Background: We are in process of migrating our ETL from an old database to a new database which record data differently. In order to be as close to our old system (which creates 1 record for sale and another if the sale was cancelled and the NEW system creating only the cancelled record), I need to create another record for these sales so that I match 1:1 between the old and new database.
What would be an effective way to achieve this. For example, I can get 10k records that need duplication. These are based on specific conditions in the database.
Here is the sample of data :
AcctNum CancelFlag SaleDate SalePrice
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Y 2022-06-27 100.00
2 Y 2022-05-10 156.00
Desired output:
AcctNum CancelFlag SaleDate SalePrice
---------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Y 2022-06-27 100.00
1 2022-06-27 -100.00
2 Y 2022-05-10 156.00
2 2022-05-10 -156.00
Please note that on the duped row, I won't have the CancelFlag = Y and the SalePrice will be flipped to a negative sign to indicate the cancellation of the sale.
Thanks for taking the time to read.
So if I understand correctly, you basically want to create new rows for each of those rows selected , with the CheckFlag off, and the amount negated - right?
So try something like this:
INSERT INTO dbo.YourTable (AcctNum, CancelFlag, SaleDate, SalePrice)
SELECT
AcctNum, NULL, SaleDate, SalePrice * -1.0
FROM
dbo.YourTable
WHERE
CancelFlag = 'Y'
AND SalePrice > 0.0;
Does that do what you're looking for? You might need to tweak your WHERE clause to get precisely those existing rows from the table that you're really interested in.
Related
I'm running a SELECT query to get data across multiple tables in the same server instance. However I've just noticed that the rows pulled on some data get duplicated because the main table I'm pulling from has a few different values in one of the columns. Here's the query:
SELECT DISTINCT BIF030.C_ACCOUNT AS ACCOUNTNUMBER,
BIF003.C_ACCOUNTTYPE AS ACCOUNTTYPECODE,
CON013.C_DESCRIPTION AS ACCOUNTTYPE,
BIF003.C_DIVISION AS ZONE_DIVISONCODE,
CON028.C_DESCRIPTION AS ZONE_DIVISION,
BIF030.C_METER as METERNUMBER,
BIF005.C_METERCUSTOM1 AS REGISTERNUMBER,
CONVERT(DECIMAL(20,2), BIF030.N_CONSUMP) AS CONSUMPTION,
CON007.C_DESCRIPTION AS UNITS,
BIF030.T_READDATE AS READINGDATE,
MONTH(BIF030.T_READDATE) AS READINGMONTH,
DAY(BIF030.T_READDATE) AS READINGDAY,
YEAR(BIF030.T_READDATE) AS READINGYEAR,
BIF030.I_DAYS AS READINGDAYSCOUNT
FROM ADVANCED.BIF030
LEFT JOIN ADVANCED.CON007 ON CON007.C_UNITS=BIF030.C_UNITS
LEFT JOIN ADVANCED.BIF005 ON BIF005.C_METER=BIF030.C_METER
LEFT JOIN ADVANCED.BIF003 ON BIF003.C_ACCOUNT=BIF030.C_ACCOUNT
LEFT JOIN ADVANCED.CON013 ON CON013.C_ACCOUNTTYPE=BIF003.C_ACCOUNTTYPE
LEFT JOIN ADVANCED.CON028 ON CON028.C_DIVISION=BIF003.C_DIVISION
WHERE T_READDATE > '01-01-2014'
ORDER BY ACCOUNTNUMBER, READINGDATE ASC
I know SELECT DISTINCT is frowned upon, but I get even more rows without it. Here's a sample of what the data looks like when pulled:
ACCOUNTNUMBER
ACCOUNTTYPECODE
ACCOUNTTYPE
ZONE_DIVISIONCODE
ZONE_DIVISION
METERNUMBER
REGISTERNUMBER
CONSUMPTION
UNITS
READINGDATE
READINGMONTH
READINGDAY
READINGYEAR
READINGDAYSCOUNT
1234567
SP
ACCOUNT TYPE 1
00
00-NO ZONE
123456789
987654321
3.00
Thousands of Gallons
2014-01-16 00:00:00.00
1
16
2014
30
1234567
MF
ACCOUNT TYPE 2
02
02-GRAVITY
123456789
987654321
3.00
Thousands of Gallons
2014-01-16 00:00:00.00
1
16
2014
30
1234567
SR
ACCOUNT TYPE 3
02
02-GRAVITY
123456789
987654321
3.00
Thousands of Gallons
2014-01-16 00:00:00.00
1
16
2014
30
I also know the column that is messing this up is the "AccountTypeCode" because other accounts that don't have multiple codes associated with the "AccountNumber" only show 1 set of rows. So this one specifically (and probably others) is tripling the amount of rows pulled when it should only pull one for each "ReadingDate".
