The concerned tables are as follows:
students(rollno, name, deptcode)
depts(deptcode, deptname)
course(crs_rollno, crs_name, marks)
The query is
Find the name and roll number of the students from each department who obtained
highest total marks in their own department.
Consider:
i) Courses of different department are different.
ii) All students of a particular department take same number and same courses.
Then only the query makes sense.
I wrote a successful query for displaying the maximum total marks by a student in each department.
select do.deptname, max(x.marks) from students so
inner join depts do
on do.deptcode=so.deptcode
inner join(
select s.name as name, d.deptname as deptname, sum(c.marks) as marks from students s
inner join crs_regd c
on s.rollno=c.crs_rollno
inner join depts d
on d.deptcode=s.deptcode
group by s.name,d.deptname) x
on x.name=so.name and x.deptname=do.deptname group by do.deptname;
But as mentioned I need to display the name as well. Accordingly if I include so.name in select list, I need to include it in group by clause and the output is as below:
Kendra Summers Computer Science 274
Stewart Robbins English 80
Cole Page Computer Science 250
Brian Steele English 83
expected output:
Kendra Summers Computer Science 274
Brian Steele English 83
Where is the problem?
I guess this can be easily achieved if you use window function -
select name, deptname, marks
from (select s.name as name, d.deptname as deptname, sum(c.marks) as marks,
row_number() over(partition by d.deptname order by sum(c.marks) desc) rn
from students s
inner join crs_regd c on s.rollno=c.crs_rollno
inner join depts d on d.deptcode=s.deptcode
group by s.name,d.deptname) x
where rn = 1;
To solve the problem with a readable query I had to define a couple of views:
total_marks: For each student the sum of their marks
create view total_marks as select s.deptcode, s.name, s.rollno, sum(c.marks) as total from course c, students s where s.rollno = c.crs_rollno group by s.rollno;
dept_max: For each department the highest total score by a single student of that department
create view dept_max as select deptcode, max(total) max_total from total_marks group by deptcode;
So I can get the desidered output with the query
select a.deptcode, a.rollno, a.name from total_marks a join dept_max b on a.deptcode = b.deptcode and a.total = b.max_total
If you don't want to use views you can replace their selects on the final query, which will result in this:
select a.deptcode, a.rollno, a.name
from
(select s.deptcode, s.name, s.rollno, sum(c.marks) as total from course c, students s where s.rollno = c.crs_rollno group by s.rollno) a
join (select deptcode, max(total) max_total from (select s.deptcode, s.name, s.rollno, sum(c.marks) as total from course c, students s where s.rollno = c.crs_rollno group by s.rollno) a_ group by deptcode) b
on a.deptcode = b.deptcode and a.total = b.max_total
Which I'm sure it is easily improvable in performance by someone more skilled then me...
If you (and anybody else) want to try it the way I did, here is the schema:
create table depts ( deptcode int primary key auto_increment, deptname varchar(20) );
create table students ( rollno int primary key auto_increment, name varchar(20) not null, deptcode int, foreign key (deptcode) references depts(deptcode) );
create table course ( crs_rollno int, crs_name varchar(20), marks int, foreign key (crs_rollno) references students(rollno) );
And here all the entries I inserted:
insert into depts (deptname) values ("Computer Science"),("Biology"),("Fine Arts");
insert into students (name,deptcode) values ("Turing",1),("Jobs",1),("Tanenbaum",1),("Darwin",2),("Mendel",2),("Bernard",2),("Picasso",3),("Monet",3),("Van Gogh",3);
insert into course (crs_rollno,crs_name,marks) values
(1,"Algorithms",25),(1,"Database",28),(1,"Programming",29),(1,"Calculus",30),
(2,"Algorithms",24),(2,"Database",22),(2,"Programming",28),(2,"Calculus",19),
(3,"Algorithms",21),(3,"Database",27),(3,"Programming",23),(3,"Calculus",26),
(4,"Zoology",22),(4,"Botanics",28),(4,"Chemistry",30),(4,"Anatomy",25),(4,"Pharmacology",27),
(5,"Zoology",29),(5,"Botanics",27),(5,"Chemistry",26),(5,"Anatomy",25),(5,"Pharmacology",24),
(6,"Zoology",18),(6,"Botanics",19),(6,"Chemistry",22),(6,"Anatomy",23),(6,"Pharmacology",24),
(7,"Sculpture",26),(7,"History",25),(7,"Painting",30),
(8,"Sculpture",29),(8,"History",24),(8,"Painting",30),
(9,"Sculpture",21),(9,"History",19),(9,"Painting",25) ;
Those inserts will load these data:
select * from depts;
+----------+------------------+
| deptcode | deptname |
