I'm having difficulties trying to return some data from a poorly structured one to many table.
I've been provided with a data export where everything from 'Section Codes' onwards (in cat_fullxPath) relates to a 'skillID' in my clients database.
The results previously returned on one line but I've used a split function to break these out (from the cat_fullXPath column). You can see the relevant 'skillID' from my clients DB in the far right column:
From here, there are thousands of records that may have a mixture of these skillIDs (and many others, I've just provided this one example). I want to be able to find the records that match all 4 (or however many match from another example) skillIDs and ONLY those.
For example (I just happen to know this ID gives me the results I want):
SELECT
id
skillID
FROM table1
WHERE skillID IN ( 1004464, 1006543, 1004605, 1006740 )
AND id = 69580;
This returns me:
Note that these are the only columns in that table.
So this is an ID I'd want to return.
These are results I'd not want to return as one of the skillIDs are missing:
I've created a temp table with a count of all the skills for each ID but I'm not sure if I'm going down the right path at this point
I'm pretty sure that there's a simple solution to this, however I'm hitting my head against the wall. Hope someone can help!
EDIT
This might be a clearer example of when there are different groups of skillIds that I need to align. I've partitioned these off by cat_fullxpath to see if this makes things clearer:
In this screenshot, for example I want to find the ids for everything in table1 where skillID IN (1003914,1005354,1004701) then repeat for (1004659,1004492,1004493,1004701). etc
We know that you need exactly 4 skills, so just make a subquery:
select id from
(
SELECT
id
count(skillID) countSkill
FROM table1
WHERE skillID IN ( 1004464, 1006543, 1004605, 1006740 )
group by id;
)
where countSkill = 4;
Could work with sum, instead of count. But instead of filtering by the 4, you filter by 4022352, which is the sum of all skillID.
You can also remove the subquery and use HAVING. But you will obtain worse performance.
SELECT
id
count(skillID) countSkill
FROM table1
WHERE skillID IN ( 1004464, 1006543, 1004605, 1006740 )
group by id
having count(skillID) = 4;
You haven't told us your DBMS. Here is a standard SQL approach:
select id
from table1
group by id
having count(case when skillid = 1004464 then 1 end) > 0
and count(case when skillid = 1006543 then 1 end) > 0
and count(case when skillid = 1004605 then 1 end) > 0
and count(case when skillid = 1006740 then 1 end) > 0
and count(case when skillid not in (1004464, 1006543, 1004605, 1006740) then 1 end) = 0;
Another option is to concatenate all skills and see if the resulting skill list matches the desired skill list. In SQL Server the string aggregation function is STRING_AGG.
select id
from table1
group by id
having string_agg(skillid, ',') within group (order by skillid) in
(
'1004464,1004605,1006543,1006740'
);
You can easily extend the IN clause with other combinations or even get the list from another table. Only make sure the skill IDs in the strings are sorted in order to make the strings comparable ('1004464,1004605,1006543,1006740' <> '1006740,1004464,1004605,1006543').
Related
I have a large database and i'd like to pull info from a table (Term) where the Names are not linked to a PartyId for a certain SearchId. However:
There are multiple versions of the searches (sometimes 20-40 - otherwise I think SQL - Comparing two rows and two columns would work for me)
The PartyId will almost always be NULL for the first version for the search, and if the same Name for the same SearchId has a PartyId associated in a later version the NULL row should not appear in the results of the query.
I have 8 left joins to display the information requested - 3 of them are joined on the Term table
A very simplified sample of data is below
CASE statement? Join the table with itself for comparison? A temp table or do I just return the fields I'm joining on and/or want to display?
Providing sample data that yields no expected result is not as useful as providing data that gives an expected result..
When asking a question start with defining the problem in plain English. If you can't you don't understand your problem well enough yet. Then define the tables which are involved in the problem (including the columns) and sample data; the SQL you've tried, and what you're expected result is using the data in your sample. Without this minimum information we make many guesses and even with that information we may have to make assumptions; but without a minimum verifiable example showing illustrating your question, helping is problematic.
--End soap box
I'm guessing you're after only the names for a searchID which has a NULL partyID for the highest SearchVerID
So if we eliminated ID 6 from your example data, then 'Bob' would be returned
If we added ID 9 to your sample data for name 'Harry' with a searchID of 2 and a searchVerID of 3 and a null partyID then 'Harry' too would be returned...
If my understanding is correct, then perhaps...
