I have this:
SELECT
SU.FullName as Salesperson,
COUNT(DS.new_dealsheetid) as Units,
SUM(SO.New_profits_sales_totaldealprofit) as TDP,
SUM(SO.New_profits_sales_totaldealprofit) / COUNT(DS.new_dealsheetid) as PPU,
-- opportunities subquery
(SELECT COUNT(*) FROM Opportunity O
LEFT JOIN Account A ON O.AccountId = A.AccountId
WHERE A.OwnerId = SU.SystemUserId AND
YEAR(O.CreatedOn) = 2022)
-- /opportunities subquery
FROM New_dealsheet DS
LEFT JOIN SalesOrder SO ON DS.New_DSheetId = SO.SalesOrderId
LEFT JOIN New_salespeople SP ON DS.New_SalespersonId = SP.New_salespeopleId
LEFT JOIN SystemUser SU ON SP.New_SystemUserId = SU.SystemUserId
WHERE
YEAR(SO.New_purchaseordersenddate) = 2022 AND
SP.New_SalesGroupIdName = 'LO'
GROUP BY SU.FullName
I'm getting an error from the subquery:
Column 'SystemUser.SystemUserId' is invalid in the select list because it is not contained in either an aggregate function or the GROUP BY clause.
Is it possible to use the SystemUser table join from the main query in this way?
As has been mentioned extensively in the comments, the error is actually telling you the problem; SU.SystemUserId isn't in the GROUP BY nor in an aggregate function, and it appears in the SELECT of the query (albeit in the WHERE of a correlated subquery). Any columns in the SELECT must be either aggregated or in the GROUP BY when using one of the other for a query scope. As the column in question isn't aggregated nor in the GROUP BY, the error occurs.
There are, however, other problems. Like mentioned ikn the comments too, your LEFT JOINs make little sense, as many of the tables you LEFT JOIN to require a column in that table to have a non-NULL value; it is impossible for a column to have a non-NULL value if a row was not found.
You also use syntax like YEAR(<Column Name>) = <int Value> in the WHERE; this is not SARGable, and thus should be avoided. Use explicit date boundaries instead.
I assume here that SU.SystemUserId is a primary key, and so should be in the GROUP BY. This is probably a good thing anyway, as a person's full name isn't something that can be used to determine who a person is on their own (take this from someone who shared their name, date of birth and post code with another person in their youth; it caused many problems on the rudimentary IT systems of the time). This results in a query like this:
SELECT SU.FullName AS Salesperson,
COUNT(DS.new_dealsheetid) AS Units,
SUM(SO.New_profits_sales_totaldealprofit) AS TDP,
SUM(SO.New_profits_sales_totaldealprofit) / COUNT(DS.new_dealsheetid) AS PPU,
(SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM dbo.Opportunity O
JOIN dbo.Account A ON O.AccountId = A.AccountId --A.OwnerID must have a non-NULL value, so why was this a LEFT JOIN?
WHERE A.OwnerId = SU.SystemUserId
AND O.CreatedOn >= '20220101' --Don't use YEAR(<Column Name>) = <int Value> syntax, it isn't SARGable
AND O.CreatedOn < '20230101') AS SomeColumnAlias
FROM dbo.New_dealsheet DS
JOIN dbo.SalesOrder SO ON DS.New_DSheetId = SO.SalesOrderId --SO.New_purchaseordersenddate must have a non-NULL value, so why was this a LEFT JOIN?
JOIN dbo.New_salespeople SP ON DS.New_SalespersonId = SP.New_salespeopleId --SP.New_SalesGroupIdName must have a non-NULL value, so why was this a LEFT JOIN?
LEFT JOIN dbo.SystemUser SU ON SP.New_SystemUserId = SU.SystemUserId --This actually looks like it can be a LEFT JOIN.
