Count rows after joining three tables in PostgreSQL

Question

Suppose I have three tables in PostgreSQL:

table1 - id1, a_id, updated_by_id
table2 - id2, a_id, updated_by_id
Users  - id, display_name

Suppose I am using the using the following query:

select count(t1.id1) from table1 t1 
left join table2 t2 on (t1.a_id=t2.a_id) 
full outer join users u1 t1.updated_by_id=u1.id)
full outer join users u2 t2.updated_by_id=u2.id) 
where u1.id=100;

I get 50 as count.

Whereas with:

select count(t1.id1) from table1 t1 
left join table2 t2 on (t1.a_id=t2.a_id) 
full outer join users u1 t1.updated_by_id=u1.id)
full outer join users u2 t2.updated_by_id=u2.id) 
where u2.id=100;

I get only 25 as count.

What is my mistake in the second query? What can I do to get the same count?

My requirement is that there is a single user table, referenced by multiple tables. I want to take the complete list of users and get the count of ids from different tables.

But the table on which I have joined alone returns the proper count but rest of them don't return the proper count. Can anybody suggest a way to modify my second query to get the proper count?

Replace the `COUNT(*) BY `*` and you will see the light. (it is only 50 rows; maybe a bit more) — wildplasser, Aug 27 '15 at 22:49
select * will give all the rows.. and also it is returning somewhere in 1000s.. I dont need that.. — ijaz ahamed, Aug 27 '15 at 23:03
Then replace the where clause to `where u1.id=100 OR u2.id=100)` (and start drwing venn-diaframs ...) — wildplasser, Aug 27 '15 at 23:15
The usual suspects are missing: Postgres version and table definitions. What you get with `\d tbl` in psql would show us data types and constraints. Also, the description of what you want to count is vague to say the least. For an exact result we need exact requirements. — Erwin Brandstetter, Aug 27 '15 at 23:15

Erwin Brandstetter · Accepted Answer · 2021-10-06T01:59:18.843

To simplify your logic, aggregate first, join later.

Guessing missing details, this query would give you the exact count, how many times each user was referenced in table1 and table2 respectively for all users:

SELECT *
FROM   users u
LEFT   JOIN (
   SELECT updated_by_id AS id, count(*) AS t1_ct
   FROM   table1
   GROUP  BY 1
   ) t1 USING (id)
LEFT   JOIN (
   SELECT updated_by_id AS id, count(*) AS t2_ct
   FROM   table2
   GROUP  BY 1
   ) t2 USING (id);

In particular, avoid multiple 1-n relationships multiplying each other when joined together:

Two SQL LEFT JOINS produce incorrect result

To retrieve a single or few users only, LATERAL joins will be faster (Postgres 9.3+):

SELECT *
FROM   users u
LEFT   JOIN  LATERAL (
   SELECT count(*) AS t1_ct
   FROM   table1
   WHERE  updated_by_id = u.id
   ) ON true
LEFT   JOIN  LATERAL (
   SELECT count(*) AS t2_ct
   FROM   table2
   WHERE  updated_by_id = u.id
   ) ON true
WHERE  u.id = 100;

What is the difference between LATERAL JOIN and a subquery in PostgreSQL?

Explain perceived difference

The particular mismatch you report is due to the specifics of a FULL OUTER JOIN:

First, an inner join is performed. Then, for each row in T1 that does not satisfy the join condition with any row in T2, a joined row is added with null values in columns of T2. Also, for each row of T2 that does not satisfy the join condition with any row in T1, a joined row with null values in the columns of T1 is added.

So you get NULL values appended on the respective other side for missing matches. count() does not count NULL values. So you can get a different result depending on whether you filter on u1.id=100 or u2.id=100.

This is just to explain, you don't need a FULL JOIN here. Use the presented alternatives instead.

Count rows after joining three tables in PostgreSQL

1 Answers1

Explain perceived difference

Linked