I have a table called "tax_info", this table stores the information of the land tax of my city, it goes like this:
taxpayer_code | condominium_num | lot_area | built_area
-------------------------------------------------------------
0010030078-2 | 00-0 | 143 | 130
0010030079-1 | 02-7 | 283 | 57
0010030080-1 | 02-7 | 283 | 48
0010030081-1 | 02-7 | 283 | 50
the taxpayer code first 3 numbers refer to the city district, the next 3 to the block within the district, and the next 4 can refer to the lot in a block if the condo number is 00-0, or to an apartment, or store, etc if the condo number is different than 00-0, in which case all equal condo numbers refer to the same lot within the block.
what I want to do is pass a list of "taxpayer_code" and get the "lot_area" and "built_area" for the lots. the problem is, if the person lives in a condo, her apartment is a fraction of the total built area for the lot. So, if I search for code 0010030078% (the -X number doesn't matter) the result is:
Lot Area = 143 and Built Area = 130
But if I search for 0010030080%, the result I expect is:
Lot Area = 283 and Built Area 155
And if I search for 0010030078%, 0010030079%, the result:
Lot Area = 426 and Built Area 285
So the database should get the taxpayer codes, then look if the condominium number is different from 00-0 for each code passed, if so, it should add to the sum all the other taxpayer codes that share the same condo number within the same district and block. (ideally, if tax codes belonging to different districts or blocks are passed a warning should be returned, and if more tax codes are added to the sum, a listing with all codes added would be nice, but it's okay if that's too much of a hassle!).
I am new to SQL and can't wrap my head around this, I appreciate every help you can give me, thanks!
Hmmm . . . use a subquery and window functions to add up the values that you want:
select ti.*
from (select ti.*,
(case when condominium_num <> '00-0'
then sum(built_area) over (partition by condominium_num)
else built_area
end) as real_built_area
from tax_info ti
) ti
where . . .
Related
I am trying to extract the country code prefix from a list of numbers, and match them to the region that they belong to. The data might look something like this:
| id | phone_number |
|----|----------------|
| 1 | +27000000000 |
| 2 | +16840000000 |
| 3 | +10000000000 |
| 4 | +27000000000 |
The country codes here are:
American Samoa: +1684
United States and Caribbean: +1
South Africa: +27
And the desired result would be something this:
| country | count |
|-----------------------------|-------|
| South Africa | 2 |
| American Samoa | 1 |
| United States and Caribbean | 1 |
There are some difficulties because
country prefix codes vary from 1 to 4 numbers and even without the country prefix,
phone number length varies from place to place.
I do not have write access to this DB, so adding another column, while probably the best solution, will not work in this use case
This is my current solution:
SELECT
CASE
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,5) = '+1684' THEN 'American Samoa'
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,5) = '+1264' THEN 'Anguilla'
...
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,5) = '+1599' THEN 'Saint Martin'
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,4) = '+355' THEN 'Albania'
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,4) = '+213' THEN 'Algeria'
...
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,4) = '+263' THEN 'Zimbabwe'
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,3) = '+93' THEN 'Afghanistan'
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,3) = '+54' THEN 'Argentina'
...
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,3) = '+58' THEN 'Venezuela'
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,3) = '+84' THEN 'Vietnam'
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,2) = '+1' THEN 'United States and Caribbean'
WHEN SUBSTRING(phone_number,1,2) = '+7' THEN 'Kazakhstan, Russia'
ELSE 'unknown'
END as country_name,
count(*)
FROM users
GROUP BY country_name
order by count desc
There are ~205 WHEN ... THEN cases. It seems to be very inefficient and times out. I assume this is because it runs the pattern matching on every row. This would need to scale to roughly 10s of millions of rows
Is there a more efficient way to do this?
I am using postgreSQL 9.6.16
In spite of reading the whole table, an index could help here. In order to aggregate the data per country code, the DBMS must sort all rows by country code. Sorting is an expensive operation, especially on large data sets. If you had an index on the country codes, the DBMS would find the codes already pre-sorted in the index and could avoid the work of sorting the data.