WHERE SO.New_purchaseordersenddate >= '20220101' --Don't use YEAR(<Column Name>) = <int Value> syntax, it isn't SARGable
AND SO.New_purchaseordersenddate < '20230101'
AND SP.New_SalesGroupIdName = 'LO'
GROUP BY SU.FullName,
SU.SystemUserId;
Doing such a sub-query is bad on a performance-wise point of view
better do it like this:
SELECT
SU.FullName as Salesperson,
COUNT(DS.new_dealsheetid) as Units,
SUM(SO.New_profits_sales_totaldealprofit) as TDP,
SUM(SO.New_profits_sales_totaldealprofit) / COUNT(DS.new_dealsheetid) as PPU,
SUM(csq.cnt) as Count
FROM New_dealsheet DS
LEFT JOIN SalesOrder SO ON DS.New_DSheetId = SO.SalesOrderId
LEFT JOIN New_salespeople SP ON DS.New_SalespersonId = SP.New_salespeopleId
LEFT JOIN SystemUser SU ON SP.New_SystemUserId = SU.SystemUserId
-- Moved subquery as sub-join
LEFT JOIN (SELECT a.OwnerId, YEAR(o.CreatedOn) as year, COUNT(*) cnt FROM Opportunity O
LEFT JOIN Account A ON O.AccountId = A.AccountId
GROUP BY a.OwnerId, YEAR(o.CreatedOn) as csq ON csq.OwnerId = su.SystemUserId and csqn.Year = 2022
WHERE
YEAR(SO.New_purchaseordersenddate) = 2022 AND
SP.New_SalesGroupIdName = 'LO'
GROUP BY SU.FullName
So you have a nice join and a clean result
The query above is untested
Related
I would like to know how I can do operations between a column and a subquery, what I want to do is add to the field Subtotal what was obtained in the subquery Impuestos, the following is the query that I am using for this case.
Select
RC.PURCHID;
LRC.VALUEMST as 'Subtotal',
isnull((
select sum((CONVERT(float, TD1.taxvalue)/100)*LRC1.VALUEMST ) as a
FROM TAXONITEM TOI1
inner join TAXDATA TD1 ON (TD1.TAXCODE = TOI1.TAXCODE and RC.DATAAREAID = TD1.DATAAREAID)
inner join TRANS LRC1 on (LRC1.VEND = RC.RECID)
WHERE TOI1.TAXITEMGROUP = PL.TAXITEMGROUP and RC.DATAAREAID = TOI1.DATAAREAID
), 0) Impuestos
from VEND RC
inner join VENDTABLE VTB on VTB.ACCOUNTNUM = RC.INVOICEACCOUNT
inner join TRANS LRC on (LRC.VEND = RC.RECID)
inner join PURCHLINE PL on (PL.LINENUMBER =LRC.LINENUM and PL.PURCHID =RC.PURCHID)
where year (RC.DELIVERYDATE) =2021 and RC.PURCHASETYPE =3 order by RC.PURCHID;
Hope someone can give me some guidance when doing operations with subqueries.
A few disjointed facts that may help:
When a SELECT statement returns only one row with one column, you can enclose that statement in parenthesis and use it as a plain value. In your case, let's say that select sum(......= TOI1.DATAAREAID returns 500. Then, your outer select's second column is equivalent to isnull(500,0)
You mention in your question "subquery Impuestos". Keep in mind that, although you indeed used a subquery as we mentioned earlier, by the time it was enclosed in parentheses it is not treated as a subquery (more accurately: derived table), but as a value. Thus, the "Impuestos" is only a column alias at this point
I dislike and avoid subqueries before the from, makes things much harder to read. Here is a solution with apply which will keep your code mostly intact:
Select
RC.PURCHID,
LRC.VALUEMST as 'Subtotal',
isnull(subquery1.a, 0) as Impuestos
from VEND RC
inner join VENDTABLE VTB on VTB.ACCOUNTNUM = RC.INVOICEACCOUNT
inner join TRANS LRC on (LRC.VEND = RC.RECID)
inner join PURCHLINE PL on (PL.LINENUMBER =LRC.LINENUM and PL.PURCHID =RC.PURCHID)
outer apply
(
select sum((CONVERT(float, TD1.taxvalue)/100)*LRC1.VALUEMST ) as a
FROM TAXONITEM TOI1
inner join TAXDATA TD1 ON (TD1.TAXCODE = TOI1.TAXCODE and RC.DATAAREAID = TD1.DATAAREAID)
inner join TRANS LRC1 on (LRC1.VEND = RC.RECID)
WHERE TOI1.TAXITEMGROUP = PL.TAXITEMGROUP and RC.DATAAREAID = TOI1.DATAAREAID
) as subquery1
where year (RC.DELIVERYDATE) =2021 and RC.PURCHASETYPE =3 order by RC.PURCHID;
I have the following SQL select statement that I use to get a subset of products, or wines:
SELECT pv.SkProdVariantId AS id,
pa.Colour AS colour,
FROM Dim.ProductVariant AS pv
JOIN ProductAttributes_new AS pa
ON pv.SkProdVariantId = pa.SkProdVariantId
WHERE pv.ProdTypeName = 'Wines'
The length of this table generated is 3,905. I want to get all the transactional data for these products.