+----------+------------------+
| 1 | Computer Science |
| 2 | Biology |
| 3 | Fine Arts |
+----------+------------------+
select * from students;
+--------+-----------+----------+
| rollno | name | deptcode |
+--------+-----------+----------+
| 1 | Turing | 1 |
| 2 | Jobs | 1 |
| 3 | Tanenbaum | 1 |
| 4 | Darwin | 2 |
| 5 | Mendel | 2 |
| 6 | Bernard | 2 |
| 7 | Picasso | 3 |
| 8 | Monet | 3 |
| 9 | Van Gogh | 3 |
+--------+-----------+----------+
select * from course;
+------------+--------------+-------+
| crs_rollno | crs_name | marks |
+------------+--------------+-------+
| 1 | Algorithms | 25 |
| 1 | Database | 28 |
| 1 | Programming | 29 |
| 1 | Calculus | 30 |
| 2 | Algorithms | 24 |
| 2 | Database | 22 |
| 2 | Programming | 28 |
| 2 | Calculus | 19 |
| 3 | Algorithms | 21 |
| 3 | Database | 27 |
| 3 | Programming | 23 |
| 3 | Calculus | 26 |
| 4 | Zoology | 22 |
| 4 | Botanics | 28 |
| 4 | Chemistry | 30 |
| 4 | Anatomy | 25 |
| 4 | Pharmacology | 27 |
| 5 | Zoology | 29 |
| 5 | Botanics | 27 |
| 5 | Chemistry | 26 |
| 5 | Anatomy | 25 |
| 5 | Pharmacology | 24 |
| 6 | Zoology | 18 |
| 6 | Botanics | 19 |
| 6 | Chemistry | 22 |
| 6 | Anatomy | 23 |
| 6 | Pharmacology | 24 |
| 7 | Sculpture | 26 |
| 7 | History | 25 |
| 7 | Painting | 30 |
| 8 | Sculpture | 29 |
| 8 | History | 24 |
| 8 | Painting | 30 |
| 9 | Sculpture | 21 |
| 9 | History | 19 |
| 9 | Painting | 25 |
+------------+--------------+-------+
I take chance to point out that this database is badly designed. This becomes evident with course table. For these reasons:
The name is singular
This table does not represent courses, but rather exams or scores
crs_name should be a foreign key referencing the primary key of another table (that would actually represent the courses)
There is no constrains to limit the marks to a range and to avoid a student to take twice the same exam
I find more logical to associate courses to departments, instead of student to departments (this way also would make these queries easier)
I tell you this because I understood you are learning from a book, so unless the book at one point says "this database is poorly designed", do not take this exercise as example to design your own!
Anyway, if you manually resolve the query with my data you will come to this results:
+----------+--------+---------+
| deptcode | rollno | name |
+----------+--------+---------+
| 1 | 1 | Turing |
| 2 | 6 | Bernard |
| 3 | 8 | Monet |
+----------+--------+---------+
As further reference, here the contents of the views I needed to define:
select * from total_marks;
+----------+-----------+--------+-------+
| deptcode | name | rollno | total |
+----------+-----------+--------+-------+
| 1 | Turing | 1 | 112 |
| 1 | Jobs | 2 | 93 |
| 1 | Tanenbaum | 3 | 97 |
| 2 | Darwin | 4 | 132 |
| 2 | Mendel | 5 | 131 |
| 2 | Bernard | 6 | 136 |
| 3 | Picasso | 7 | 81 |
| 3 | Monet | 8 | 83 |
| 3 | Van Gogh | 9 | 65 |
+----------+-----------+--------+-------+
select * from dept_max;
+----------+-----------+
| deptcode | max_total |
+----------+-----------+
| 1 | 112 |
| 2 | 136 |
| 3 | 83 |
+----------+-----------+
Hope I helped!
Try the following query
select a.name, b.deptname,c.marks
from students a
, crs_regd b
, depts c
where a.rollno = b.crs_rollno
and a.deptcode = c.deptcode
and(c.deptname,b.marks) in (select do.deptname, max(x.marks)
from students so
inner join depts do
on do.deptcode=so.deptcode
inner join (select s.name as name
, d.deptname as deptname
, sum(c.marks) as marks
from students s
inner join crs_regd c
on s.rollno=c.crs_rollno
inner join depts d
on d.deptcode=s.deptcode
group by s.name,d.deptname) x
on x.name=so.name
and x.deptname=do.deptname
group by do.deptname
)
Inner/Sub query will fetch the course name and max marks and the outer query gets the corresponding name of the student.
try and let know if you got the desired result
Dense_Rank() function would be helpful in this scenario:
SELECT subquery.*
FROM (SELECT Student_Total_Marks.rollno,
Student_Total_Marks.name,
Student_Total_Marks.deptcode, depts.deptname,
rank() over (partition by deptcode order by total_marks desc) Student_Rank
FROM (SELECT Stud.rollno,
Stud.name,
Stud.deptcode,
sum(course.marks) total_marks
FROM students stud inner join course course on stud.rollno = course.crs_rollno
GROUP BY stud.rollno,Stud.name,Stud.deptcode) Student_Total_Marks,
dept dept
WHERE Student_Total_Marks.deptcode = dept.deptname
GROUP BY Student_Total_Marks.deptcode) subquery
WHERE suquery.student_rank = 1
I would like to filter my table by MIN() function but still keep columns which cant be grouped.
