I am wanting to insert multiple rows into a table based on the "Material" column. Attached below is a snippet of the table:
+----------+---------+-----------+
| Material | Station | BuildTime |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| ABC | #1 | 5 |
| ABC | #2 | 10 |
| ABC | #3 | 15 |
| DEF | #1 | 7 |
| DEF | #2 | 12 |
| DEF | #3 | 19 |
| GHI | #1 | 11 |
| GHI | #2 | 24 |
| GHI | #3 | 13 |
+----------+---------+-----------+
As you can see, there are three types of material here at three different stations - making for a total of 9 entries. Let's say I wanted to add a "Station #4" row for each type of material. How can I insert per material "group"?
In my specific case, the "buildtime" value of Station #4 will all be identical with a value of 50.
This seems simple if there were truly only three material groups, but in the actual case, there are hundreds. Is there a way to parse through them and insert a row per group?
Thanks in advance.
You can use insert:
insert into t (material, station, buildtime)
select distinct material, '#4', 50
from t;
Related
Is there a way to merge similar values in the same column and not affect the rest, for example:
I want to sum Amount by Company and ID too.
You cannot get the data you want to display. You will be getting company name being repeated. If you want to dispaly data in the way, where company name is not repeating for subsequent rows, you have to use EXCEL or some other presentation layer tool.
SELECT Company, ID, SUM(Amount)
FROM Table1
GROUP BY Company,ID
+---------+-----+--------+
| Company | ID | Amount |
+---------+-----+--------+
| ABC | 001 | 3 |
| ABC | 002 | 3 |
| DEF | 002 | 10 |
| DEF | 003 | 5 |
+---------+-----+--------+
I have tables "T1" in the database that are broken down by month of the form (table_082020, table_092020, table_102020). Each contains several million records.
+----+----------+-------+
| id | date | value |
+----+----------+-------+
| 1 | 20200816 | abc |
+----+----------+-------+
| 2 | 20200817 | xyz |
+----+----------+-------+
+----+----------+-------+
| id | date | value |
+----+----------+-------+
| 1 | 20200901 | cba |
+----+----------+-------+
| 2 | 20200901 | zyx |
+----+----------+-------+
There is a second table "T2" that stores a reference to the primary key of the first one and actually to the table itself only without the word "table_".
+------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| rec_number | period | field1 | field2 | field3 |
+------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 777 | 092020 | aaa | bbb | ccc |
+------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 987 | 102020 | eee | fff | ggg |
+------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
| 123456 | 082020 | xxx | yyy | zzz |
+------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
There is also a third table "T3", which is the ratio of the period and the table name.
+--------+--------------+
| period | table_name |
+--------+--------------+
| 082020 | table_082020 |
+--------+--------------+
| 092020 | table_092020 |
+--------+--------------+
| 102020 | table_102020 |
+--------+--------------+
Tell me how you can combine 3 tables to get dynamic data for several periods. For example: from 15082020 to 04092020, where the data will be located in different tables, respectively
There really is no good reason for storing data in this format. It makes querying a nightmare.
If you cannot change the data format, then add a view each month that combines the data:
create view t as
select '202010' as YYYYMM, t.*
from table_102020
union all
select '202008' as YYYYMM, t.*
from table_092020
union all
. . .;
For a once-a-month effort, you can spend 10 minutes writing the code and do so with a calendar reminder. Or, better yet, set up a job that uses dynamic SQL to generate the code and run this as a job after the underlying tables are using.
What should you be doing? Well, 5 million rows a months isn't actually that much data. But if you are concerned about it, you can use table partitioning to store the data by month. This can be a little tricky; for instance, the primary key needs to include the partitioning key.
I have a recipe table with a many-to-many to a recipe_filter table. Here's some sample data:
recipe:
id | name
----+-----------
1 | test 2019
12 | slug-14
8 | dfadsfd
6 | test 4
4 | test 2
11 | slug-11
10 | Testology
13 | slug-15
5 | test 3
14 | slug-16
(10 rows)
recipe_filter_join:
recipeId | recipeFilterId
----------+----------------
1 | 1
2 | 2
3 | 3
4 | 1
6 | 5
7 | 6
8 | 4
9 | 7
6 | 8
14 | 9
14 | 4
5 | 9
5 | 38
filter:
id | slug | name | label
----+----------------------+-------------+----------------
2 | fdsfa | fdsfa | Category
3 | dsfds | dsfds | Category
6 | fdsaf | fdsaf | Category
7 | dfad | dfad | Category
8 | product-spice-2 | Spice #2 | Product
9 | product-spice-3 | Spice #3 | Product
5 | product-spice-4 | Spice #4 | Product
4 | product-spice-5 | Spice #5 | Product
1 | product-spice-6 | Spice #6 | Product
10 | product-spice-1 | Spice #1 | Product
40 | diet-halal | Halal | Diet
38 | diet-keto | Keto | Diet
41 | diet-gluten-free | Gluten free | Diet
37 | diet-vegan | Vegan | Diet
39 | diet-diabetic | Diabetic | Diet
42 | cooking-method-bake | Bake | Cooking method
43 | cooking-method-fry | Fry | Cooking method
44 | cooking-method-steam | Steam | Cooking method
45 | cooking-method-roast | Roast | Cooking method
(19 rows)
The input to my query is a list of filters.slugs for example product-spice-1, product-spice-5, cooking-method-fry, cooking-method-steam.