At the moment I'm using this select statement
SELECT c.CalDate AS timestamp,
f.SkProductVariantId AS sku_id,
f.Quantity AS quantity
FROM fact.FTransactions AS f
LEFT JOIN Dim.Calendar AS c
ON f.SkDateId = c.SkDateId
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT pv.SkProdVariantId AS id,
pa.Colour AS colour,
FROM Dim.ProductVariant AS pv
JOIN ProductAttributes_new AS pa
ON pv.SkProdVariantId = pa.SkProdVariantId
WHERE pv.ProdTypeName = 'Wines'
) AS s
ON s.id = f.SkProductVariantId
WHERE c.CalDate LIKE '%2019%'
The calendar dates are correct, but the number of unique products returned is 5,648, rather than the expected 3,905 from the select query.
Why does my LEFT JOIN on the first select query not work as I expect it to, please?
Thanks for any help!
If you want all the rows form your query, it needs to be the first reference in the LEFT JOIN. Then, I am guessing that you want transaction in 2019:
select . . .
from (SELECT pv.SkProdVariantId AS id, pa.Colour AS colour,
FROM Dim.ProductVariant pv JOIN
ProductAttributes_new pa
ON pv.SkProdVariantId = pa.SkProdVariantId
WHERE pv.ProdTypeName = 'Wines'
) s LEFT JOIN
(fact.FTransactions f JOIN
Dim.Calendar c
ON f.SkDateId = c.SkDateId AND
c.CalDate >= '2019-01-01' AND
c.CalDate < '2020-01-01'
)
ON s.id = f.SkProductVariantId;
Note that this assumes that CalDate is really a date and not a string. LIKE should only be used on strings.
You misunderstand somehow how outer joins work. See Gordon's answer and my request comment on that.
As to the task: It seems you want to select transactions of 2019, but you want to restrict your results to wine products. We typically restrict query results in the WHERE clause. You can use IN or EXISTS for that.
SELECT
c.CalDate AS timestamp,
f.SkProductVariantId AS sku_id,
f.Quantity AS quantity
FROM fact.FTransactions AS f
INNER JOIN Dim.Calendar AS c ON f.SkDateId = c.SkDateId
WHERE DATEPART(YEAR, c.CalDate) = 2019
AND f.SkProductVariantId IN
(
SELECT pv.SkProdVariantId
FROM Dim.ProductVariant AS pv
WHERE pv.ProdTypeName = 'Wines'
);
(I've removed the join to ProductAttributes_new, because it doesn't seem to play any part in this query.)
I want to have rows which appeared in 25th of February and did not appear in 6th of March. I've tried to do such query:
SELECT favfd.day, dv.title, array_to_string(array_agg(distinct "host_name"), ',') AS affected_hosts , htmltoText(dsol.fix),
count(dv.title) FROM fact_asset_vulnerability_finding_date favfd
INNER JOIN dim_vulnerability dv USING(vulnerability_id)
INNER JOIN dim_asset USING(asset_id)
INNER JOIN dim_vulnerability_solution USING(vulnerability_id)
INNER JOIN dim_solution dsol USING(solution_id)
INNER JOIN dim_solution_highest_supercedence dshs USING (solution_id)
WHERE (favfd.day='2018-02-25' OR favfd.day='2018-03-06') AND
dsol.solution_type='PATCH' AND dshs.solution_id=dshs.superceding_solution_id
GROUP BY favfd.day, dv.title, host_name, dsol.fix
ORDER BY favfd.day, dv.title
which gave me following results:
results
I've read that I need to add something like "HAVING COUNT(*)=1" but like you can see in query results my count columns looks quite weird. Here is my results with that line added:
results with having
Can you advice me what I am doing wrong?
