I have a table with the following:
| Customer | Order Count|
-----------------------
| 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 3 | 1 |
and I want to create an additional column so I end up with the following:
| Customer | Order Count| Status |
--------------------------------
| 1 | 1 | new |
| 2 | 2 | old |
| 3 | 1 | new |
How can I structure my query in order to do so?
edit: the logic for the status labeling is that new customers only have one order, and old customers have > 1
Assuming that 1 means "new" and 2 means "old", you can use a case expression:
select t.*,
case order_count
when 1 then 'new'
when 2 then 'old'
else '??'
end as status
from mytable t
Or, if you want to create a computed column:
alter table mytable
add column status varchar(10)
generated always as (
case order_count
when 1 then 'new'
when 2 then 'old'
else '??'
end
)
stored
;
Related
I have a table with old values (some null) and new values for various attributes, all inserted at different add times throughout the months. I'm trying to update a second table with records with business month end dates. Right now, these records only contain the most recent new values for all month end dates. The goal is to create historical data by updating the previous month end values with the old values from the first table. I am a beginner and was able to come up with a query to update on one object where there was one entry from the first table. Now I am trying to expand the query to include multiple objects, with possible, multiple old values within the same month. I tried to use "order by" (since I need to make updates for a month in ascending order so it gets the latest value) but read that doesn't work with update statements without a subquery. So I tried my hand at making a more complicated query, without success. I am getting the following error: single-row subquery returns more than one row. Thanks!
TableA:
| ID | TYPE | OLD_VALUE | NEW_VALUE | ADD_TIME|
-----------------------------------------------
| 1 | A | 2 | 3 | 1/11/2019 8:00:00am |
| 1 | B | 3 | 4 | 12/10/2018 8:00:00am|
| 1 | B | 4 | 5 | 12/11/2018 8:00:00am|
| 2 | A | 5 | 1 | 12/5/2018 08:00:00am|
| 2 | A | 1 | 2 | 12/5/2019 09:00:00am|
| 2 | A | 2 | 3 | 12/5/2019 10:00:00am|
| 2 | B | 1 | 2 | 12/5/2019 10:00:00am|
TableB
| ID | MONTH_END | TYPE_A | TYPE_B |
-----------------------------------
| 1 | 1/31/19 | 3 | 5 |
| 1 | 12/31/18 | 3 | 5 |
| 1 | 11/30/18 | 3 | 5 |
| 2 | 12/31/18 | 3 | 2 |
| 2 | 11/30/18 | 3 | 2 |
Desired Output for TableB
| ID | MONTH_END | TYPE_A | TYPE_B |
-----------------------------------
| 1 | 1/31/19 | 3 | 5 |
| 1 | 12/31/18 | 2 | 5 |
| 1 | 11/30/18 | 2 | 3 |
| 2 | 12/31/18 | 3 | 2 |
| 2 | 11/30/18 | 5 | 2 |
My Query for Type A (Which I plan to adapt for Type B and execute as well for the desired output)
update TableB B
set b.type_a =
(
with aa as
(
select id, nvl(old_value, new_value) typea, add_time
from TableA
where type = 'A'
order by id, add_time ascending
)
select typea
from aa
where aa.id = b.id
and b.month_end <= aa.add_tm
)
where exists
(
with aa as
(
select id, nvl(old_value, new_value) typea, add_time
from TableA
where type = 'A'
order by id, add_time ascending
)
select typea
from aa
where aa.id = b.id
and b.month_end <= aa.add_tm
)
Kudo's for giving example input data and desired output. I found your question a bit confusing so let me rephrase to "Provide the last type a value from table a that is in the same month as the month end.
By matching on type and date of entry, we can get your answer. The "ROWNUM=1" is to limit result set to a single entry in case there is more than one row with the same add_time. This SQL is still a mess, maybe someone else can come up with a better one.
UPDATE tableb b
SET b.typea =
(SELECT old_value
FROM tablea a
WHERE LAST_DAY( TRUNC( a.add_time ) ) = b.month_end
AND TYPE = 'A'
AND add_time =
(SELECT MAX( add_time )
FROM tablea
WHERE TYPE = 'A' AND LAST_DAY( TRUNC( a.add_time ) ) = b.month_end)
AND ROWNUM = 1)
WHERE EXISTS
(SELECT old_value
FROM tablea a
WHERE LAST_DAY( TRUNC( a.add_time ) ) = b.month_end AND TYPE = 'A');
I've seen similar questions about but not quite hitting the nail on the head for what I need. Lets say I have a table.
+-----+-------+
| ID | Value |
+-----+-------+
| 123 | 1 |
| 123 | 2 |
| 123 | 3 |
| 456 | 1 |
| 456 | 2 |
| 456 | 4 |
| 789 | 1 |
| 789 | 2 |
+-----+-------+
I want to return DISTINCT IDs but exclude those that have a certain value. For example lets say I don't want any IDs that have a 3 as a value. My results should look like.
+-----+
| ID |
+-----+
| 456 |
| 789 |
+-----+
I hope this makes sense. If more information is needed please ask and if this has been answered before please point me in the right direction. Thanks.
You can use group by and having:
select id
from t
group by id
having sum(case when value = 3 then 1 else 0 end) = 0;
The having clause counts the number of "3"s for each id. The = 0 returns only returns groups where the count is 0 (i.e. there are no "3"s).
