Re^2: Parse complex SQL statement

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Parse complex SQL statement by kennethk (Abbot) on Jun 12, 2014 at 15:04 UTC
One possibility for why the parser is failing is I think your posted SQL is invalid: unless I'm reading it wrong, you have 7 parameters to insert but 8 terms because you have a repeated comma. I also note no nested queries in the query provided, so it's also possible that I can't diagnose the issue because you haven't posted the correct target. If this is an internal utility, you could accomplish your goal with something like `m/insert\s+into\s+(\S+)\s\(\s([^)]+?)\s\)\s (?:values\s\(\s([^)]+?)\s\) \| select\s(.+?)\s+(?:where\|order) ) /ix` [download] but this has a number of potential issues: nested queries will parse incorrectly, it fails to consider quoted names and string literals, ... Which is why I usually suggest canned code. Update: Or misparse by me; the regular expression should read `m/insert\s+into\s+(\S+)\s\(\s([^)]+?)\s\)\s (?:values\s\(\s([^)]+?)\s\) \| select\s(.+?)\s+(?:from\b) ) /ix` [download] Of course, your posted SQL doesn't actually correspond to the SQL posted in the `original_string` field in Re^2: Parse complex SQL statement. #11929 First ask yourself `How would I do this without a computer?' Then have the computer do it the same way.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Parse complex SQL statement by perl_help26 (Beadle) on Jun 16, 2014 at 09:29 UTC
Hello Kenneth, Thanks for your reply... There was a typo in my sql the successive commas shd have had "null" in between... However, this is not the issue. I have a problem with the nested queries... Also, I can't use this regexp because it's too specific and I have various sql statements with different structures... I found a module at: https://searchcode.com/codesearch/view/836428/ This seems to be parsing fine for now ... I just need to find a way to keep the hierarchy on the nested sqls...	[reply]
Re^5: Parse complex SQL statement by kennethk (Abbot) on Jun 16, 2014 at 19:22 UTC
Hierarchy is probably best maintained by anchoring front and back, and literally recursively parsing the statements. #11929 First ask yourself `How would I do this without a computer?' Then have the computer do it the same way.	[reply]