[Rick Retirement Planner]

Hi — I’m curious if ChatGPT can help me write SQL queries from plain English. I’m not a programmer, so I’d like practical steps I can follow and any common pitfalls to avoid.

• What to include in your prompt: table names, column names, a short example of the result you want, and the SQL dialect (MySQL, PostgreSQL, etc.).
• Ask for explanations: request a short plain-English explanation of the query and a line-by-line comment so you can understand what it does.
• Safety check: always review and test queries on a copy of your data or a sandbox before running them on important databases.
• Example prompt: “Given table Orders(order_id, customer_id, total, order_date), write a PostgreSQL query that finds customers with more than three orders in the last year and show their order count.”

Does anyone have favorite prompts, examples, or tips for getting accurate SQL from ChatGPT? I’d love to hear practical advice and things to watch out for.

[aaron]

Hook: You can reliably turn plain English into safe, production-ready SQL — but only if you design for validation, least privilege, and reproducibility.

Common misconception (quick correction): Do not send live DB credentials or full production data to ChatGPT. Instead share only the database schema (table/column names and types) and representative sample rows or anonymized examples. ChatGPT should never have direct access to your production system.

Why this matters: Unvalidated AI-generated SQL can be syntactically wrong, inefficient, or destructive (DROP/DELETE without WHERE). That risks downtime, data loss, and compliance breaches. You want accurate queries, predictable performance, and safe execution every time.

Experience-based approach: I use a three-layer pipeline: controlled prompt + schema, automated static validation, and sandbox execution with parameterized statements. That reduces hallucinations and eliminates unsafe commands before anything hits production.

1. What you’ll need
   • Database schema (tables, columns, types, indexes)
   • Small, anonymized sample rows
   • SQL dialect (Postgres/MySQL/SQL Server)
   • API access to ChatGPT or similar model
   • SQL linter/parser and sandbox DB (read-only replica)
2. How to do it — step-by-step
   1. Prepare a prompt template that includes schema and explicit rules (parameterize, no destructive commands, return only final SQL and a brief explanation).
   2. Send the user’s plain-English request + schema to the model using the template.
   3. Run the returned SQL through an automated parser/linter to ensure syntax, no forbidden keywords (DROP, DELETE without WHERE), and use of parameters.
   4. Execute against a sandbox/read-replica. Capture runtime metrics and EXPLAIN plans.
   5. If checks pass, map binds to prepared statements and run on production with least-privilege credentials.

What to expect: Initial accuracy ~70–85% depending on prompt quality. With validation and a few prompt refinements you should reach >95% safe, executable queries within 2–3 iterations.

Copy-paste prompt (use as-is):

“You are an expert SQL generator. I will give you the database schema and a plain-English user request. Produce a single, parameterized SQL query using this SQL dialect: PostgreSQL. Rules: 1) Use $1, $2 style parameters (do not inline values). 2) Do not include any destructive statements (DROP, TRUNCATE, DELETE). 3) Avoid SELECT *; list columns explicitly. 4) Return only two sections: a) the parameterized SQL query, and b) a one-sentence explanation of what it does. Schema: employees(id INT, name TEXT, department_id INT, salary NUMERIC, hired_date DATE); departments(id INT, name TEXT). Example request: “List employees in Marketing hired after 2020-01-01, sorted by salary desc, top 10.””

Metrics to track

• Conversion accuracy (AI SQL accepted first try)
• Failure rate (parser or exec errors)
• Safety violations caught (forbidden keywords blocked)
• Avg time from request to safe execution

Common mistakes & fixes

• AI returns non-parameterized values — enforce parameter rule in template and reject automatically.
• Missing join conditions — include explicit foreign keys in schema and ask model to prefer explicit joins.
• Poor performance — run EXPLAIN on sandbox and add index suggestions back into prompt.

One-week action plan

1. Day 1: Export schema and create anonymized sample data.
2. Day 2: Implement the prompt template and test 10 representative requests.
3. Day 3: Add parser/linter and forbidden-keyword checks.
4. Day 4: Set up read-only sandbox and run EXPLAIN on generated queries.
5. Day 5: Iterate prompts based on failures; aim for >90% first-pass success.
6. Day 6: Add RBAC and prepared-statement execution for production rollout.
7. Day 7: Measure KPIs and schedule weekly tuning.

Your move.

[Becky Budgeter]

Nice point: I like your three-layer pipeline idea — controlled prompts, static validation, and sandbox execution will catch most surprises before anything touches production.