For the above example, I want to write a query that gets all recipes where the filter slug is (product-spice-1 or product-spice-5) and (cooking-method-fry or cooking-method-steam).
How do I create a generic query from the example above?
Update: In case it's not clear, for the list of filters given, I want to group them based on label and apply an OR between group members and an AND condition for other groups, if that makes any sense.
You want to INTERSECT two queries
SELECT
rfj."recipeId"
FROM recipe_filter_join rfj
JOIN filter ON filter.id = rfj."recipeFilterId"
WHERE filter.slug IN ('product-spice-1','product-spice-5')
INTERSECT
SELECT
rfj."recipeId"
FROM recipe_filter_join rfj
JOIN filter ON filter.id = rfj."recipeFilterId"
WHERE filter.slug IN ('cooking-method-fry', 'cooking-method-steam')
And this is is quite generalizable. As you can see, the only difference between the two parts is in the WHERE clause. If you have other conditions on Diet or category, you could generate the appropriate query string with the variation on filer & join them with INTERSECT as the separator in your programming language of choice.
I want to group them based on label and apply an OR between group members and an AND condition for other groups.
If you would prefer to have your application code call the query with just a list of slugs, then the following solution is more general.
If we restate the problem description as :
We want to search for recipes which have ingredients intersecting with the provided ingredient list, and the distinct labels for the recipes equals the distinct labels derived from the ingredient list (this last part is handled by the having clause)
We can write
WITH distinct_labels AS (
SELECT
ARRAY_AGG(DISTINCT label ORDER BY label) distinct_labels_filtered
FROM filter
WHERE slug IN ('product-spice-1','product-spice-5','cooking-method-fry', 'cooking-method-steam')
)
SELECT
rfj."recipeId"
FROM filter
JOIN recipe_filter_join rfj
ON filter.id = rfj."recipeFilterId"
WHERE slug IN ('product-spice-1','product-spice-5','cooking-method-fry', 'cooking-method-steam')
GROUP BY 1
HAVING ARRAY_AGG(DISTINCT label ORDER BY label) = (SELECT distinct_labels_filtered FROM distinct_labels)
I have data on approx 1000 individuals, where each individual can have multiple rows, with multiple dates and where the columns indicate the program admitted to and a code number.
I need each row to contain a distinct date, so I need to delete the rows of duplicate dates from my table. Where there are multiple rows with the same date, I need to keep the row that has the lowest code number. In the case of more than one row having both the same date and the same lowest code, then I need to keep the row that also has been in program (prog) B. For example;
| ID | DATE | CODE | PROG|
--------------------------------
| 1 | 1996-08-16 | 24 | A |
| 1 | 1997-06-02 | 123 | A |
| 1 | 1997-06-02 | 123 | B |
| 1 | 1997-06-02 | 211 | B |
| 1 | 1997-08-19 | 67 | A |
| 1 | 1997-08-19 | 23 | A |
So my desired output would look like this;
| ID | DATE | CODE | PROG|
--------------------------------
| 1 | 1996-08-16 | 24 | A |
| 1 | 1997-06-02 | 123 | B |
| 1 | 1997-08-19 | 23 | A |
I'm struggling to come up with a solution to this, so any help greatly appreciated!
Microsoft SQL Server 2012 (X64)
The following works with your test data
SELECT ID, date, MIN(code), MAX(prog) FROM table
GROUP BY date
You can then use the results of this query to create a new table or populate a new table. Or to delete all records not returned by this query.
SQLFiddle http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/0ebb5/5
You can use min() function: (See the details here)
select ID, DATE, min(CODE), max(PROG)
from table
group by DATE
I assume that your table has a valid primary key. However i would recommend you to take IDas Primary key. Hope this would help you.
is it possible to return count of values in single row?
For example this is test table and I want to count of daily_typing_pages
SQL> SELECT * FROM employee_tbl;
+------+------+------------+--------------------+
| id | name | work_date | daily_typing_pages |
+------+------+------------+--------------------+
| 1 | John | 2007-01-24 | 250 |
| 2 | Ram | 2007-05-27 | 220 |
| 3 | Jack | 2007-05-06 | 170 |
| 3 | Jack | 2007-04-06 | 100 |
| 4 | Jill | 2007-04-06 | 220 |
| 5 | Zara | 2007-06-06 | 300 |
| 5 | Zara | 2007-02-06 | 350 |
+------+------+------------+--------------------+
Result of this count should be : 1610 how ever if I simply count() AROUND it return:
SQL>SELECT COUNT(daily_typing_pages) FROM employee_tbl ;
+---------------------------+
| COUNT(daily_typing_pages) |
+---------------------------+
| 7 |
+---------------------------+
1 row in set (0.01 sec)
So it return number of rows instead of count single row.
Is there some way how to do things like I want without using external programming language which will count it for me?
Thanks
You want SUM instead of COUNT. COUNT merely counts the number of records, you want them summed.
You didn't mention your DBMS, but see for example, for sql server this
Did you mean you want to summarize alle numbers of daily_typing_pages ?
So you can use sum(daily_typing_pages):
SELECT SUM(daily_typing_pages) FROM employee_tbl