You don't have the separate country code in a column, but each phone number starts with the code, so you could index the complete phone number:
create index idx on users (phone_number);
Then you must make it obvious to the DBMS that you are interested in the beginnings of the string, so it will consider using the index. Invoking a function like SUBSTRING on the phone number is likely to make the the DBMS blind to this. Use LIKE instead. According to the docs (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.3/indexes-types.html), indexes on strings can be used with LIKE 'something%':
WHEN phone_number LIKE '+1684%' THEN 'American Samoa'
There is no guarantee this will help, but it's worth a try I think. It depends on whether the optimizer sees the advantage of using the pre-sorted phone numbers from the index.
I have a series of queries that generate reports that contain chemical data. There are two compounds A and B where A is the total amount and B is a speciated amount (like total iron and ferrous iron, for example).
There are about one hundred total compounds in the query result, and I need a criteria to filter the results such that if both Compounds A and B are present, only Compound B is displayed. So far I've tried adding a few iif statements to the criteria section in the query builder with no luck.
Here is what I have so far:
SELECT Table1.KEY_ANLT
FROM Table1
WHERE (((Table1.KEY_ANLT)=IIf([Table1].[KEY_ANLT]=1223 And [Table1].[KEY_ANLT]=70,70,1223)));
This filters out Compound A but does not include the rest of the compounds. How can I modify the query to also include the other compounds?
So, to clarify some of the comments above, the problem here is you don't have (or haven't specified above) a way to identify values that go together. You gave 70 and 1223 as an example, but if you gave us a list of all the numbers, how would we be able to identify which ones go together? You might say "chemistry expertise", but that's based on another column with the compounds' names, right? So really, your query should use that column. But then there's still the problem of how to connect associated names (e.g., "total iron" and "ferrous iron" might be connected because they both have the word "iron", but what about "permanganate" and "manganese"?). In short, you need another column to specify the thing in common between these separate rows, whether it's element, ion, charge, etc. You would also need a column identifying which row in each "group" you would want to include in your query (or, which ones to exclude). For example:
+----------+-----------------+---------+---------+
| KEY_ANLT | Compound | Element | Primary |
+----------+-----------------+---------+---------+
| 70 | total iron | Fe | Y |
| 1223 | ferrous iron | Fe | |
| 1224 | ferric iron | Fe | |
| 900 | total manganese | Mn | Y |
| 901 | permanganate | Mn | |
+----------+-----------------+---------+---------+
Then, to get a query that shows just the "primary" rows, it's pretty trivial:
SELECT * FROM Table1 WHERE Primary='Y';
Without that [Primary] column, you'd have to decide how to choose each row. Perhaps you'd want the one with the smallest KEY_ANLT?
SELECT Table1.*
FROM
(SELECT Element, min(KEY_ANLT) AS MinKey FROM Table1 GROUP BY Element) AS Subquery
INNER JOIN Table1 ON
Subquery.Element=Table1.Element AND
Subquery.MinKey=Table1.KEY_ANLT
The reason your query doesn't work is that the WHERE clause operates row-by-row, and doesn't compare different rows to one another. So in your SQL:
IIf([Table1].[KEY_ANLT]=1223 And [Table1].[KEY_ANLT]=70,70,1223)
NONE of the rows will evaluate this as 70, because no single row has KEY_ANLT=1223 AND KEY_ANLT=70. Each row only has one value for KEY_ANLT. So then that IIF expression evaluates as 1223 for every row, and your condition will only return rows where KEY_ANLT=1223 (compound B).
I have a request where I need to create an integrity report where I am looking at sales data and verifying that the payment terms are consistent on all items (rows).
Sample data:
Sales # | Line # | Terms Code
100 | 1.0 | N90
100 | 2.0 | N90
101 | 1.0 | N60
101 | 2.0 | P45
101 | 3.0 | N60
Notice that on SO 101, line 2.0 has a different terms code. I need to detect that and only display order 101 on the report.
I was looking at using the PREVIOUS operator in a variable like this:
=If(Previous([Payment Terms Code])=[Payment Terms Code]) Then 0 Else 1
but that looks at the Order 100 line 2.0 and would flag it incorrectly.
I am not sure how I can do this, but maybe using the IN operator some how. Suggestions?
So is appropriate to describe the requirement as you need to see any Sales Orders that have more than one distinct terms code? If so, you can accomplish it like this:
Create a new variable:
Terms Count =Count([Terms Code]) in ([Sales #])
Add this object to the report. You should see "1" for all of the 100 records, and "2" for the 101 records.
