I have two tables in HANA, that is, A and B.
Data are inserted into A in batch mode, and B is used is to log the current batch that is ready to be used in A(When insert into A is done, will log its batch in B).
Sample data are:
A
name score batch_id
Tom 80 1
Jack 30 1
Alex 90 1
Tom 90 2
Jack 50 2
Alex 70 2
Tom 70 3
Jack 60 3
Alex 80 3
B
table_name batch_id
A 1
A 2
A 3
I have the following sql to get the latest batch from A that is ready be used:
select * from A where a.batch_id = (select max(batch_id) from B where table_name = 'A')
I want to model the above sql with attribute view, analytic view or compute view, but there are no measures defined in the sql, it looks that it can't be created as analytic view or compute view.
I would ask what type of view I should created, and how to model it, thanks!
you can use rank node to data source of table B, partition by column Table_Name, Descending Order , threshold value 1, this will automatically give you max value ; put filter on Data source Node on column Table_name as A,
Then use the output of Rank node to Join with data source of Table A,
You should use CALC View with at least one Key Figure;
Alternatively you can use Table Function to write Sql Cod ein it but bottom line is you should have key Figure
Related
I have a table company_totals, that has the following schema -
column_name
column_data_type
company
STRING
link
STRING
full_count
FLOAT
starts_with_count
FLOAT
Number of rows = 12,000,000. Table size = 1.6 GB. CLUSTERED BY = company link. SEARCH INDEX created on column = link.
I have the following select statement which is taking beyond 6 hours and the execution results in timeout - Operation timed out after 6.0 hours. Consider reducing the amount of work performed by your operation so that it can complete within this limit.)
SELECT first_table.company, first_table.link, null as full_count, SUM(second_table.full_count) AS starts_with_count
FROM company_totals first_table, company_totals second_table
WHERE STARTS_WITH(second_table.link, first_table.link)
group by first_table.company, first_table.link
The above query calculates values of the column starts_with_count which is the sum of values of another column full_count, based on a starts_with() condition. In the company_totals table, the column starts_with_count is what I want to fill. I have added the expected values for this column manually to show my expectation. Other column values are already present in the table. The starts_with_count value is sum (full_count) where its link appears in other rows.
company
link
full_count
starts_with_count (expected)
abc
http://www.abc.net1
1
15 (= sum (full_count) where link like 'http://www.abc.net1%')
abc
http://www.abc.net1/page1
2
9 (= sum (full_count) where link like 'http://www.abc.net1/page1%')
abc
http://www.abc.net1/page1/folder1
3
3 (= sum (full_count) where link like 'http://www.abc.net1/page1/folder1%')
abc
http://www.abc.net1/page1/folder2
4
4
abc
http://www.abc.net1/page2
5
5
xyz
http://www.xyz.net1/
6
21
xyz
http://www.xyz.net1/page1/
7
15
xyz
http://www.xyz.net1/page1/file1
8
8
Highly appreciate any help in this issue.
I've changed my DB structure to make it more future proof. Now I'm having trouble with the new select query.
I have table called activities that has a list of activities and how many steps per minute that activity was worth. The table was structred like this:
Activities
id act_name act_steps
12 Boxing 250
14 Karate 300
17 Yoga 89
I have another table called distance that is structed like this:
Distance
id dist_activity_id dist_activity_duration member_id
1 12 60 12
2 14 90 12
3 17 30 12
I have the query that would SUM and produce a total for all activities in the distance table
SELECT ROUND(SUM(act_steps * dist_activity_duration / 2000),2) AS total_miles
FROM distance,
activities
WHERE activities.id = distance.dist_activity_id
This worked fine.
To future proof it incase the number of steps for an activity changes I've setup a table called steps that is structured like this:
Steps
id activity_steps
1 6
2 250
3 300
4 89
I then updated the activities table, removing the act_steps column and replacing it with steps_id so it now looks like this:
Updated activities
id act_name steps_id
12 Boxing 2
14 Karate 3
17 Yoga 4
I'm not sure how to create the select command to get the SUM using the new structure.
Could someone please help me with this?