Also if anyone knows a good way to optimize the query I'd be happy to learn. I know just enough SQL to be dangerous, but not enough to figure this out. Thanks.
Ok. So good news and I want to add this in case it helps anyone else in the future. I found out that since the ACCOUNTTYPECODE and ZONE_DIVISIONCODE were coming from the table BIF003 I needed to add more in the WHERE statement. This is what fixed it for me:
AND BIF030.C_CUSTOMER = BIF003.C_CUSTOMER
Because the C_CUSTOMER column was different (it's a column in the BIF003 and BIF030 tables) which lead to the separate ACCOUNTTYPECODE results I need to check it in the WHERE statement.
Thanks everyone for kick starting my brain on this one.
I have the following SQL script(of which the result is displayed under the script). The issue I am having is that I need to add up the quantity on the invoice. The quantity works fine when all the products on the invoice are different. When there is a product that appears twice on the invoice, the result is incorrect. Any help appreciated.
The DISTINCT keyword acts on all columns you select.
A new product introduces a difference which makes it no longer distinct. Hence the extra row(s).
Where you had:
Order Product Total
1 Toaster $10
2 Chair $20
And another item is added to order 1:
Order Product Total
1 Toaster $99
1 Balloon $99 -- Yes that's a $89 balloon!
2 Chair $20
The new row (balloon) is distinct and isn't reduced into the previous row (toaster).
To make is distinct again, don't select the product name:
Order Total
1 $99
2 $20
Uniqueness kicks in and everyone's happy!
If you can remove the column from the select list that's "different", you should get the results you need.
I need A Function or a Trigger to solve this Problem??
customer_details :::
custid name creditid
----------------------------
2 a 1
3 b 2
4 c 3
balance_amount :::
creditid credit_type balance
-----------------------------------
1 rent 1000
1 transport 2000
1 food 1000
1 fruits 1500
2 rent 1500
2 transport 1020
2 food 1200
2 fruits 1000
3 transport 1600
3 rent 2000
3 food 1540
3 fruits 1560
Pay_the_loan :::
creditid credit_type Pay status
---------------------------------------------
1 rent 500 null
2 fruits 600 null
3 transport 400 null
1 fruits 500 null
once i update the status column in pay_the_loan table to ok for a particular creditid i.e..,
(update pay_the_loan set status='ok' where creditid=2)
then it should deduct the amount from the balance column in balance_amount table and it should be updated i.e..,(1000-600=400 in balance_amount table where balance_amount.credit_type=fruits and creditid=2 from balance amount table)
Possible post me a Function or a Trigger to solve this problem ?
You're probably better off restructuring a little, creating a loan_amount table with the original loans, and just make balance_amount a view that shows the current balance with all payments deducted. That way, for example, a correction in a payment amount will not make your system show the wrong balance.
A view that calculates the current balance for you could look something like;
CREATE VIEW balance_amount AS
SELECT la.creditid, la.credit_type, amount
- COALESCE(SUM(pay),0) balance
FROM loan_amount la
LEFT JOIN pay_the_loan pl
ON la.creditid = pl.creditid
AND la.credit_type = pl.credit_type
AND pl.status = 'OK'
GROUP BY la.creditid, la.credit_type, la.amount;
An SQLfiddle with the whole setup.