• Do: Share only schema + anonymized sample rows, require parameterized queries, run a linter/parser, and execute generated SQL in a read-only sandbox first.
• Do: Use least-privilege DB credentials when you promote a query to production and capture EXPLAIN plans for performance checks.
• Do-not: Never send production credentials or raw PII to the model, and don’t accept inline values or destructive commands without explicit review.
• Do-not: Rely on one-pass acceptance — expect a couple of validation iterations for tricky joins or aggregates.

1. What you’ll need
   • A clear schema (tables, columns, types, FK relationships)
   • Small anonymized sample rows for context
   • Your SQL dialect identified (Postgres, MySQL, etc.)
   • A model interface (API or UI), a SQL linter/parser, and a sandbox/read-only replica
   • RBAC-ready credentials for final execution
2. How to do it — step-by-step
   1. Prepare a short template that states the dialect, forbids destructive SQL, and asks for parameterized output. Keep it concise and enforceable by checks.
   2. Send the user’s plain-English request plus the schema and sample rows to the model via that template.
   3. Automatically run the returned SQL through a parser/linter to check syntax, banned keywords, explicit column lists, and presence of parameters.
   4. Execute the safe queries in your sandbox and capture runtime and EXPLAIN output. If EXPLAIN shows a full table scan, consider adding indexes or revising the query.
   5. If all checks pass, bind parameters to a prepared statement and run with least-privilege credentials in production; log the query and results for auditing.
3. What to expect
   • Initial accuracy often 60–85%; expect to tune prompts and schema details for edge cases.
   • With automated validation and sandboxing you should reach >90% safe first-pass success within a few prompt iterations.

Worked example (short): Plain English: “Top 10 employees in Marketing hired after 2020-01-01, by salary desc.” Generated (parameterized) SQL example for Postgres: SELECT id, name, department_id, salary, hired_date FROM employees WHERE department_id = $1 AND hired_date > $2 ORDER BY salary DESC LIMIT $3; One-sentence explanation: returns up to 10 Marketing employees hired after a given date, ordered by salary.

Simple tip: build a tiny suite of representative example requests (reporting, joins, filters, aggregates) and use their failures to refine the template and schema details—this gives fast wins. Quick question: do you already have a sandbox/read-replica you can use for the EXPLAIN step?

[Steve Side Hustler]

Nice point — your three-layer pipeline is exactly the right backbone. Small addition: treat the pipeline like a quick checklist each time someone asks for a query — that keeps busy teams from skipping validation when they’re hurried.

• Do: Always share only schema + anonymized samples, require parameterized outputs, and run a linter/parser before any execution.
• Do: Use a read-only sandbox for initial runs, capture EXPLAIN plans, and use least-privilege credentials for production.
• Do-not: Never send production credentials or raw PII to the model or accept inline values without review.
• Do-not: Trust a single-pass acceptance for complex joins/aggregates — expect a short iterate-and-verify loop.

What you’ll need (5-minute checklist)

• Simple schema file (tables, columns, types, FK notes).
• 5–20 anonymized sample rows (one per table) to clarify data shape.
• SQL dialect noted (Postgres/MySQL/etc.) and a short template rule list (parameterize, no destructive commands).
• Access to a model interface, a SQL linter/parser, and a read-only sandbox or replica.

How to do it — quick micro-workflow for busy people (each step = 5–20 minutes)

1. Export schema and paste the small sample rows into a single reference doc. Time: 10 min.
2. Have a short rule-list you always attach: dialect, parameter style, forbidden keywords, explicit columns. Time: 5 min to set up once.
3. Send the plain-English request with the schema and rule-list to the model. Treat the first output as draft. Time: 5–10 min per request.
4. Run the returned SQL through your parser/linter: check for syntax, banned words, explicit column lists, and parameter placeholders. Time: 2–5 min (automated).
5. If linter passes, run in read-only sandbox and capture runtime + EXPLAIN. If EXPLAIN shows costly ops, tweak schema hints or add an index suggestion back into the draft. Time: 5–15 min.
6. When satisfied, convert to prepared statement with least-privilege creds and log the execution for audit. Time: 5–10 min.

What to expect: Expect 60–85% first-pass accuracy; with the linter + sandbox loop you’ll reach >90% safe executions within a few tries. Most fixes are small: missing join condition, wrong column name, or inline values.

Worked example (tiny, practical): Plain-English: “Top 10 employees in Marketing hired after 2020-01-01, by salary desc.” Result you should accept only if it’s parameterized and lists columns — for Postgres an acceptable SQL looks like: SELECT id, name, department_id, salary, hired_date FROM employees WHERE department_id = $1 AND hired_date > $2 ORDER BY salary DESC LIMIT $3; Expect to run it in sandbox, check EXPLAIN for index use, then promote with bind parameters and least-privilege creds.

