
*LastName* is more unique, and *FirstName* is less unique.

If I do two searches:

    select * from PEOPLE where FirstName=&quot;F&quot; and LastName=&quot;L&quot;
    select * from PEOPLE where LastName=&quot;L&quot; and FirstName=&quot;F&quot;

My belief is the second one is faster because the more unique criterion (`LastName`) comes first in the `where` clause, and records will get eliminated more efficiently. I don&#39;t think the optimizer is smart enough to optimize the first SQL query.

Is my understanding correct?





Does the order of where clauses matter in SQL?

I&#39;m developing a web API with Laravel 5.0 but I&#39;m not sure about a specific query I&#39;m trying to build.

My classes are as follows:

    
    class Event extends Model {
    
    	protected $table = &#39;events&#39;;
    	public $timestamps = false;
    
    	public function participants()
        {
            return $this-&gt;hasMany(&#39;App\Participant&#39;, &#39;IDEvent&#39;, &#39;ID&#39;);
        }
        
    	public function owner()
    	{
    		return $this-&gt;hasOne(&#39;App\User&#39;, &#39;ID&#39;, &#39;IDOwner&#39;);
    	}
    }

and


    class Participant extends Model {
    
    	protected $table = &#39;participants&#39;;
    	public $timestamps = false;
    
    	public function user()
        {
            return $this-&gt;belongTo(&#39;App\User&#39;, &#39;IDUser&#39;, &#39;ID&#39;);
        }
        
        public function event()
        {
        	return $this-&gt;belongTo(&#39;App\Event&#39;, &#39;IDEvent&#39;, &#39;ID&#39;);
        }
    }


Now, I want to get all the events with a specific participant.
I tried with:

    Event::with(&#39;participants&#39;)-&gt;where(&#39;IDUser&#39;, 1)-&gt;get();

but the `where` condition is applied on the `Event` and not on its `Participants`. The following gives me an exception:

    Participant::where(&#39;IDUser&#39;, 1)-&gt;event()-&gt;get();

I know that I can write this:

    $list = Participant::where(&#39;IDUser&#39;, 1)-&gt;get();
    for($item in $list) {
       $event = $item-&gt;event;
       // ... other code ...
    }

but it doesn&#39;t seem very efficient to send so many queries to the server.

What is the best way to perform a `where` through a model relationship using Laravel 5 and Eloquent?

Laravel where on relationship object

I&#39;m hoping to sort the items returned in the following query by **the order they&#39;re entered into the IN() function**.

INPUT:

    SELECT id, name FROM mytable WHERE name IN (&#39;B&#39;, &#39;A&#39;, &#39;D&#39;, &#39;E&#39;, &#39;C&#39;);

OUTPUT:

    |   id   |   name  |
    ^--------^---------^
    |   5    |   B     |
    |   6    |   B     |
    |   1    |   D     |
    |   15   |   E     |
    |   17   |   E     |
    |   9    |   C     |
    |   18   |   C     |

Any ideas? 

MySQL - ORDER BY values within IN()

Is it possible to negate a where clause?

e.g.

    DELETE * FROM table WHERE id != 2;

SQL WHERE condition is not equal to?

How do I construct a SQL query (MS SQL Server) where the &quot;where&quot; clause is case-insensitive?

    SELECT * FROM myTable WHERE myField = &#39;sOmeVal&#39;

I want the results to come back ignoring the case



SQL server ignore case in a where expression

Is there a method in Linq where you can use to build SQL strings like &quot;...where (a=1) OR (a=2)&quot;?

&quot;Or&quot; equivalent in Linq Where() lambda expression

Database: Sybase Advantage 11

On my quest to normalize data, I am trying to delete the results I get from this `SELECT` statement:

    SELECT tableA.entitynum
    FROM tableA q
    INNER JOIN tableB u on (u.qlabel = q.entityrole AND u.fieldnum = q.fieldnum) 
    WHERE (LENGTH(q.memotext) NOT IN (8,9,10) 
    OR q.memotext NOT LIKE &#39;%/%/%&#39;)
    AND (u.FldFormat = &#39;Date&#39;)
    ;

This is the `DELETE` statement I have come up with:

    DELETE FROM tableA
    WHERE (SELECT q.entitynum
    FROM tableA q
    INNER JOIN tableB u on (u.qlabel = q.entityrole AND u.fieldnum = q.fieldnum) 
    WHERE (LENGTH(q.memotext) NOT IN (8,9,10) 
    OR q.memotext NOT LIKE &#39;%/%/%&#39;)
    AND (u.FldFormat = &#39;Date&#39;))
    ;

I continuously get this error when I try to run this statement:

    ERROR IN SCRIPT: poQuery: Error 7200:  AQE Error:  State = S0000;   NativeError = 2124;
    [iAnywhere Solutions][Advantage SQL Engine]Invalid operand for operator: = Boolean value
    cannot be operated with non-Boolean value.