Finally, add a filter to the report on Trans Count > 1.
The syntax for the Previous() function is:
Previous(dimension|measure|Self [;Row|col][;(reset_dims)][;offset][;NoNull])
The third parameter, reset_dims allows you to specify when the list of dimensions used to reset the calculation.
Thus, your formula would then be:
Previous([Payment Terms Code]; ([Sales #];[Line #]))
Notes:
You must always place dimensions in parentheses even if there is only one dimension in the list of reset dimensions.
When you specify a set of reset dimensions you must separate them with semi-colon
In my journey to learn SQL, I'm writing various queries on an old database of mine, but getting into more complex things, I want to make sure I'm not over engineering this. I have a table Agent, with different agents offering different prices for cities. Multiple agents can serve the same city, each with different prices. I wanted to run a query which would return the total cost of hiring all of the agents for any given city, ordered by the most expensive.
WITH orderedPrices AS (
SELECT SUM(agtFMPrice)
OVER (PARTITION BY agtCity)
AS IX FROM Agent)
SELECT IX
FROM orderedPrices
ORDER BY IX DESC
I found that doing it without the view returned by orderedPrices, it wouldn't order the prices (I assume because it's an aggregate function, or whatever they're called). Did I do this in the best way I could have, or could it be simplified?
Also, if you're feeling particularly bored, go ahead and give me a new assignment/query to do on this table. I could use the practice.
What you have written in English doesn't seem to quite match qhat you have written in SQL.
English:
- One record per City
- One field per record, showing the total cost of all associated agents
SQL:
- One record per Agent
- One field per record, showing the total cost of all agents in the same city
AgentID | agtCity | agtFMPrice
---------+---------+------------
1 | 1 | 10
2 | 1 | 20
3 | 2 | 30
4 | 2 | 10
5 | 2 | 25
Results of SQL version Results of English version
------------------------ ----------------------------
30 30
30 65
65
65
65
If you want the English version, I'd do this...
SELECT
agtCity,
SUM(agtFMPrice) AS IX
FROM
Agent
GROUP BY
agtCity
ORDER BY
SUM(agtFMPrice) DESC
To assist performance, the table could (should?) also have an Index on (agtCity)
I am trying to write up a query for wordpress which will give me all the post_id's with the lowest fromprice field for each region. Now the trick is these are custom fields in wordpress, and due to such, the information is stored row based, so there is no region and fromprice columns.
So the data I have is (but of course containing a lot more rows):
Post_ID | Meta_Key | Meta_Value
1 | Region | Location1
1 | FromPrice | 150
2 | Region | Location1
2 | FromPrice | 160
3 | Region | Location2
3 | FromPrice | 145
The query I am endeavoring to build should return the post_id of the "lowest priced" matching post grouped by each region with results like:
Post_ID | Region | From Price
1 | Location1 | 150
3 | Location2 | 145
This will allow me to easily iterate the post_id's and print the required information, in fact, I would be just happy with returning post_id's if the rest is harder, I can then fetch the information independently if need be.
Thanks a lot, tearing my hair out over this one; don't often have to think about shifting results on their side from row based to column based that often, but this time I need it!
So you get an idea of the table structure I have, you can use the below as a guide. I thought I had this, but it turned out yes, this query prints out each distinct region WITH the lowest from price found attached to that post in the region, but the post_id is completely incorrect. I don't know why, it seems to be just getting the first result of the post_id and using that.
SELECT pm.post_id,
pm2.meta_value as region,
MIN(pm.meta_value) as price
FROM `wp_postmeta` pm
inner join `wp_postmeta` pm2
on pm2.post_id = pm.post_id
AND pm2.meta_key = 'region'
AND pm.meta_key = 'fromprice'
group by region
I suggest changing MIN(pm.meta_value) in your query to be MIN(CAST(pm.meta_value AS DECIMAL)). Meta_value is a character field, so your existing query will be returning the minimum string value, not the minimum numeric value; for example, "100" will be deemed to be lower than "21".
EDIT - amended CAST syntax.
It's hard to figure out without being able to execute the query, but would it help to just change your group by to:
group by pm.post_id, region