Reputation: 513
I have a query in which I want the name of a company and its employee quantity. The thing is I want to filter this result by some conditions (like employee_number > 50
etc.). My problem is that, when building the query, I don't know how to filter this result, as the condition is set over a calculated field, so when applying the condition it gives me the below
Error: `SQLSTATE[42S22]: Column not found: 1054 Unknown column 'employee_number' in 'where clause'`.
I have been trying different things, but this is what I currently have:
$query = $this->Companies->find('all')->where($conditions)->contain(['Users']);
$query
->select(['Users.name',
'Company.modified',
'employee_number' => $query->func()->count('DISTINCT(Employees.id)')])
->where('employee_number >' => 50 )
->leftJoinWith('Employees', function (\Cake\ORM\Query $query) {
return $query->where(['deleted' => 0]);
})
->group(['Employees.company_id', 'Company.id']);
Upvotes: 0
Views: 464
Reputation: 60463
First things first, you cannot refer to an aggregate in the WHERE
clause, as grouping happens afterwards, hence the error, the field employee_number
doesn't exist when the WHERE
conditions are being applied, you have to leverage the HAVING
clause instead.
Depending on the DBMS that you are using you can reference the column from the select list, MySQL for example allows that:
$query
->select([
'Users.name',
'Company.modified',
'employee_number' => $query->func()->count('DISTINCT Employees.id')
])
->leftJoinWith('Employees', function (\Cake\ORM\Query $query) {
return $query->where(['deleted' => 0]);
})
->group(['Employees.company_id', 'Company.id'])
->having(['employee_number >' => 50]);
while Postgres for example doesn't, and requires you to repeat the aggregation inside of the HAVING
clause:
->having(function (
\Cake\Database\Expression\QueryExpression $exp,
\Cake\ORM\Query $query
) {
return $exp->gt($query->func()->count('DISTINCT Employees.id'), 50);
});
ps. using DISTINCT
should only be necessary when you have for example multiple joins that would result in duplicate joined rows.
See also
Upvotes: 2