Thanks
Wayne
Learn to use proper JOIN syntax! Your query should look like:
SELECT ROUND(SUM(a.act_steps * d.dist_activity_duration / 2000), 2) AS total_miles
FROM distance d JOIN
activities a
ON a.id = d.dist_activity_id;
If you need to lookup the steps, then add another JOIN:
SELECT ROUND(SUM(s.activity_steps * d.dist_activity_duration / 2000), 2) AS total_miles
FROM distance d JOIN
activities a
ON a.id = d.dist_activity_id JOIN
steps s
ON s.id = a.steps_id;
Below are the input and output details.Any database Oracle, SQL Server and MySQL should do for the answers.I am not able to derive the logic to rank data which will help me to pivot.
My source is a flat file which contains data like below.I have loaded that file into one of the tables in Oracle.
Source Input:
**Flatfile1**
**Coulmn1**
Kamesh
65
5000
123456789
Nanu
45
3000
321654789
Expected Output:
Name Age Salary Mobilenumber
Kamesh 65 5000 123456789
Nanu 45 3000 321654789
After loading into one of the tables I am applying the logic to number this data which will eventually look like below:
Column1 Datavalue
Kamesh 1
65 1
5000 1
123456789 1
Nanu 2
45 2
3000 2
321654789 2
However, I am not able to derive logic (I tried with Rank) which will give me sequence number like this without having any key field.Hope this explains situation.
Thanks!!
Oracle doesn't store the rows in order, if you do select * from table1 multiple times you could get rows in different orders according to db operations and caching
Therefore if you have a table like that with no other column it's impossible to "pivot" the data.
I strongly suggest to save data in a normalized form, if you can't consider adding a column with a row ID populated automatically (identity column in oracle 12, trigger+ sequence in previous version)
Once you have your rows in order it will be easy to organize your data
I have 2 procedures (say A and B). They both return data with similar columns set (Id, Name, Count). To be more concrete, procedures results examples are listed below:
A:
Id Name Count
1 A 10
2 B 11
B:
Id Name Count
1 E 14
2 F 15
3 G 16
4 H 17
The IDs are generated as ROW_NUMBER() as I don't have own identifiers for these records because they are aggregated values.
In code I query over the both results using the same class NameAndCountView.
And finally my problem. When I look into results after executing both procedures sequentially I get the following:
A:
Id Name Count
1 A 10 ->|
2 B 11 ->|
|
B: |
Id Name Count |
1 A 10 <-|
2 B 11 <-|
3 G 16
4 H 17
As you can see results in the second set are replaced with results with the same IDs from the first. Of course the problem take place because I use the same class for retrieving data, right?
The question is how to make this work without creating additional NameAndCountView2-like class?
If possible, and if you don't really mind about the original Id values, maybe you can try having the first query return even Ids :
ROW_NUMBER() over (order by .... )*2
while the second returns odd Ids :
ROW_NUMBER() over (order by .... )*2+1
This would also allow you to know where the Ids come from.
I guess this would be repeatable with N queries by having the query number i selecting
ROW_NUMBER() over (order by .... )*n+i
Hope this will help
I have data in two tables that i want to get into a view to then be able to do reporting on and having trouble as only some of the records in the first table have records in the second table.
The data is ranges for a product.
For example I have 2 options the first has 6 ranges of pricing, 3 are stored in table A and 3 in table B linked by the ID of the record in table A. The second has only 3 ranges that are in table A so no record is created in table B for this product.
When I try to do a create view and include the details from the second table I only get the details for the first option and not the second as it is excluding this because there is no record in the second table.
How do I over come this?
TableP1 TableP2
Product_id Unit Range 1 Range 2 Range 3 TableP1_ID Range 4 Range 5 Range 6 TableP1_ID
1 Person 20 18 16 1 14 12 10 1
2 Person 25 22 2
not sure if the above makes sense.
Can you not have two queries and UNION the results together in your VIEW code?
Something like:
CREATE myView
AS
SELECT X,
Y
FROM Table1
UNION
SELECT X,
Y
FROM Table2;