I have an Items table:
id | name | is_featured
1 name1 false
The items from this table I need to show them in a random way, but is_featured first. The rules are:
If count is_featured=True > 6, get is_featured=True all, and randomize and get first 6
If count is_featured=True < 6, get is_featured=True all, and randomize
Count how many are missing up to 6. Get from non-featured random the remaining items.Unite lists.
I do this in 2-3 steps in database:
first count the number of featured
first get featured then get the rest if is needed, and randomize(in backend)
It is possible to do that in one step, in database?
You seem to want six rows, with the is_featured first. You can do this in one step:
select i.*
from items i
order by i.is_featured desc, -- true is first
random()
fetch first 6 rows only;
That is, sort all the data with is_featured first. Then choose the first six.
Related
I have a query that i am trying to run which counts the recurrence of part_number, groups it, and displays the output.
I would like to only display the top 5 entries (rows) in descending value.
Here is my code for reference.
SELECT TOP 5
part_log.part_number,
COUNT(part_log.part_number) AS CountOfpart_number
FROM part_log
GROUP BY part_log.part_number
ORDER BY Count(part_log.part_number) DESC;
The problem is for example, if I have 8 part numbers with a variance in values, but the 5th row value is the same as the 6th, 7th, and 8th, then it will spit the below data out instead of just cutting it off at the 5th row.
p/n: 5 occ:10
p/n: 6 occ:7
p/n: 2 occ:5
p/n: 3 occ:4
p/n: 1 occ:2
p/n: 4 occ:2
p/n: 7 occ:2
p/n: 8 occ:2
I don't have a preference for which part number gets spit out from the ones with the same value, I simply only want 5 rows to be retrieved.
Removing the ORDER BY function gives me only 5 rows, but omits the descending values that I need.
Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.
MS Access treats TOP as TOP WITH TIES. That is, it continues to return equal values when there are ties.
The simple solution is to add an additional key. In this case, the obvious key to add is the GROUP BY key -- because you know that will be unique on each row:
SELECT TOP 5 pl.part_number,
COUNT(*) AS CountOfpart_number
FROM part_log as pl
GROUP BY pl.part_number
ORDER BY Count(*) DESC, pl.part_number;
How about adding a second criteria to the ORDER BY clause?
ORDER BY Count(part_log.part_number) DESC, part_log.part_number;
Since you are grouping by part_numbers, the values are guaranteed to be unique in the resultset, which makes this column a perfect candidate to break the ties.
What I am trying to do is fairly simple. I just want to add a row number to a query. Since this is in Access is a bit more difficult than other SQL, but under normal circumstances is still doable using solutions such as DCount or Select Count(*), example here: How to show row number in Access query like ROW_NUMBER in SQL or Access SQL how to make an increment in SELECT query
My Issue
My issue is I'm trying to add this counter to a multi-join query that orders by fields from numerous tables.