One way is to use a HAVING clause to assert your date criteria:
SELECT
dv.title,
array_to_string(array_agg(distinct "host_name"), ',') AS affected_hosts,
htmltoText(dsol.fix),
count(dv.title)
FROM fact_asset_vulnerability_finding_date favfd
INNER JOIN dim_vulnerability dv USING(vulnerability_id)
INNER JOIN dim_asset USING(asset_id)
INNER JOIN dim_vulnerability_solution USING(vulnerability_id)
INNER JOIN dim_solution dsol USING(solution_id)
INNER JOIN dim_solution_highest_supercedence dshs USING (solution_id)
WHERE
dsol.solution_type = 'PATCH' AND
dshs.solution_id = dshs.superceding_solution_id
GROUP BY dv.title, dsol.fix
HAVING
SUM(CASE WHEN favfd.day = '2018-02-25' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) > 0 AND
SUM(CASE WHEN favfd.day = '2018-03-06' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) = 0
ORDER BY favfd.day, dv.title
The only major changes I made were to remove host_name from the GROUP BY clause, because you use this column in aggregate, in the select clause. And I added the HAVING clause to check your logic.
The change you should make is to replace your implicit join syntax with explicit joins. Putting join criteria into the WHERE clause is considered bad practice nowadays.
Trying to populate the location column of a query and was hoping that the use of the COALESCE function would help me get what I want.
SELECT OrderItem.Code AS ItemCode, MAX(COALESCE(OrderItem.Location, [Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData].InventoryLocation)) AS Location, SUM(OrderItem.Quantity) AS Quantity, MAX(Store.StoreName) AS Store
FROM OrderItem
INNER JOIN [Order] ON OrderItem.OrderID = [Order].OrderID
INNER JOIN [Store] ON [Order].StoreID = [Store].StoreID
LEFT JOIN [AmazonOrder] ON [AmazonOrder].OrderID = [Order].OrderID
JOIN [Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData] ON [Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData].[InventoryNumber] = [OrderItem].[Code]
WHERE (CASE WHEN [Order].[LocalStatus] = 'Recently Downloaded' AND [AmazonOrder].FulfillmentChannel = 2 THEN 1
WHEN [Order].[LocalStatus] = 'Recently Downloaded' AND [Store].StoreName != 'Amazon' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END ) = 1
GROUP BY OrderItem.Code
ORDER BY ItemCode
There will not be a location when the Store is Amazon so I need to Join on another table in another database. I don't believe I'm using this correctly. Also I do get the right Location results returned if I use :
SELECT InventoryLocation From [Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData] WHERE InventoryNumber = 'L1201-2W-EA'
Perhaps this is more like the query that you want:
SELECT oi.Code AS ItemCode, COALESCE(oi.Location, id.InventoryLocation) AS Location,
oi.Quantity, s.StoreName AS Store
FROM OrderItem oi INNER JOIN
[Order] o
ON oi.OrderID = o.OrderID INNER JOIN
[Store]
ON o.StoreID = s.StoreID LEFT JOIN
AmazonOrder ao
ON ao.OrderID = o.OrderID JOIN
[Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData] id
ON id.InventoryNumber = oi.[Code]
WHERE o.LocalStatus = 'Recently Downloaded' AND
(ao.FulfillmentChannel = 2 OR s.StoreName <> 'Amazon')
ORDER BY ItemCode
Here are the changes:
Removed the aggregation. It does not seem to be part of the question.
Introduced table aliases, so the query is easier to write and to read.
Simplified the logic in the where clause.
As the comment above says, the max seems somewhat strange, an arbitrary aggregation no doubt due to one of the joins bringing back more information than you might of expected.
Then the statement has a few issues:
The coalesce is using two fields, neither if which is in a left join, only the AmazonOrder is left joined, so that seems a bit strange, that would only work if the first field in the coalesce (OrderItem.Location) is nullable - which it might be, there is no schema posted.
The left join itself is an inner join in disguise at present - within the where clause you have given explicit conditions on a field from that table - AND [AmazonOrder].FulfillmentChannel = 2 - if the record was actually missing the left join would return null for that field, and the where clause would then drop it out of the results. If you want this to properly work as a left join, any condition on fields from that table must move into the join condition, or the where clause itself must allow for that field being null (explicitly or using a coalesce.)
