I am currently in a situation where I cannot think of a way out. To explain my problem I will first post a very simplified version of the database I am using:
ID: Place: Product:
111111 1 Product A
222222 1 Product A
222222 2 Product B
333333 1 Product A
444444 1 Product A
444444 2 Product B
444444 3 Product C
555555 1 Product A
Above 3 columns are mentioned. The first column "ID:" represents the unique ID each order has. The second "Place:" represents the position of a certain item in an order. If the order is made up of only 1 product, there will be only one row corresponding to it in the database:
111111 1 Product A
If the order has two or more products in it, there will be two or more rows in the database with the same value in the "ID:" column and the "Place:" column will represent the position of the item in the order.
222222 1 Product A
222222 2 Product B
-------------------------
444444 1 Product A
444444 2 Product B
444444 3 Product C
The third column "Product:" is pretty much obvious- it represents the name of the product.
My question is the following:
Is it possible to make a query which would find the different types of orders and count them? For example, if the order is made up of only "Product A" this should be a unique type of order. If the order consists of "Product A" in place 1 and "Product B" in place 2 (or vice versa) then that would be a unique order as well. It should look like this:
Type: Count()
Product A 3
Product A,B 1
Product A,B,C 1
I tried numerous queries but the results that I get are far from what I am looking for. Any hints would be very appreciated!
I apologize if the answer is easy or obvious. I am not very experienced with SQL yet.
Thank you in advance, Petar
if you are using mysql, you can use the group_concat function, and run a query like this:
select type, count(1) from
(
SELECT group_concat(PRODUCT ORDER BY PRODUCT) type
FROM products
GROUP BY ID
) a
group by type;
but I must warn you, this query will be executed using temporary and filesort
(select count(Product) as cnt1,ID from test1
GROUP BY ID)
Kindly share what exactly output you want in display.May be this will help you.
Related
I've attempted to write a query but I've not managed to get it working correctly.
I'm attempting to retrieve where a specific product has been bought but where it also has been bought with other products. In the case below, I want to find where product A01 has been bought but also when it was bought with other products.
Data (extracted from tables for illustration):
Order | Product
123456 | A01
123457 | A01
123457 | B02
123458 | C03
123459 | A01
123459 | C03
Query which will return all orders with product A01 without showing other products:
SELECT
O.NUMBER
O.DATE
P.NUMBER
FROM
ORDERS O
JOIN PRODUCTS P on P.ID = O.ID
WHERE
P.NUMBER = 'A01'
I've tried to create a sub query which brings back just orders of product A01 but I don't know how to place it in the query for it to return all orders containing product A01 as well as any other product ordered with it.
Any help on this would be very grateful.
Thanks in advance.
You can use conditional SUM to detect if one ORDER group have one ore more 'A01'
CREATE TABLE orders
("Order" int, "Product" varchar(3))
;
INSERT INTO orders
("Order", "Product")
VALUES
(123456, 'A01'),
(123457, 'A01'),
(123457, 'B02'),
(123458, 'C03'),
(123459, 'A01'),
(123459, 'C03')
;
SELECT "Order"
FROM orders
GROUP BY "Order"
HAVING SUM(CASE WHEN "Product" = 'A01' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) > 0
I appreciated Juan's including the DDL to create the database on my system. By the time I saw it, I'd already done all the same work, except that I got around the reserved word problem by naming that field Order1.
Sadly, I didn't consider that either of the offered queries worked on my system. I used MySQL.
The first one returned the A01 lines of the two orders on which other products were ordered too. I took Alex's purpose to include seeing all items of all orders that included A01. (Perhaps he wants to tell future customers what other products other customers have ordered with A01, and generate sales that way.)
The second one returned the three A01 lines.
Maybe Alex wants:
select *
from orders
where Order1 in (select Order1
from orders
where Product = 'A01')
It outputs all lines of all orders that include A01. The subquery makes a list of all orders with A01. The first query returns all lines of those orders.
In a big database, you might not want to run two queries, but this is the only way I see to get the result I understood Alex wanted. If that is what he wanted, he would have to run a second query once armed with output from the queries offered, so there's no real gain.
Good discussion. Thanks to all!
Use GROUP BY clause along with HAVING like
select "order", Product
from data
group by "order"
having count(distinct product) > 1;
I have a staging table that was created from a flat file and modified before copying to a final destination. Some of the records will be inserted and the rest updated if needed.
The only issue I have is it is a one to many relationship. The table is a list of retailers and some of them are entered with the same store name and SS# more than once but with a different contact type.
Like this:
Store_ID SS# First_Name Last_Name Type Description
________________________________________________________________________
1234 123-12-1234 JP Crawford A Owner
1234 123-12-1234 JP Crawford D Other Contact 1
1234 987-76-9876 Aaron Nola E Other Contact 2
1236 321-12-3210 Mikael Franco A Manager
1236 321-12-3210 Mikael Franco J Other Contact 7
I need to be able to select one of the records when there is a duplicate store_id/SS#. There is no date available so I do not know which record was added last. In cases where one of the records is "Owner" and the other is "Other Contact" I can assume the correct one is "Owner". Same for if one of them is "Manager" for instance. But there are some examples where one record may be "Other Contact 5" and the next is "Other Contact 6".
Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.
Assuming the highest Type (eg A) is the one you would like to select in case of duplication, the following should work:
SELECT temp.store_id, temp.ss#, temp.first_name,
temp.last_name, temp.type, temp.description
FROM
(SELECT t.store_id, t.ss#, t.first_name,t.last_name,
t.type, t.description,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY t.store_id,ss# ORDER BY t.type) num
FROM YourTable t) temp
WHERE temp.num=1;
In a DB2 Database, I want to do the following simple mathematics using a SQL query:
AvailableStock = SupplyStock - DemandStock
SupplyStock is stored in 1 table in 1 row, let's call this table the Supply table.