Troubleshooting
My code is a bit ridiculous (19 fields, seven of which are long expressions, from 9 different joined tables, and ordered by fields from 5 of those tables). To make things simple, I have an simplified example query below:
Example Query
SELECT DCount("*","Requests_T","[Requests_T].[RequestID]<=" & [Requests_T].[RequestID]) AS counter, Requests_T.RequestHardDeadline AS Deadline, Requests_T.RequestOverridePriority AS Priority, Requests_T.RequestUserGroup AS [User Group], Requests_T.RequestNbrUsers AS [Nbr of Users], Requests_T.RequestSubmissionDate AS [Submitted on], Requests_T.RequestID
FROM (((((((Requests_T
INNER JOIN ENUM_UserGroups_T ON ENUM_UserGroups_T.UserGroups = Requests_T.RequestUserGroup)
INNER JOIN ENUM_RequestNbrUsers_T ON ENUM_RequestNbrUsers_T.NbrUsers = Requests_T.RequestNbrUsers)
INNER JOIN ENUM_RequestPriority_T ON ENUM_RequestPriority_T.Priority = Requests_T.RequestOverridePriority)
ORDER BY Requests_T.RequestHardDeadline, ENUM_RequestPriority_T.DisplayOrder DESC , ENUM_UserGroups_T.DisplayOrder, ENUM_RequestNbrUsers_T.DisplayOrder DESC , Requests_T.RequestSubmissionDate;
If the code above is trying to select a field from a table not included, I apologize - just trust the field comes from somewhere (lol i.e. one of the other joins I excluded to simply the query). A great example of this is the .DisplayOrder fields used in the ORDER BY expression. These are fields from a table that simply determines the "priority" of an enum. Example: Requests_T.RequestOverridePriority displays to the user as an combobox option of "Low", "Med", "High". So in a table, I assign a numerical priority to these of "1", "2", and "3" to these options, respectively. Thus when ENUM_RequestPriority_T.DisplayOrder DESC is called in order by, all "High" priority requests will display above "Medium" and "Low". Same holds true for ENUM_UserGroups_T.DisplayOrder and ENUM_RequestNbrUsers_T.DisplayOrder.
I'd also prefer to NOT use DCOUNT due to efficiency, and rather do something like:
select count(*) from Requests_T where Requests_T.RequestID>=RequestID) as counter
Due to the "Order By" expression however, my 'counter' doesn't actually count my resulting rows sequentially since both of my examples are tied to the RequestID.
Example Results
Based on my actual query results, I've made an example result of the query above.
Counter Deadline Priority User_Group Nbr_of_Users Submitted_on RequestID
5 12/01/2016 High IT 2-4 01/01/2016 5
7 01/01/2017 Low IT 2-4 05/06/2016 8
10 Med IT 2-4 07/13/2016 11
15 Low IT 10+ 01/01/2016 16
8 Low IT 2-4 01/01/2016 9
2 Low IT 2-4 05/05/2016 2
The query is displaying my results in the proper order (those with the nearest deadline at the top, then those with the highest priority, then user group, then # of users, and finally, if all else is equal, it is sorted by submission date). However, my "Counter" values are completely wrong! The counter field should simply intriment +1 for each new row. Thus if displaying a single request on a form for a user, I could say
"You are number: Counter [associated to RequestID] in the
development queue."
Meanwhile my results:
Aren't sequential (notice the first four display sequentially, but then the final two rows don't)! Even though the final two rows are lower in priority than the records above them, they ended up with a lower Counter value simply because they had the lower RequestID.
They don't start at "1" and increment +1 for each new record.
Ideal Results
Thus my ideal result from above would be:
Counter Deadline Priority User_Group Nbr_of_Users Submitted_on RequestID
1 12/01/2016 High IT 2-4 01/01/2016 5
2 01/01/2017 Low IT 2-4 05/06/2016 8
3 Med IT 2-4 07/13/2016 11
4 Low IT 10+ 01/01/2016 16
5 Low IT 2-4 01/01/2016 9
6 Low IT 2-4 05/05/2016 2
I'm spoiled by PLSQL and other software where this would be automatic lol. This is driving me crazy! Any help would be greatly appreciated.
FYI - I'd prefer an SQL option over VBA if possible. VBA is very much welcomed and will definitely get an up vote and my huge thanks if it works, but I'd like to mark an SQL option as the answer.
Unfortuantely, MS Access doesn't have the very useful ROW_NUMBER() function like other clients do. So we are left to improvise.
Because your query is so complicated and MS Access does not support common table expressions, I recommend you follow a two step process. First, name that query you already wrote IntermediateQuery. Then, write a second query called FinalQuery that does the following:
SELECT i1.field_primarykey, i1.field2, ... , i1.field_x,
(SELECT field_primarykey FROM IntermediateQuery i2
WHERE t2.field_primarykey <= t1.field_primarykey) AS Counter
FROM IntermediateQuery i1
ORDER BY Counter
The unfortunate side effect of this is the more data your table returns, the longer it will take for the inline subquery to calculate. However, this is the only way you'll get your row numbers. It does depend on having a primary key in the table. In this particular case, it doesn't have to be an explicitly defined primary key, it just needs to be a field or combination of fields that is completely unique for each record.