I have also tried this statement:

    DELETE FROM tableA 
    INNER JOIN tableB u on (u.qlabel = tableA.entityrole AND u.fieldnum = tableA.fieldnum) 
    WHERE (LENGTH(q.memotext) NOT IN (8,9,10) 
    OR tableA.memotext NOT LIKE &#39;%/%/%&#39;)
    AND (u.FldFormat = &#39;Date&#39;)
    ;

Which results in:

    ERROR IN SCRIPT: poQuery: Error 7200:  AQE Error:  State = 42000;   NativeError = 2117;
    [iAnywhere Solutions][Advantage SQL Engine] Unexpected token: INNER -- Expecting semicolon.
    -- Location of error in the SQL statement is: 23 (line: 2 column: 1)

Could someone aid me in properly constructing a DELETE query that will result in the proper data being removed? 


How to write a SQL DELETE statement with a SELECT statement in the WHERE clause?

Is there any way to write case-insensitive queries in PostgreSQL, E.g. I want that following 3 queries return same result.

    SELECT id FROM groups where name=&#39;administrator&#39;

    SELECT id FROM groups where name=&#39;ADMINISTRATOR&#39;

    SELECT id FROM groups where name=&#39;Administrator&#39;


How to make &quot;case-insensitive&quot; query in Postgresql?

I have 2 tables, I want to filter the 1 table **before** the 2 tables are joined together.

Customer Table:


       ╔══════════╦═══════╗
       ║ Customer ║ State ║
       ╠══════════╬═══════╣
       ║ A        ║ S     ║
       ║ B        ║ V     ║
       ║ C        ║ L     ║
       ╚══════════╩═══════╝


Entry Table:

       ╔══════════╦═══════╦══════════╗
       ║ Customer ║ Entry ║ Category ║
       ╠══════════╬═══════╬══════════╣
       ║ A        ║  5575 ║ D        ║
       ║ A        ║  6532 ║ C        ║
       ║ A        ║  3215 ║ D        ║
       ║ A        ║  5645 ║ M        ║
       ║ B        ║  3331 ║ A        ║
       ║ B        ║  4445 ║ D        ║
       ╚══════════╩═══════╩══════════╝

I want to Left Join so I get all records from the Customer table regardless of whether there are related records in the Entry table. However I want to filter on category D in the entry table **before the join**.

Desired Results:

       ╔══════════╦═══════╦═══════╗
       ║ Customer ║ State ║ Entry ║
       ╠══════════╬═══════╬═══════╣
       ║ A        ║ S     ║  5575 ║
       ║ A        ║ S     ║  3215 ║
       ║ B        ║ V     ║  4445 ║
       ║ C        ║ L     ║  NULL ║
       ╚══════════╩═══════╩═══════╝

If I was to do the following query:

       SELECT Customer.Customer, Customer.State, Entry.Entry
       FROM Customer
       LEFT JOIN Entry
       ON Customer.Customer=Entry.Customer
       WHERE Entry.Category=&#39;D&#39;

This would filter out the last record.

So I want all rows from the left table and join it to the entry table filtered on category D.

Thanks to any help in advance!!

Filter Table Before Applying Left Join

Ok, I think I might be overlooking something obvious/simple here... but I need to write a query that returns only records that match multiple criteria on the same column...

My table is a very simple linking setup for applying flags to a user ...

    ID   contactid  flag        flag_type 
    -----------------------------------
    118  99         Volunteer   1 
    119  99         Uploaded    2 
    120  100        Via Import  3 
    121  100        Volunteer   1  
    122  100        Uploaded    2

etc... in this case you&#39;ll see both contact 99 and 100 are flagged as both &quot;Volunteer&quot; and &quot;Uploaded&quot;...

What I need to be able to do is return those contactid&#39;s ONLY that match multiple criteria entered via a search form...the contactid&#39;s have to match ALL chosen flags... in my head the SQL should look something like:

    SELECT contactid 
     WHERE flag = &#39;Volunteer&#39; 
       AND flag = &#39;Uploaded&#39;...

but... that returns nothing... What am I doing wrong here?

SELECTING with multiple WHERE conditions on same column

In the following code, the last phrase I can put an `in` in front. Will it change anything? 

Another question: If I decide to put `in` in front of the last phrase, do I need to indent it? 

I tried without indenting and hugs complains 

&gt; Last generator in do {...} must be an expression

    import Data.Char
    groupsOf _ [] = []
    groupsOf n xs = 
        take n xs : groupsOf n ( tail xs )
 
    problem_8 x = maximum . map product . groupsOf 5 $ x
    main = do t &lt;- readFile &quot;p8.log&quot; 
              let digits = map digitToInt $concat $ lines t
              print $ problem_8 digits

---

### Edit

Ok, so people don&#39;t seem to understand what I&#39;m saying. Let me rephrase:
are the following two the same, given the context above?