WITH CTE AS (
SELECT Name, Row_Number() over (partition by Name order by SearchVersID Desc)
FROM Term
WHERE SearchID = 2)
SELECT Name
FROM CTE
WHERE RN = 1
and partyID is null;
This assigns a row number (RN) to each name starting at 1 and increasing by one for each entry; for searchID's of 2. The highest searchversion will always have a RN of 1. Then we filter to include only those RN which are 1 and have a null partyID. This would result in only those names having a searchID of 2 the highest search version and a NULL partyID
Ok So I took the question a different way too..
If you simply want all the names not linked to a PartyID for a given search.
SELECT A.*
FROM TERM A
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM TERM B
WHERE A.Name = B.Name
AND SearchID = 2) and partyID is not null)
AND searchID = 2
The above should return all term records associated to searchID 2
that have a partyId. This last method is the exists not exists and set logic I was talking about in comments.
I need to write an sql query that will pull back the data that meets several groups of criteria from the same table. The easiest way to describe is to imagine using an SQL "in" clause but instead of the internals of that clause being "or"s joining the parameters you want it to match it is instead an "and".
I attempted to use count to verify the correct amount of data was pulled back for each "in" statement but the count can't always be trusted due to other entries being similar for each column.
A sample table might be this:
id count animal
--- ----- ------
1 5 puppy
1 6 cat
1 6 puppy
So, now I need a query that will pull back all entries with an id of 1 and a count of 5 and 6 and an animal of puppy and cat. I pretty much need to verify the entire path of the table entry to know I want to pull it back. Is there any built in function that can do this? Do I need to use a recursive CTE to dig deep after confirming that one set of criteria is met? Thanks for any help.
If I got it right
with cnt as(
select id
from tbl
where [count] in (5,6) and animal in ('puppy', 'cat')
group by id
having count(distinct[count])=2 and count(distinct animal)=2
)
select id, [count], animal
from tbl
where id in (select id from cnt);
It's kind of confusing what you're looking for exactly but can you not use or's and ands?
select id, count, animal
from table
where id = 1 and
(count = 5 or count = 6) and
(animal = puppy or anmial = cat)
I think you just want:
select t.*
from t
where id = 1 and
count in (5, 6) and
animal in ('puppy', 'cat');
EDIT:
If you want them all in the same row, just rearrange the conditions:
select t.*
from t
where id = 1 and
( (count = 5 and animal = 'puppy') or
(count = 6 and animal = 'cat')
);
I have a single table of activities, some labelled 'Assessment' (type_id of 50) and some 'Counselling' (type_id of 9) with dates of the activities. I need to compare these dates to find how long people wait for counselling after assessment. The table contains rows for many people, and that is the primary key of 'id'. My problem is how to produce a result row with both the assessment details and the counselling details for the same person, so that I can compare the dates. I've tried joining the table to itself, and tried nested subqueries, I just can't fathom it. I'm using Access 2010 btw.
Please forgive my stupidity, but here's an example of joining the table to itself that doesn't work, producing nothing (not surprising):
Table looks like:
ID TYPE_ID ACTIVITY_DATE_TIME
----------------------------------
1 9 20130411
1 v 50 v 20130511
2 9 20130511
3 9 20130511
In the above the last two rows have only had assessment so I want to ignore them, and just work on the situation where there's both assessment and counselling 'type-id'
SELECT
civicrm_activity.id, civicrm_activity.type_id,
civicrm_activity.activity_date_time,
civicrm_activity_1.type_id,
civicrm_activity_1.activity_date_time
FROM
civicrm_activity INNER JOIN civicrm_activity AS civicrm_activity_1
ON civicrm_activity.id = civicrm_activity_1.id
WHERE
civicrm_activity.type_id=9
AND civicrm_activity_1.type_id=50;
I'm actually wondering whether this is in fact not possible to do with SQL? I hope it is possible? Thank you for your patience!
Sounds to me like you only want to get the ID numbers where you have a TYPE_ID entry of both 9 and 50.
SELECT DISTINCT id FROM civicrm_activity WHERE type_id = '9' AND id IN (SELECT id FROM civicrm_activity WHERE type_id = '50');
This will give you a list of id's that has entries with both type_id 9 and 50. With that list you can now go and get the specifics.