You can update both tables in the same query:
update
pay_the_loan
set
pay_the_loan.status='ok',
balance_amount.balance=balance_amount.balance-pay_the_loan.Pay
from balance_amount
where
pay_the_loan.creditid=balance_amount.creditid
and
pay_the_loan.creditid=2
and
balance_amount.credit_type='fruits';
Update. I've read the documentation of postgresql update statement. Apparently, I was wrong and it is not possible to update two tables in a single query. However, I still think that you do not need a trigger here. Just use two update queries one after another:
update
pay_the_loan
set
status='ok'
where
pay_the_loan.creditid=2;
update
balance_amount
set
amount=balance_amount.amount-pay_the_loan.Pay
from pay_the_loan
where
pay_the_loan.creditid=balance_amount.creditid
and
pay_the_loan.creditid=2
and
balance_amount.credit_type='fruits';
Sorry in advance if this has already been covered.
I am working on a database which isnt particularly well structured but it is owned by a third party and cannot be changed.
I need some assistance with t-sql in find the next occurrence of a value within the table and return records based on the result. Let me first explain the data. I have simplified this to make it easier to understand.
Polref Effective Date Transaction Type Suffix Value
ABCD1 01/06/2010 New Bus 1 175.00
ABCD1 01/06/2011 Ren 2 200.00
ABCD1 19/08/2011 Adjust 3 50.00
ABCD1 23/04/2012 Adjust 4 50.00
ABCD1 01/06/2012 Ren 5 275.00
So if I ran my query for 2011, the code would need to return in this example rows with suffix 2,3 and 4. So what I have been trying to do is find the first suffix of a New Bus or Ren for the specified year and then finding the next suffix for a New Bus or Ren for the same polref and then using those two suffix values to limit my recordset. It aint working!!
I cant use MAX() as transactions for 2013 have already been added to the system to I would get more records than I actually need.
There result I should be expecting for this example data would be:
ABCD1 300.00
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
To answer another question, If I select 2011 as my year to run the report, there should only be one New Bus or Ren transaction for 2011 so if its a New Bus transaction, the next main transaction will be a Ren, if its a Ren then the next main transaction will be a Ren. Again in my example below, if I run for 2011, it should find the Ren from 01/06/2011 so I want to return that Ren and the two Adjust records.
Sorry, I've not used this forum before so apologies if I was a little vague.
The table I am using has many polrefs so I need this code to calculate totals for all polrefs that fall within the date range. Some polrefs may only have one row, a New Bus, some will have many rows depending on how many adjustments have been made throughout the year of the policy
Partial answer:
This query:
declare #t table (PolRef char(5) not null, EffectiveDate date not null,TransactionType varchar(10) not null,Suffix int not null,Value decimal(10,2) not null)
insert into #t (Polref,EffectiveDate,TransactionType,Suffix,Value) values
('ABCD1','20100601','New Bus',1,175.00),
('ABCD1','20110601','Ren',2,200.00),
('ABCD1','20110819','Adjust',3,50.00),
('ABCD1','20120423','Adjust',4,50.00),
('ABCD1','20120601','Ren',5,275.00)
;With StartTransactions as (
select PolRef,Suffix,ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY PolRef ORDER BY Suffix) rn
from #t where TransactionType in ('New Bus','Ren')
), Periods as (
select st1.PolRef,st1.Suffix as StartSuffix,st2.Suffix as EndSuffix
from
StartTransactions st1
left join
StartTransactions st2
on
st1.PolRef = st2.PolRef and
st1.rn = st2.rn - 1
)
select
p.PolRef,t2.EffectiveDate,SUM(t.Value) as Total
from
Periods p
inner join
#t t
on
p.PolRef = t.PolRef and
p.StartSuffix <= t.Suffix and
(p.EndSuffix > t.Suffix or
p.EndSuffix is null)
inner join
#t t2
on
p.PolRef = t2.PolRef and
t2.Suffix = p.StartSuffix
group by
p.PolRef,t2.EffectiveDate
Groups each set of transactions based on each successive Ren or New Bus transaction:
PolRef EffectiveDate Total
------ ------------- ---------------------------------------
ABCD1 2010-06-01 175.00
ABCD1 2011-06-01 300.00
ABCD1 2012-06-01 275.00
From that, it should be trivial to e.g. select out only the ones you're interested in from a particular year. But your question is still vague on some specifics, so I'm not taking it any further at this point.