1.

    let digits = map digitToInt $concat $ lines t
    print $ problem_8 digits

2.

    let digits = map digitToInt $concat $ lines t
    in print $ problem_8 digits

Another question concerning the scope of bindings declared in `let`: I read [here][1] that:

&gt; `where` Clauses.

Sometimes it is convenient to scope bindings over several guarded equations, which requires a where clause: 

    f x y  |  y&gt;z           =  ...
           |  y==z          =  ...
           |  y&lt;z           =  ...
         where z = x*x

Note that this cannot be done with a let expression, which only scopes over the expression **which it encloses**.

My question: so, the variable digits shouldn&#39;t be visible to the last print phrase. Do I miss something here?


  [1]: http://www.haskell.org/tutorial/patterns.html


In Haskell, when do we use in with let?

As the title suggest I am looking for a way to do a where clause in combination with an include.

Here is my situations:
I am responsible for the support of a large application full of code smells.
Changing too much code causes bugs everywhere so I am looking for the safest solution.

Let&#39;s say I have an object Bus and an object People(Bus has a navigation prop Collection of People).
In my Query I need to select all the Busses with only the Passengers that are awake. This is a simplistic dummy example

In the current code:

    var busses = Context.Busses.Where(b=&gt;b.IsDriving == true);
    foreach(var bus in busses)
    {
       var passengers = Context.People.Where(p=&gt;p.BusId == bus.Id &amp;&amp; p.Awake == true);
       foreach(var person in passengers)
       {
           bus.Passengers.Add(person);
       }
    }

After this code the Context is disposed and in the calling method the resulting Bus entities are Mapped to a DTO class (100% copy of Entity).

This code causes multiple calls to DB which is a No-Go, so I found this solution [ON MSDN Blogs][1]

This worked great when debugging the result but when the entities are mapped to the DTO (Using AutoMapper) I get an exception that the Context/Connection has been closed and that the object can&#39;t be loaded. (Context is always closed can’t change this :( )

So I need to make sure that the Selected Passengers are already loaded (IsLoaded on navigation property is also False). If I inspect the Passengers collection The Count also throws the Exception but there is also a collection on the Collection of Passegers called “wrapped related entities” which contain my filtered objects.

Is there a way to load these wrapped related entities into the whole collection?
(I can&#39;t change the automapper mapping config because this is used in the whole application).

Is there another way to Get the Active Passengers?

Any hint is welcome...


Edit
-----------------

Answer of Gert Arnold doesn&#39;t work because the data isn&#39;t loaded eagerly.
But when I simplify it and delete the where it is loaded. This is realy strange since the execute sql returns all the passengers in both cases. So there must be a problem when putting the results back into the entity.

    Context.Configuration.LazyLoadingEnabled = false;
    var buses = Context.Busses.Where(b =&gt; b.IsDriving)
            .Select(b =&gt; new 
                         { 
                             b,
                             Passengers = b.Passengers
                         })
            .ToList()
            .Select(x =&gt; x.b)
            .ToList();

Edit2
-----------------

After a lot of struggle the answer of Gert Arnold work!
As Gert Arnold suggested you need to disable Lazy Loading and Keep it OFF.
This will ask for some extra changes to the appliaction since the prev developer loved Lazy Loading -_-

  [1]: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/alexj/archive/2009/10/13/tip-37-how-to-do-a-conditional-include.aspx

EF: Include with where clause

I am creating a SQL query in which I need a conditional `where` clause.  

It should be something like this:


    SELECT 
		DateAppr,
		TimeAppr,
		TAT,
		LaserLTR,
		Permit,
		LtrPrinter,
		JobName,
		JobNumber,
		JobDesc,
		ActQty,
		(ActQty-LtrPrinted) AS L,
		(ActQty-QtyInserted) AS M,
		((ActQty-LtrPrinted)-(ActQty-QtyInserted)) AS N
	FROM 
		[test].[dbo].[MM]
	WHERE 
		DateDropped = 0
                --This is where i need the conditional clause 
		AND CASE
				WHEN @JobsOnHold = 1 THEN DateAppr &gt;=  0
				ELSE  DateAppr != 0
			END

The above query is not working. Is this not the correct syntax or is there another way to do this that I don&#39;t know? 

I don&#39;t want to use dynamic SQL, so is there any other way or do I have to use a workaround like using `if else` and using the same query with different `where` clauses?