I'm trying to create a query that will insert new records to a table or update already existing records, but I'm getting stuck on the filtering and grouping for the criteria I want.
I have two tables: tbl_PartInfo, and dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.
I'm want to select from dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE based upon the combination of CUST_ORDER_ID, CUST_ORDER_LINE_NO, and REVISION_ID. Each customer order can have multiple lines, and each line can have multiple revision. I'm trying to select the unique combinations of each order and it's connected lines, but take the connected information for the row with the highest value in the revision column.
I want to insert/update from dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE the following columns:
CUST_ORDER_ID
PART_ID
USER_ORDER_QTY
UNIT_PRICE
I want to insert/update them into tbl_PartInfo as the following columns respectively:
JobID
DrawingNumber
Quantity
UnitPrice
So if I have the following rows in dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE (PART_ID omitted for example)
CUST_ORDER_ID CUST_ORDER_LINE_NO REVISION_ID USER_ORDER_QTY UNIT_PRICE
SCabc 1 1 0 100
SCabc 1 2 4 150
SCabc 1 3 4 125
SCabc 2 3 2 200
SCxyz 1 1 0 0
SCxyz 1 2 3 50
It would return
CUST_ORDER_ID CUST_ORDER_LINE_NO (REVISION_ID) USER_ORDER_QTY UNIT_PRICE
SCabc 1 3 4 125
SCabc 2 3 2 200
SCxyz 1 2 3 50
but with PART_ID included and without REVISION_ID
So far, my code is just for the inset portion as I was trying to get the correct records selected, but I keep getting duplicates of CUST_ORDER_ID and CUST_ORDER_LINE_NO.
INSERT INTO tbl_PartInfo ( JobID, DrawingNumber, Quantity, UnitPrice, ProductFamily, ProductCategory )
SELECT dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.CUST_ORDER_ID, dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.PART_ID, dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.USER_ORDER_QTY, dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.UNIT_PRICE, dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.CUST_ORDER_LINE_NO, Max(dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.REVISION_ID) AS MaxOfREVISION_ID
FROM dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE, tbl_PartInfo
GROUP BY dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.CUST_ORDER_ID, dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.PART_ID, dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.USER_ORDER_QTY, dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.UNIT_PRICE, dbo_CUST_BOOK_LINE.CUST_ORDER_LINE_NO;
This has been far more complicated that anything I've done so far, so any help would be greatly appreciated. Sorry about the long column names, I didn't get to choose them.
I did some research and think I found a way to make it work, but I'm still testing it. Right now I'm using three queries, but it should be easily simplified into two when complete.
The first is an append query that takes the two columns I want to get distinct combo's from and selects them and using "group by," while also selecting max of the revision column. It appends them to another table that I'm using called tbl_TempDrop. This table is only being used right now to reduce the number of results before the next part.
The second is an update query that updates tbl_TempDrop to include all the other columns I wanted by setting the criteria equal to the three selected columns from the first query. This took an EXTREMELY long time to complete when I had 700,000 records to work with, hence the use of the tbl_TempDrop.
The third query is a basic append query that appends the rows of tbl_TempDrop to the end destination, tbl_PartInfo.
All that's left is to run all three in a row.
I didn't want to include the full details of any tables or queries yet until I ensure that it works as desired, and because some of the names are vague since I will be using this method for multiple query searches.
This website helped me a little to make sure I had the basic idea down. http://www.techonthenet.com/access/queries/max_query2_2007.php
Let me know if you see any flaws with the ideology!