So the Supply table has this data:
ProductID | SupplyStock
---------------------
109 10
244 7 edit: exclude this product from the search
DemandStock is stored in a separate table Demand, where demand is logged as each customer logs demand during a customer order journey. Example data from the Demand table:
ProductID | DemandStock
------------------------
109 1
244 4 edit: exclude this product
109 6
109 2
So in our heads, if I want to calculate the AvailableStock for product '109', Supply is 10, Demand for product 109 totals to 9, and so Available stock is 1.
How do I do this in one select query in DB2 SQL?
The knowledge I have so far of some of the imagined steps in PseudoCode:
I select SupplyStock where product ID = '109'
I select sum(DemandStock) where product ID = '109'
I subtract SupplyStock from DemandStock
I present this as a resulting AvailableStock
The results will look like this:
Product ID | AvailableStock
109 9
I'd love to get this selected in one SQL select query.
Edit: I've since received an answer (that was almost perfect) and realised the question missed out some information.
This information:
We need to exclude data from products we don't want to select data for, and we also need to specifically select product 109.
My apologies, this was omitted from the original question.
I've since added a 'where' to select the product and this works for me. But for future sake, perhaps the answer should include this information too.
You do this using a join to bring the tables together and group by to aggregate the results of the join:
select s.ProductId, s.SupplyStock, sum(d.DemandStock),
(s.SupplyStock - sum(d.DemandStock)) as Available
from Supply s left join
Demand d
on s.ProductId = d.ProductId
where s.ProductId = 109
group by s.ProductId, s.SupplyStock;
In a unique table, I have multiple lines with the same reference information (ID). For the same day, customers had drink and the Appreciation is either 1 (yes) or 0 (no).
Table
ID DAY Drink Appreciation
1 1 Coffee 1
1 1 Tea 0
1 1 Soda 1
2 1 Coffee 1
2 1 Tea 1
3 1 Coffee 0
3 1 Tea 0
3 1 Iced Tea 1
I first tried to see who appreciated a certain drink, which is obviously very simple
Select ID, max(appreciation)
from table
where (day=1 and drink='coffee' and appreciation=1)
or (day=1 and drink='tea' and appreciation=1)
Since I am not even interested in the drink, I used max to remove duplicates and keep only the lane with the highest appreciation.
But what I want to do now is to see who in fact appreciated every drink they had. Again, I am not interested in every lane in the end, but only the ID and the appreciation. How can I modify my where to have it done on every single ID? Adding the ID in the condition is also not and option. I tried switching or for and, but it doesn't return any value. How could I do this?
This should do the trick:
SELECT ID
FROM table
WHERE DRINK IN ('coffee','tea') -- or whatever else filter you want.
group by ID
HAVING MIN(appreciation) > 0
What it does is:
It looks for the minimum appreciation and see to it that that is bigger than 0 for all lines in the group. And the group is the ID, as defined in the group by clause.
as you can see i'm using the having clause, because you can't have aggregate functions in the where section.
Of course you can join other tables into the query as you like. Just be carefull not to add some unwanted filter by joining, which might reduce your dataset in this query.
I cant seem to group by multiple data fields and sum a particular grouped column.
I want to group Person to customer and then group customer to price and then sum price. The person with the highest combined sum(price) should be listed in ascending order.
Example:
table customer
-----------
customer | common_id
green 2
blue 2
orange 1
table invoice
----------
person | price | common_id
bob 2330 1
greg 360 2
greg 170 2
SELECT DISTINCT
min(person) As person,min(customer) AS customer, sum(price) as price
FROM invoice a LEFT JOIN customer b ON a.common_id = b.common_id
GROUP BY customer,price
ORDER BY person
The results I desire are:
**BOB:**
Orange, $2230
**GREG:**
green, $360
blue,$170
The colors are the customer, that GREG and Bob handle. Each color has a price.
There are two issues that I can see. One is a bit picky, and one is quite fundamental.
Presentation of data in SQL
SQL returns tabular data sets. It's not able to return sub-sets with headings, looking something a Pivot Table.
The means that this is not possible...
**BOB:**
Orange, $2230
**GREG:**
green, $360
blue, $170
But that this is possible...
Bob, Orange, $2230
Greg, Green, $360
Greg, Blue, $170
Relating data
I can visually see how you relate the data together...
table customer table invoice
-------------- -------------
customer | common_id person | price |common_id
green 2 greg 360 2
blue 2 greg 170 2
orange 1 bob 2330 1
But SQL doesn't have any implied ordering. Things can only be related if an expression can state that they are related. For example, the following is equally possible...
table customer table invoice
-------------- -------------
customer | common_id person | price |common_id
green 2 greg 170 2 \ These two have
blue 2 greg 360 2 / been swapped
orange 1 bob 2330 1
This means that you need rules (and likely additional fields) that explicitly state which customer record matches which invoice record, especially when there are multiples in both with the same common_id.
An example of a rule could be, the lowest price always matches with the first customer alphabetically. But then, what happens if you have three records in customer for common_id = 2, but only two records in invoice for common_id = 2? Or do the number of records always match, and do you enforce that?
Most likely you need an extra piece (or pieces) of information to know which records relate to each other.
you should group by using all your selected fields except sum then maybe the function group_concat (mysql) can help you in concatenating resulting rows of the group clause
Im not sure how you could possibly do this. Greg has 2 colors, AND 2 prices, how do you determine which goes with which?
Greg Blue 170 or Greg Blue 360 ???? or attaching the Green to either price?
I think the colors need to have unique identofiers, seperate from the person unique identofiers.
Just a thought.