Conditional WHERE clause in SQL Server

`np.where` has the semantics of a vectorized if/else (similar to Apache Spark&#39;s `when`/`otherwise` DataFrame method). I know that I can use `np.where` on `pandas.Series`, but `pandas` often defines its own API to use instead of raw `numpy` functions, which is usually more convenient with `pd.Series`/`pd.DataFrame`.

Sure enough, I found `pandas.DataFrame.where`. However, at first glance, it has completely different semantics. I could not find a way to rewrite the most basic example of `np.where` using pandas `where`:

    # df is pd.DataFrame
    # how to write this using df.where?
    df[&#39;C&#39;] = np.where((df[&#39;A&#39;]&lt;0) | (df[&#39;B&#39;]&gt;0), df[&#39;A&#39;]+df[&#39;B&#39;], df[&#39;A&#39;]/df[&#39;B&#39;])

Am I missing something obvious? Or is pandas&#39; `where` intended for a completely different use case, despite same name as `np.where`? 

pandas equivalent of np.where

What is the best way to assemble a dynamic WHERE clause to a LINQ statement?

I have several dozen checkboxes on a form and am passing them back as:  Dictionary&amp;lt;string, List&amp;lt;string&amp;gt;&amp;gt; (Dictionary&amp;lt;fieldName,List&amp;lt;values&amp;gt;&amp;gt;) to my LINQ query.

    public IOrderedQueryable&lt;ProductDetail&gt; GetProductList(string productGroupName, string productTypeName, Dictionary&lt;string,List&lt;string&gt;&gt; filterDictionary)
    {
        var q = from c in db.ProductDetail
                where c.ProductGroupName == productGroupName &amp;&amp; c.ProductTypeName == productTypeName
                // insert dynamic filter here
                orderby c.ProductTypeName
                select c;
        return q;
    }

Dynamic WHERE clause in LINQ

Suppose I have two tables that are linked (one has a foreign key to the other):
    
    CREATE TABLE Document (
      Id INT PRIMARY KEY,
      Name VARCHAR 255
    )

    CREATE TABLE DocumentStats (
      Id INT PRIMARY KEY,
      DocumentId INT, -- this is a foreign key to table Document
      NbViews INT
    )

I know, this is not the smartest way of doing things, but this is the best example I could come up with.

Now, I want to get all documents that have more than 500 views. The two solutions that come to my mind are:

    SELECT *
    FROM Document, DocumentStats
    WHERE DocumentStats.Id = Document.Id
      AND DocumentStats.NbViews &gt; 500

or:

    SELECT *
    FROM Document
    INNER JOIN DocumentStats ON Document.Id = DocumentStats.Id
    WHERE DocumentStats.NbViews &gt; 500

Are both queries equivalent, or is there one way that is far better than the other? If so, why?

EDIT: as requested in the answers, this question was aimed at SQL Server, but I would be interested in knowing if it is different for other database engines (MySQL, etc...).

Is a JOIN faster than a WHERE?

The following statements give the same result (one is using `on`, and the other using `where`):

    mysql&gt; select * from gifts INNER JOIN sentGifts ON gifts.giftID = sentGifts.giftID;
    mysql&gt; select * from gifts INNER JOIN sentGifts WHERE gifts.giftID = sentGifts.giftID;

I can only see in a case of a Left Outer Join finding the &quot;unmatched&quot; cases:  
(to find out the gifts that were never sent by anybody)

    mysql&gt; select name from gifts LEFT OUTER JOIN sentgifts 
               ON gifts.giftID = sentgifts.giftID 
               WHERE sentgifts.giftID IS NULL;

In this case, it is first using `on`, and then `where`.  Does the `on` first do the matching, and then `where` does the &quot;secondary&quot; filtering?  Or is there a more general rule of using `on` versus `where`?   Thanks.



In SQL / MySQL, what is the difference between &quot;ON&quot; and &quot;WHERE&quot; in a join statement?

I read some Posts here and seems like nothing special but I can not still select the entries of the last days.

    SELECT 
    	p1.kArtikel, 
    	p1.cName, 
    	p1.cKurzBeschreibung, 
    	p1.dLetzteAktualisierung, 
    	p1.dErstellt, 
    	p1.cSeo,
    	p2.kartikelpict,
    	p2.nNr,
    	p2.cPfad
    	
    FROM 
    	tartikel AS p1 WHERE DATE(dErstellt) &gt; (NOW() - INTERVAL 7 DAY)
    	
    INNER JOIN 
    	tartikelpict AS p2 
    	ON (p1.kArtikel = p2.kArtikel) WHERE (p2.nNr = 1)
    
    ORDER BY 
    	p1.kArtikel DESC
    
    LIMIT
    	100;&#39;, $connection);

If I add the between today and last 7 days my Code will not output anything.

All Where Clause Solutions on Gang of Coders

Total of 30 Where Clause Solutions