I have a column in the sql server called "Ordinal" that is used to indicate the display order of the rows. It starts from 0 and skips 10 for the next row. so we have something like this:
Id Ordinal
1 0
2 20
3 10
It skips 10 because we wanted to be able to move item in between items (based on ordinal) without having to reassign ordinal number for the entire table.
As you can imagine eventually, Ordinal number will need to be reassign somehow for a move in between operation either on surrounding rows or for the entire table as the unused ordinal numbers between the target items are all used up.
Is there any algorithm that I can use to effectively reorder the ordinal number for the move operation taken in the consideration like long term maintainability of the table and minimizing update operations of the table?
You can re-number the sequences using a somewhat complicated UPDATE statement:
UPDATE u
SET u.sequence = 10 * (c.num_below-1)
FROM test u
JOIN (
SELECT t.id, count(*) AS num_below
FROM test t
JOIN test tr ON tr.sequence <= t.sequence
GROUP BY t.id
) c ON c.id=u.id
The idea is to obtain a count of items with the sequence lower than that of the current row, multiply the count by ten, and assign it as the new count.
The content of test before the UPDATE:
ID Sequence
__ ________
1 0
2 10
3 20
4 12
The content of test after the UPDATE:
ID Sequence
__ ________
1 0
2 30
3 10
4 20
Now the sequence numbers are evenly spread again, so you can continue inserting in the middle until you run out of new sequence numbers; then you can re-number again.
Demo.
These won't answer your question directly--I just thought I might suggest some other approaches:
One possibility--don't try to do it by hand. Have your software manage the numbers. If they need re-writing, just save them with new numbers.
a second--use a "Linked List" instead. In each record store the index of the next record you want displayed, then have your code load that directly into a linked list.
Yet another simple approach. Let's say you're inserting a new record with an ordinal equal x.
First, check if there's a row having ordinal value equal x. In case there's one, just update all the records having the ordinal value equal or bigger than x increasing them by y. Then, you are safe to insert a new record.
This way you're sure you'll not run update every time and of course, you'll keep the order.
I am new to SQL and I am not sure how to properly search my question so I will ask here.
Please see this link to see the SQL tables and queries I am working with
In this example there are 6 rows and I am limiting my search to start at the first index and give me at most 2. However, I would like to know the index of the row that has id 1.
When I use the query I describe in sqlfiddle, It shows me rows with id 5 and 23. But it doesn't include the row with id 1. However, I need to know the index of the row with id 1..
click here to see the full list
The link above prints out all of the rows and we can see that index 3 has the row containing id 1.
However I need to know that index without asking for the entire Array.
Why is this important? Well, lets say that we have 1 million rows. And if I ask for a million rows, that would mean allocating an array of one million. I could parse the array until I find the id I am looking for. However, allocating a million is way too costly.
Lets say for example that the row I am looking for resides in index 26, But I make my query so that it starts at index 0 and limits to 10. The array that I get from this query would not contain index 26. However I still need to know that it IS at index 26.
So this magic query would give me two things:
the top ten rows of the sorted rows
the index of a specified id (e.g. id of 1) regardless of its placement in the list.
Is this a possible query?
Clarification:
I use the word index to mean the row number.
If a we query a list of names from the db, we could get something like this:
bob
frank
dawn
then bob would be at index 0, frank would be at index 1 and dawn at index 2.
If I ORDER BY name ASC then the list of names would become
bob
dawn
frank
bob would be index 0 dawn would be index 1 and frank would be index 2.
I hope this makes things more clear.
If you want the row number, use the row_number() function:
SELECT *
FROM (SELECT ud.id, ud.team_name, ui.name, ui.date_created,
row_number() over (order by ui.name, ui.id) as rownumber
FROM user_data ud JOIN
user_infos ui
ON ui.id = ud.id
WHERE ui.date_created BETWEEN NOW() - INTERVAL '1 year' AND NOW()
) t
WHERE rownumber <= 10 or id = 1;
If you want them in order, just add order by rownumber as the last statement.