Use this SQL for the time of type_id 9
SELECT activity_date_time FROM civicrm_activity WHERE id = 'id_from_last_sql' AND type_id = '9'
Use this SQL for the time of type_id 50
SELECT activity_date_time FROM civicrm_activity WHERE id = 'id_from_last_sql' AND type_id = '50'
Your query looks OK to me, too. The one problem might be that you use only one table alias. I don't know, but perhaps Access treats the table name "specially" such that, in effect, the WHERE clause says
WHERE
civicrm_activity.type_id=9
AND civicrm_activity.type_id=50;
That would certainly explain zero rows returned!
To fix that, use an alias for each table. I suggest shorter ones,
SELECT A.id, A.type_id, A.activity_date_time,
B.type_id, B.activity_date_time
FROM civicrm_activity as A
JOIN civicrm_activity as B
ON A.id = B.id
WHERE A.type_id=9
AND B.type_id=50;
I'm building a BI report for a client where there is a 1-n related join involved.
The joined table has a field for employee ID (EmplId).
The query that I've built for this report is supposed to give a 1 in its field "OneEmployee" if all the related posts have the same employee in the EmplId field, null if it's different employees, i.e:
TaskTrans
TaskTransHours > EmplId: 'John'
TaskTransHours > EmplId: 'John'
This should give a 1 in the said field in the query
TaskTrans
TaskTransHours > EmplId: 'John'
TaskTransHours > EmplId: 'George'
This should leave the said field blank
The idea is to create a field where a case function checks this and returns the correct value. But my problem is whereas there is a way to check for this through SQL.
select not count(*) from your_table
where employee_id = GIVEN_ID
and your_field not in ( select min(your_field)
from your_table
where employee_id = GIVEN_ID);
Note: my first idea was to use LIMIT 1 in the inner query, but MYSQL didn't like it, so min it was - the points to use any, but only one. Min should work, but the field should be indexed, then this query will actually execute rather fast, as only indexes would be used (obviously employee_id should also be indexed).
Note2: Do not get too confused with not in front of count(*), you want 1 when there is none that is different, I count different ones, and then give you the not count(*), which will be one if count is 0, otherwise 0.
Seems a job for a window COUNT():
SELECT
…,
CASE COUNT(DISTINCT TaskTransHours.EmplId) OVER () WHEN 1 THEN 1 END
AS OneEmployee
FROM …
2 records in above image are from Db, in above table Constraint are (SID and LINE_ITEM_ID),
SID and LINE_ITEM_ID both column are used to find a unique record.
My issues :
I am looking for a query it should fetch the recored from DB depending on conditions
if i search for PART_NUMBER = 'PAU43-IMB-P6'
1. it should fetch one record from DB if search for PART_NUMBER = 'PAU43-IMB-P6', no mater to which SID that item belong to if there is only one recored either under SID =1 or SID = 2.
2. it should fetch one record which is under SID = 2 only, from DB on search for PART_NUMBER = 'PAU43-IMB-P6', if there are 2 items one in SID=1 and other in SID=2.
i am looking for a query which will search for a given part_number depending on Both SID 1 and 2, and it should return value under SID =2 and it can return value under SID=1 only if the there are no records under SID=2 (query has to withstand a load of Million record search).
Thank you
Select *
from Table
where SID||LINE_ITEM_ID = (
select Max(SID)||Max(LINE_ITEM_ID)
from table
where PART_NUMBER = 'PAU43-IMB-P6'
);
If I understand correctly, for each considered LINE_ITEM_ID you want to return only the one with the largest value for SID. This is a common requirement and, as with most things in SQL, can be written in many different ways; the best performing will depend on many factors, not least of which is the SQL product you are using.
Here's one possible approach:
SELECT DISTINCT * -- use a column list
FROM YourTable AS T1
INNER JOIN (
SELECT T2.LINE_ITEM_ID,
MAX(T2.SID) AS max_SID
FROM YourTable AS T2
GROUP
BY T2.LINE_ITEM_ID
) AS DT1 (LINE_ITEM_ID, max_SID)
ON T1.LINE_ITEM_ID = DT1.LINE_ITEM_ID
AND T1.SID = DT1.max_SID;
That said, I don't recall seeing one that relies on the UNION relational operator. You could easily rewrite the above using the INTERSECT relational operator but it would be more verbose.
Well in my case it worked something like this:
select LINE_ITEM_ID,SID,price_1,part_number from (
(select LINE_ITEM_ID,SID,price_1,part_number from Table where SID = 2)
UNION
(select LINE_ITEM_ID,SID,price_1,part_number from Table SID = 1 and line_item_id NOT IN (select LINE_ITEM_ID,SID,price_1,part_number from Table SID = 2)))
This query solved my issue..........