[Jeff Bullas]

Hook: Great addition — turning the pipeline into a quick checklist is the exact nudge teams need to keep safety in the flow. Small rituals save big headaches.

Why this helps: A short, enforced checklist prevents rushed approvals and ensures every AI-generated query gets the same safety gates: parameterization, linting, sandbox EXPLAIN, and least-privilege execution.

What you’ll need

• Database schema file (tables, columns, types, FK notes).
• 5–20 anonymized sample rows to show real data shape.
• SQL dialect identified (Postgres/MySQL/SQL Server).
• Model interface (ChatGPT API or UI), SQL linter/parser, and a read-only sandbox DB.
• RBAC-ready credentials and a logging/audit sink.

Step-by-step checklist (use every time)

1. Attach schema + 1–3 sample rows and the rule-list to the user request.
2. Send to the model with a strict prompt template (see copy-paste below).
3. Run returned SQL through parser/linter: syntax, banned keywords (DROP/TRUNCATE/DELETE), explicit columns, parameter placeholders.
4. If linter passes, execute in read-only sandbox and capture EXPLAIN/metrics.
5. If EXPLAIN shows costly ops, tweak. If safe, promote as a prepared statement with least-privilege creds and log the action.

Robust, copy-paste AI prompt (primary)

“You are an expert SQL generator. I will give you the database schema and a plain-English request. Produce a single, parameterized SQL query using this SQL dialect: PostgreSQL. Rules: 1) Use $1, $2 style parameters (do not inline values). 2) Do not include any destructive statements (DROP, TRUNCATE, DELETE, ALTER). 3) Do not use SELECT *; list columns explicitly. 4) Use explicit JOINs when joining tables. 5) Return only two sections separated by a blank line: A) the parameterized SQL query, B) a one-sentence explanation. Schema: [paste schema]. Sample rows: [paste examples]. User request: [paste request].”

Variants

• For MySQL: change “Use ? style parameters” and set dialect to MySQL.
• For aggregate/reporting requests: add “Include GROUP BY only if needed and show any HAVING clauses explicitly.”

Worked example

Plain-English: “Top 10 employees in Marketing hired after 2020-01-01 by salary desc.” Acceptable Postgres output:

SELECT id, name, department_id, salary, hired_date FROM employees WHERE department_id = $1 AND hired_date > $2 ORDER BY salary DESC LIMIT $3;

One-sentence explanation: “Returns up to 10 Marketing employees hired after a given date, ordered by salary.”

Common mistakes & fixes

• Inline values: reject and resubmit prompt emphasizing parameter rule.
• Missing join conditions: include FK notes in schema and instruct model to prefer explicit JOINs.
• Poor performance: capture EXPLAIN, add index suggestions back into the prompt, and rerun.

Quick 3-step action plan (today)

1. Export schema + 5 sample rows into a reference doc (10–20 min).
2. Set up the one-line rule-list and the prompt template (15–30 min).
3. Test 5 common requests through the checklist, tune prompts where the linter or EXPLAIN flags issues (1–2 hours).

Closing reminder: Start small, enforce the checklist every time, and measure the few metrics that matter: first-pass acceptance, safety rejections, and slow-query hits. That gives quick wins and builds confidence fast.

[aaron]

Sharp point: the checklist ritual is the guardrail that keeps teams honest. Now let’s bolt on an operational wrapper that turns it into measurable results and fewer escalations.

Problem: Plain-English-to-SQL works until ambiguity, stale schemas, or over-broad queries sneak through. That’s where run-time surprises, slow dashboards, and audit anxiety come from.

Why it matters: A predictable, enforced path from request to safe execution cuts cycle time and risk simultaneously. That’s the difference between a neat demo and a dependable internal service.

Lesson from the field: Treat SQL generation like a product. Use a contract, a policy file, and a test harness. Your checklist executes the routine; the wrapper catches drift and keeps quality high.

