Combine Toad sql queries with decreasing output results into one list - toad

Question

I've been trying to produce a result where multiple queries return more restrictive returns. How can I see the full list as well as those records that meet the more restrictive conditions? Query 1 returns 538 records of sites in the given counties.
SELECT E_SITES.ID "SITE ID",
E_SITES.NAME "SITE NAME",
E_SITES.ADDR_1 "SITE ADDRESS"
E_SITES.CITY_NAME || ', ' || E_SITES.STATE_CODE || ' ' || E_SITES.POSTAL_CODE,
E_SITES.COUNTY_NAME
FROM E_SITES
WHERE E_SITES.COUNTY_NAME IN ('ALLAMAKEE', 'BENTON', 'BLACK HAWK', 'BREMER', 'BUCHANAN', 'CHICKASAW', 'CLAYTON', 'DELAWARE', 'DUBUQUE')
ORDER BY E_SITES.ID
Query 2 returns the number of sites that have a contact person identified. This is 503 records.
SELECT E_SITES.ID "SITE ID",
E_SITES.NAME "SITE NAME",
E_SITES.ADDR_1 "SITE ADDRESS"
E_SITES.CITY_NAME || ', ' || E_SITES.STATE_CODE || ' ' || E_SITES.POSTAL_CODE,
E_SITES.COUNTY_NAME,
E_INDIVIDUALS.FIRST_NAME || ' ' || E_INDIVIDUALS.LAST_NAME
FROM E_SITES, E_AFFILIATIONS, E_INDIVIDUALS
WHERE E_SITES.SITE_ID = E_AFFILIATIONS.SITE_ID
AND E_AFFILIATIONS.INDIVIDUAL_RID = E_INDIVIDUALS.RID
AND E_AFFILIATIONS.AFFILIATION_TYPE = ('SITE_CONTACT')
AND E_SITES.COUNTY_NAME IN ('ALLAMAKEE', 'BENTON', 'BLACK HAWK', 'BREMER', 'BUCHANAN', 'CHICKASAW', 'CLAYTON', 'DELAWARE', 'DUBUQUE')
ORDER BY E_SITES.ID
A further query would return those sites with a mailing address, which reduces the results down to 486 records. I need to get all 538 records, whether or not they have a contact or mailing address, and for those that do, have one row for each site.
Additional Information
My current results can look like this for Query 1 (including column headers for clarity, quotes to distinguish data elements):
"SITE ID" "SITE NAME" "SITE ADDRESS" "CITY, STATE ZIP" "COUNTY_NAME"
"09698" "BODINE ELECTRIC" "18114 KAPP DR" "PEOSTA, IA 52067" "BREMER"
"16895" "BRUGGEMAN LUMBER" "3003 WILLOW RD" "HOPKINTON, IA 52237" "DELAWARE"
"40047" "GENEVIEVE, LLC" "707 LINCOLN ST" "GARNAVILLOR, IA 52052" "CLAYTON"
Query 2 which requires a contact person currently only returns records that meet the requirement, even though I use the (+) operator.
"SITE ID" "SITE NAME" "SITE ADDRESS" "CITY, STATE ZIP" "COUNTY_NAME" "FIRST NAME LAST NAME"
"40047" "GENEVIEVE, LLC" "707 LINCOLN ST" "GARNAVILLOR, IA 52052" "CLAYTON" "DALE KARTMAN"
I get 1 record rather than the 3 records, with 2 having no contact person and 1 with a contact person. This is my dilema. I have to run each of these queries separately, get the results and copy them to a spreadsheet. Then I have to align the records with contact names to the 1st query of all facilities. Very labor intensive. Hope this helps clarify my needs.

Answer 1

If I understood you correctly, it is the OUTER JOIN you're looking for.
Here's a simple example (based on Scott's EMP and DEPT tables) which shows what it is.
There are 4 departments in the DEPT table:
SQL> select deptno from dept order by deptno;
DEPTNO
----------
10
20
30
40
However, no employee works in department 40:
SQL> select deptno, ename from emp order by deptno;
DEPTNO ENAME
---------- ----------
10 KING
10 CLARK
10 MILLER
20 FORD
20 SMITH
20 JONES
30 JAMES
30 TURNER
30 MARTIN
30 WARD
30 ALLEN
30 BLAKE
12 rows selected.
SQL>
If you want to display information collected from both of those tables (department name from the DEPT table and employee name from the EMP table), you'd join those tables - just like you did (I'll use ANSI syntax which actually JOINS tables, instead of enumerating them and putting join conditions into the WHERE clause):
SQL> select d.deptno, d.dname, e.ename
2 from dept d join emp e on e.deptno = d.deptno
3 order by d.deptno;
DEPTNO DNAME ENAME
---------- -------------- ----------
10 ACCOUNTING KING
10 ACCOUNTING CLARK
10 ACCOUNTING MILLER
20 RESEARCH FORD
20 RESEARCH SMITH
20 RESEARCH JONES
30 SALES JAMES
30 SALES TURNER
30 SALES MARTIN
30 SALES WARD
30 SALES ALLEN
30 SALES BLAKE
12 rows selected.
SQL>
Looks OK, but - I'd like to get information about DEPTNO = 40, although nobody works in it. So, use outer join:
SQL> select d.deptno, d.dname, e.ename
2 from dept d left join emp e on e.deptno = d.deptno
3 order by d.deptno;
DEPTNO DNAME ENAME
---------- -------------- ----------
10 ACCOUNTING KING
10 ACCOUNTING CLARK
10 ACCOUNTING MILLER
20 RESEARCH FORD
20 RESEARCH SMITH
20 RESEARCH JONES
30 SALES JAMES
30 SALES TURNER
30 SALES MARTIN
30 SALES WARD
30 SALES ALLEN
30 SALES BLAKE
40 OPERATIONS
13 rows selected.
SQL>
Right! Here it is! (note that LEFT JOIN produces the same result as LEFT OUTER JOIN; no need to specify "outer", although it makes thinks somewhat more obvious).
Also, there's the "old" Oracle outer join operator, (+) (literally, a + sign enclosed into round brackets). The above query would work as well if we put it like this:
select d.deptno, d.dname, e.ename
from dept d, emp e
where d.deptno = e.deptno (+);
I'd suggest you do the same with (outer join) your query. Once again:
join tables in the JOIN clause
put filters into the WHERE clause
Query will be easier to read and maintain, you'll know what is what, and - if necessary (and it might even be the case for you), if you use the "old" (+) operator, you won't be able to outer join one table to more than just one another table. As you're going deeper and deeper, you might need to outer join some table to several others, and that's where ANSI join takes place.
Good luck!