Confused about the behaviour of last_run_metadata_path in JDBC input

[pk.241011]

I am trying to get some data out of a SQL database.
Here is the configuration:

input
{
        jdbc
        {
                jdbc_driver_class => "com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver"
                jdbc_connection_string => ""
                jdbc_user => ""
                jdbc_password => ""

                statement => "select TOP 500 a.ResultID, a.UnitIdentifier, b.Result from MyDB.Res a inner join MyDb.ResData b on a.ResultID=b.ResultID where a.ResultID > :sql_last_value and a.Code like '9840%' and a.CreatedOn > '2020-01-01' order by a.ResultID"

                tracking_column => "ResultID"
                use_column_value => true
                tracking_column_type => "numeric"
                schedule => "*/1 * * * *"
                jdbc_paging_enabled => "true"
                jdbc_default_timezone => "Australia/Sydney"
                jdbc_page_size => "500"
                last_run_metadata_path => "/Drive/logstash/logs/logstash_jdbc_last_run"
        }
}

Funny thing about ResultID is that it is a negative number. Why I do not know. But it keeps increasing in subsequent records.

The contents of the logstash_jdbc_last_run remains zero after I run it on terminal.
--- 0

In the logs I see
where a.ResultID > 0 in repeated runs. Should it not be the value of last run instead of 0?
Logstash version is : 7.7.0

[Badger]

If ResultID is negative then I would expect your SQL to test 'where a.ResultID < :sql_last_value' (< instead of >). I believe 0 is the default initial value when you use a numeric tracking column.

[pk.241011]

@Badger They started the numbering of the primary field from maximum negative so as to get maximum range.

The rough representation is:
-11, -10, -9, -8, -7

If I keep a.ResultID < :sql_last_value, then at end of first run, :sql_last_value will have value -7.
Then the second run will also ingest the first 4 elements and :sql_last_value will have value -8.

Two things I have noticed:

1. a.ResultID > :sql_last_value leads to this in logs where a.ResultID > 0. It remains unchanged between the queries.

2. I tried to get around it by creating an alias.

   statement => "select a.ResultID, a.ResultID * (-1) as resid , a.UnitIdentifier, b.Result from MyDB.Res a inner join MyDb.ResData b on a.ResultID=b.ResultID where a.ResultID > :sql_last_value and a.Code like '9840%' and a.CreatedOn > '2020-01-01' order by resid ASC"
   tracking_column => "resid"
   use_column_value => true
   tracking_column_type => "numeric"

This gives error:
Exception when executing JDBC query {:exception=>#<Sequel::DatabaseError: Java::ComMicrosoftSqlserverJdbc::SQLServerException: Invalid column name 'resid'.

The query runs fine in my Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio.

EDIT 1
Just read through this.
Bottomline: column_alias can be used in an ORDER BY clause, but it cannot be used in a WHERE, GROUP BY, or HAVING clause .

EDIT 2
I am trying out this logic:
statement => "select a.ResultID , a.UnitIdentifier, b.Result from MyDB.Res a inner join MyDb.ResData b on a.ResultID=b.ResultID where a.ResultID < :sql_last_value and a.Code like '9840%' and a.CreatedOn > '2020-01-01' order by a.ResultID DESC"

This means that the data is pulled in reverse chronological order:
Dec, Nov, Oct, Sept......

This is fine by me. As long as the whole data comes in it is fine.
But I am concerned if I have turned the logic of incremental pulling of future data from database on it head.