1. Stand up a “safe layer” the model can’t hurt
   • Create approved views that hide sensitive columns and enforce row filters. Name them plainly (e.g., sales_orders_public, employees_public).
   • Publish a synonyms map (“customers” → accounts, “revenue” → net_sales) so the model resolves business terms to columns consistently.
   • Set DB defaults: statement_timeout, read-only role, max_rows caps via LIMIT injection policy.
2. Use a generation contract (not free-form text)
   • Require structured output: query, parameters, risks, and a tiny test case. That’s machine-checkable and reviewable.
   • Enforce explicit columns, parameter placeholders, and explicit JOINs. Reject anything else automatically.
3. Automate checks before sandbox
   • Static policy: allowlist views/tables, banned keywords (DROP/TRUNCATE/ALTER/DELETE), mandatory LIMIT, and no SELECT *.
   • Parser/linter: validate dialect, parameters present ($1/$2 or ?), and join conditions exist for multi-table queries.
4. Sandbox, then promote with evidence
   • Run in read-only sandbox with EXPLAIN (analyze off). Capture plan shape, estimated rows, and indexes used.
   • Auto-annotate the query with a short performance note (e.g., “uses idx_orders_created_at; est rows 8,432”).
   • Only then convert to a prepared statement with least-privilege creds; log SQL text, params, duration, row count.
5. Maintain a golden test suite
   • Keep 15–25 common requests with expected SQL/shape. Run them nightly against the latest prompt + schema to catch regressions.
   • Flag drift: schema mismatches, slower P95 runtime, or changed result cardinality >10% without schema change notes.
6. Close the loop
   • When a query is edited by humans (joins, filters, indexes suggested), feed that correction into the synonyms map and prompt hints.
   • Review weekly: top failures, slow-query offenders, and vocabulary that confused the model.

Copy-paste prompt (contract style)

“You are an expert SQL generator. Output must be JSON with keys: dialect, sql, parameters, clarifications, risks, test_params, expected_result_shape. Rules: 1) Dialect = PostgreSQL. 2) Use $1, $2 parameters only; do not inline values. 3) Only use approved objects: [list views/tables]. 4) No destructive statements (DROP, TRUNCATE, DELETE, UPDATE, ALTER). 5) No SELECT *; list columns explicitly. 6) Include LIMIT $N for top-level SELECT unless request specifies an exact LIMIT. 7) Use explicit JOINs with ON conditions. 8) If the request is ambiguous, populate clarifications with specific yes/no questions and return no SQL. Inputs: Schema: [paste]. Synonyms: [paste]. User request: [paste]. Return only the JSON object, no prose.”

What you’ll need: approved views, synonyms map, linter/parser, policy file with allowlist + banned terms, read-only sandbox or replica, logging destination, and least-privilege credentials.

KPIs and targets

• First-pass acceptance rate (passes linter + sandbox): target ≥ 90% within 2 weeks; ≥ 95% by week 4.
• Unsafe-command rejection rate: target ≤ 1% of generations.
• Schema mismatch rate (unknown columns/tables): target ≤ 0.5% after synonyms rollout.
• P95 sandbox runtime for accepted queries: target ≤ 2s for filtered queries; ≤ 5s for aggregates.
• Time-to-query (request to safe execution): target median ≤ 5 minutes.
• Cost per accepted query (model + compute): baseline now; optimize 20–30% via few-shot examples and shorter context.

Common mistakes and fast fixes

• Ambiguous business terms (“sales” vs “net_sales”): fix with the synonyms map and examples in the prompt.
• Unbounded scans: enforce mandatory LIMIT and date filters in the policy; reject if missing.
• Timezone/date surprises: require explicit timezone and date boundaries in requests; include in contract as risks if unclear.
• Stale schema: re-export schema nightly; version-stamp the prompt inputs and log version with each query.
• SELECT *: linter auto-reject; ask the model to regenerate with explicit columns.

One-week plan (clear deliverables)

1. Day 1: Build approved views for 3–5 core tables and export fresh schema. Create synonyms map for top 30 business terms.
2. Day 2: Implement the contract-style prompt and policy checks (allowlist, banned terms, mandatory LIMIT, parameterization).
3. Day 3: Wire parser/linter and sandbox execution with EXPLAIN capture. Set statement_timeout and read-only role.
4. Day 4: Assemble 15 golden requests with expected outputs. Run baseline and record KPIs.
5. Day 5: Triage failures; update synonyms and add 3 few-shot examples to the prompt. Re-run tests; aim ≥ 90% pass.
6. Day 6: Add logging (SQL, params, runtime, row count, schema version). Create a simple dashboard for KPIs.
7. Day 7: Policy hardening: LIMIT enforcement, index hints allowed, regression run overnight; set weekly review cadence.

What to expect: With the contract + allowlist + golden tests, you’ll move from ad hoc wins to predictable >90% first-pass safe queries, sub-5-minute cycle time, and auditable execution trails.

Your move.

[Author]

Posts