SELECT OrderItem.Code AS Code,
CASE WHEN (LEN(ISNULL(MAX([OrderItem].[Location]),'')) = 1)
THEN MAX([OrderItem].[Location])
ELSE MAX([Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData].InventoryLocation)
END AS Location,
SUM(OrderItem.Quantity) AS Quantity,
MAX(Store.StoreName) AS Store
FROM OrderItem
INNER JOIN [Order] ON OrderItem.OrderID = [Order].OrderID
INNER JOIN [Store] ON [Order].StoreID = [Store].StoreID
LEFT JOIN [AmazonOrder] ON [AmazonOrder].OrderID = [Order].OrderID
LEFT JOIN [Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData] ON [Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData].[InventoryNumber] = [OrderItem].[Code] OR
[Picklist].[dbo].[ItemData].[MediaCreator] = [OrderItem].[Code]
WHERE [Order].LocalStatus = 'Recently Downloaded' AND (AmazonOrder.FulfillmentChannel = 2 OR Store.StoreName <> 'Amazon')
GROUP BY OrderItem.Code
ORDER BY OrderItem.Code
Decided to go with case statement on location column route because I could not get COALESCE to work for me. Schema, some not all data, at SQLFiddle.
I guess if someone gets COALESCE to work I'll change the answer?
#Gordon Linoff I used the re-written WHERE clause because it looked cleaner than using the CASE statement. It worked and guessed there was a simpler way to go about it but was more worried about getting COALESCE to work. As for the Aliases sometimes I like to use them but in this case since there was a lot of tables I like to code out what I'm actually working in. Just my preference .
I have an SQL query
SELECT spt.paymenttype,
MAX(nest.paytypetotal) total
FROM sportpaymenttype spt
INNER JOIN (SELECT spt.paymenttype,
SUM(sod.detailunitprice * sod.detailquantity) paytypetotal
FROM sportorderdetail sod
INNER JOIN sportorder so ON so.orderid = sod.orderid
INNER JOIN sportpaymenttype spt ON spt.paymenttype = so.paymenttype
GROUP BY spt.paymenttype) nest ON nest.paymenttype = spt.paymenttype
GROUP BY spt.paymenttype;
I expect it to return one row (because of the MAX function) however, it returns 4 rows. I came up with a painful way to do it properly but I'm wondering, why the max function is behaving this way?
Also, these are the results, where I only expect the first one
PAYMENTTYPE TOTAL
Loan 8640.95
Check 147.34
Credit Card 479.93
Cash 25.95
What I was wondering is if there was a better way to do this...
SELECT spt.paymenttype,
nest.paytypetotal total
FROM sportpaymenttype spt
INNER JOIN (SELECT spt.paymenttype,
SUM(sod.detailunitprice * sod.detailquantity) paytypetotal
FROM sportorderdetail sod
INNER JOIN sportorder so ON so.orderid = sod.orderid
INNER JOIN sportpaymenttype spt ON spt.paymenttype = so.paymenttype
GROUP BY spt.paymenttype) nest ON nest.paymenttype = spt.paymenttype
WHERE nest.paytypetotal = (SELECT MAX(nest.paytypetotal)
FROM (SELECT spt.paymenttype,
SUM(sod.detailunitprice * sod.detailquantity) paytypetotal
FROM sportorderdetail sod
INNER JOIN sportorder so ON so.orderid = sod.orderid
INNER JOIN sportpaymenttype spt ON spt.paymenttype = so.paymenttype
GROUP BY spt.paymenttype) nest);
Thanks.
It is behaving that way because you're telling Oracle to group by the paymenttype
If you do a MAX(spt.paymenttype) and remove the GROUP BY than it will work as you want it.
The MAX function is an aggregate. When you use a GROUP BY (in your case, the "GROUP BY spt.paymenttype" at the end), the aggregate applies to each group produced by the GROUP BY, not to the result set as a whole. You did get one result row per payment type, as GROUP BY is supposed to do in the absence of filters.
To get one row, pick the single payment type you want, and add a
HAVING spt.paymenttype = 'FOO'
at the very end of the query. If you want the max value across all paytypetotal values, probably easiest (not necessarily best) to make this whole thing into a subquery and then select from it the largest payment value.