I have table:
+----+----------+----------------------+
| ID | distance | geom |
+----+----------+----------------------+
| 1 | 2 | DSDGSAsd23423DSFF |
| 2 | 11.2 | SXSADVERG678BNDVS4 |
| 2 | 2 | XCZFETEFD567687SDF |
| 3 | 24 | SADASDSVG3423FD |
| 3 | 10 | SDFSDFSDF343DFDGF |
| 4 | 34 | SFDHGHJ546GHJHJHJ |
| 5 | 22 | SDFSGTHHGHGFHUKJYU45 |
| 6 | 78 | SDFDGDHKIKUI45 |
| 6 | 15 | DSGDHHJGHJKHGKHJKJ65 |
+----+----------+----------------------+
This is what I would like to achieve:
+----+----------+----------------------+
| ID | distance | geom |
+----+----------+----------------------+
| 1 | 2 | DSDGSAsd23423DSFF |
| 2 | 2 | XCZFETEFD567687SDF |
| 3 | 10 | SDFSDFSDF343DFDGF |
| 4 | 34 | SFDHGHJ546GHJHJHJ |
| 5 | 22 | SDFSGTHHGHGFHUKJYU45 |
| 6 | 15 | DSGDHHJGHJKHGKHJKJ65 |
+----+----------+----------------------+
it is possible when I use MIN() on distance column and grouping by ID but then I loose my geom which is essential.
The query looks like this:
SELECT "ID", MIN(distance) AS distance FROM somefile GROUP BY "ID"
the result is:
+----+----------+
| ID | distance |
+----+----------+
| 1 | 2 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 3 | 10 |
| 4 | 34 |
| 5 | 22 |
| 6 | 15 |
+----+----------+
but this is not what I want.
Any suggestions?
One common approach to this is to find the minimum values in a derived table that you join with:
SELECT somefile."ID", somefile.distance, somefile.geom
FROM somefile
JOIN (
SELECT "ID", MIN(distance) AS distance FROM somefile GROUP BY "ID"
) t ON t.distance = somefile.distance AND t.ID = somefile.ID;
Sample SQL Fiddle
You need a window function to do this:
SELECT "ID", distance, geom
FROM (
SELECT "ID", distance, geom, rank() OVER (PARTITION BY "ID" ORDER BY distance) AS rnk
FROM somefile) sub
WHERE rnk = 1;
This effectively orders the entire set of rows first by the "ID" value, then by the distance and returns the record for each "ID" where the distance is minimal - no need to do a GROUP BY.
select a.*,b.geom from
(SELECT ID, MIN(distance) AS distance FROM somefile GROUP BY ID) as a
inner join somefile as b on a.id=b.id and a.distance=b.distance
You can use "distinct on" clause of the PostgreSQL.
select distinct on(id) id, distance, geom
from table_name
order by distance;
I think this is what you are exactly looking for.
For more details on how "distinct on" works, refer the documentation and the example.
But, remember, using "distinct on" does not comply to SQL standards.
I have two tables:
1. Master
| ID | Name | Amount |
|-----|--------|--------|
| 1 | a | 5000 |
| 2 | b | 10000 |
| 3 | c | 5000 |
| 4 | d | 8000 |
2. Detail
| ID |MasterID| PID | Qty |
|-----|--------|-------|------|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | 20 |
| 3 | 2 | 2 | 60 |
| 4 | 2 | 3 | 10 |
| 5 | 3 | 4 | 100 |
| 6 | 4 | 1 | 20 |
| 7 | 4 | 3 | 40 |
I want to select sum(Amount) from Master which joins to Deatil where Detail.PID in (1,2,3)
So I execute the following query:
SELECT SUM(Amount) FROM Master M INNER JOIN Detail D ON M.ID = D.MasterID WHERE D.PID IN (1,2,3)
Result should be 20000. But I am getting 40000
See this fiddle. Any suggestion?
You are getting exactly double the amount because the detail table has two occurences for each of the PIDs in the WHERE clause.
See demo
Use
SELECT SUM(Amount)
FROM Master M
WHERE M.ID IN (
SELECT DISTINCT MasterID
FROM DETAIL
WHERE PID IN (1,2,3) )
What is the requirement of joining the master table with details when you have all your columns are in Master table.
Also, isnt there any FK relationhsip defined on these tables. Looking at your data it seems to me that there should be FK on detail table for MasterId. If that is the case then you do not need join the table at all.
Also, in case you want to make sure that you have records in details table for the records for which you need sum and there is no FK relationship. Then you could give a try for exists instead of join.