Recently in a job interview, I was given the following problem.
Say I have the following table
widget_Name | widget_Costs | In_Stock
---------------------------------------------------------
a | 15.00 | 1
b | 30.00 | 1
c | 20.00 | 1
d | 25.00 | 1
where widget_name is holds the name of the widget, widget_costs is the price of a widget, and in stock is a constant of 1.
Now for my business insurance I have a certain deductible. I am looking to find a sql statement that will tell me every widget and it's price exceeds the deductible. So if my dedudctible is $50.00 the above would just return
widget_Name | widget_Costs | In_Stock
---------------------------------------------------------
a | 15.00 | 1
d | 25.00 | 1
Since widgets b and c where used to meet the deductible
The closest I could get is the following
SELECT
*
FROM (
SELECT
widget_name,
widget_price
FROM interview.tbl_widgets
minus
SELECT widget_name,widget_price
FROM (
SELECT
widget_name,
widget_price,
50 - sum(widget_price) over (ORDER BY widget_price ROWS between unbounded preceding and current row) as running_total
FROM interview.tbl_widgets
)
where running_total >= 0
)
;
Which gives me
widget_Name | widget_Costs | In_Stock
---------------------------------------------------------
c | 20.00 | 1
d | 25.00 | 1
because it uses a and b to meet the majority of the deductible
I was hoping someone might be able to show me the correct answer
EDIT: I understood the interview question to be asking this. Given a table of widgets and their prices and given a dollar amount, substract as many of the widgets you can up to the dollar amount and return those widgets and their prices that remain
I'll put an answer up, just in case it's easier than it looks, but if the idea is just to return any widget that costs more than the deductible then you'd do something like this:
Select
Widget_Name, Widget_Cost, In_Stock
From
Widgets
Where
Widget_Cost > 50 -- SubSelect for variable deductibles?
For your sample data my query returns no rows.
I believe I understand your question, but I'm not 100%. Here is what I'm assuming you mean:
Your deductible is say, $50. To meet the deductible you have you "use" two items. (Is this always two? How high can it go? Can it be just one? What if they don't total exactly $50, there is a lot of missing information). You then want to return the widgets that aren't being used towards deductible. I have the following.
CREATE TABLE #test
(
widget_name char(1),
widget_cost money
)
INSERT INTO #test (widget_name, widget_cost)
SELECT 'a', 15.00 UNION ALL
SELECT 'b', 30.00 UNION ALL
SELECT 'c', 20.00 UNION ALL
SELECT 'd', 25.00
SELECT * FROM #test t1
WHERE t1.widget_name NOT IN (
SELECT t1.widget_name FROM #test t1
CROSS JOIN #test t2
WHERE t1.widget_cost + t2.widget_cost = 50 AND t1.widget_name != t2.widget_name)
Which returns
widget_name widget_cost
----------- ---------------------
a 15.00
d 25.00
This looks like a Bin Packing problem these are really hard to solve especially with SQL.
If you search on SO for Bin Packing + SQL, you'll find how to find Sum(field) in condition ie “select * from table where sum(field) < 150” Which is basically the same problem except you want to add a NOT IN to it.
I couldn't get the accepted answer by brianegge to work but what he wrote about it in general was interesting
..the problem you
describe of wanting the selection of
users which would most closely fit
into a given size, is a bin packing
problem. This is an NP-Hard problem,
and won't be easily solved with ANSI
SQL. However, the above seems to
return the right result, but in fact
it simply starts with the smallest
item, and continues to add items until
the bin is full.
A general, more effective bin packing
algorithm would is to start with the
largest item and continue to add
smaller ones as they fit. This
algorithm would select users 5 and 4.
So with this advice you could write a cursor to loop over the table to do just this (it just wouldn't be pretty).
Aaron Alton gives a nice link to a series of articles that attempts to solve the Bin Packing problem with sql but basically concludes that its probably best to use a cursor to do it.