You can use not exists :
select distinct t.id
from table t
where not exists (select 1 from table t1 where t1.id = t.id and t1.value = 3);
Try this:
select id from tablename
group by id
having (case when value=3 then 1 else 0 end)=0
You can also use EXCEPT for comparing following two data sets that will give the desired result set
select distinct Id from ValuesTbl
except
select Id from ValuesTbl where Value = 3
Say I have the following table:
CREATE TABLE data (
PROJECT_ID VARCHAR,
TASK_ID VARCHAR,
REF_ID VARCHAR,
REF_VALUE VARCHAR
);
I want to identify rows where
PROJECT_ID, REF_ID, REF_VALUE are the same
but TASK_ID are different.
The desired output is a list of TASK_ID_1, TASK_ID_2 and COUNT(*) of such conflicts. So, for example,
DATA
+------------+---------+--------+-----------+
| PROJECT_ID | TASK_ID | REF_ID | REF_VALUE |
+------------+---------+--------+-----------+
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
+------------+---------+--------+-----------+
OUTPUT
+-----------+-----------+----------+
| TASK_ID_1 | TASK_ID_2 | COUNT(*) |
+-----------+-----------+----------+
| 1 | 2 | 2 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 |
+-----------+-----------+----------+
would mean that there are two entries with TASK_ID == 1 and two entries with TASK_ID == 2 that share the same values for the other three columns. The inherent symmetry in the output is fine.
How would I go about finding this information? I've tried joining the table onto itself and grouping, but this turned up more results for a single task than the table had rows altogether, so it's clearly wrong.
The database used is PostgreSQL, though a solution that applies to most common SQL systems would be preferable.
You want a self join and aggregation:
select d1.task_id as task_id_1, d2.task_id as task_id_2, count(*)
from data d1 join
data d2
on d1.project_id = d2.project_id and
d1.ref_id = d2.ref_id and
d1.ref_value = d2.ref_value and
d1.task_id <> d2.task_id
group by d1.task_id, d2.task_id;
Notes:
Add the condition d1.task_id < d2.task_id if you want each pair to occur only once in the result set.
This does not handle NULL values, although that is easy enough to handle. Use is not distinct from instead of =.
You can also simplify this a bit with the using clause:
select d1.task_id as task_id_1, d2.task_id as task_id_2, count(*)
from data d1 join
data d2
using (project_id, ref_id, ref_value)
where d1.task_id <> d2.task_id
group by d1.task_id, d2.task_id;
You can get an idea of how many rows might be returned by using:
select d.project_id, d.ref_id, d.ref_value, count(distinct d.task_id), count(*)
from data d
group by d.project_id, d.ref_id, d.ref_value;
This is how I understand your question. This assume there are only two task for the same combination.
SQL DEMO
SELECT "PROJECT_ID", "REF_ID", "REF_VALUE",
MIN("TASK_ID") as TASK_ID_1,
MAX("TASK_ID") as TASK_ID_2,
COUNT(*) as cnt
FROM Table1
GROUP BY "PROJECT_ID", "REF_ID", "REF_VALUE"
HAVING MIN("TASK_ID") != MAX("TASK_ID")
-- COUNT(*) > 1 also should work
OUTPUT
I add more column to make clear what are the same elements:
| PROJECT_ID | REF_ID | REF_VALUE | task_id_1 | task_id_2 | cnt |
|------------|--------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----|
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
I have following sample data in Oracle v.12 database
ID | NAME | DML_TYPE | FND_FILESEQNO | FND_FILERBA
---------------------------------------------------------
1 | name1a | insert | 1 | 1
1 | name1b | update | 1 | 2
2 | name2a | insert | 2 | 1
2 | name2b | update | 2 | 2
....
....
....
I want following 2 transactions to happen
delete old records (FND_FILESEQNO + FND_FILERBA) partition by 'ID' column
update latest record DML_TYPE = 'insert'
So eventually, if I query this table, I should get following result...
ID | NAME | DML_TYPE | FND_FILESEQNO | FND_FILERBA
---------------------------------------------------------
1 | name1b | insert | 1 | 2
2 | name2b | insert | 2 | 2
Many thanks
Try This:-
MERGE INTO STACTOVER a
USING ( SELECT * FROM (
SELECT STACTOVER.*,Row_Number() OVER(PARTITION BY ID ORDER BY ID)rn
FROM STACTOVER)WHERE rn>1
)b
ON
(a.ID = b.ID)
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE SET a.dml_type = 'insert'
DELETE WHERE a.NAME != b.NAME ;
I want to order by a string column where that column is an enumeration. For example:
+----+--------+----------------------+
| ID | NAME | STATUS |
+----+--------+----------------------+
| 1 | Serdar | ACTIVE |
| 2 | John | DEACTIVE |
| 3 | Jerry | WAITING_FOR_APPROVAL |
| 4 | Jessie | REJECTED |
+----+--------+----------------------+
I want to order by STATUS. It should sort the results such that the first result must have STATUS = WAITING_FOR_APPROVAL, then ACTIVE, then DEACTIVE and then REJECTED.
Is there any way to do that in SQL? Is there something like Comparator in java?
You can enumerate the values in a CASE statement and order by that
SELECT id, name, status
FROM your_table
ORDER BY (CASE status
WHEN 'WAITING_FOR_APPROVAL' THEN 1
WHEN 'ACTIVE' THEN 2
WHEN 'DEACTIVE' THEN 3
WHEN 'REJECTED' THEN 4
ELSE 5
END)