EXAMPLE:
The issue is that I have, for example, 5 people to solve 100 cases, and the assignment has to be fair, I think that SQL through loops should be able to assign the first cases to the first 5 people, but then it has to go back to count and reassign, in case a new case falls.
I have two tables with the following fields
Technicians
ID_TEC-----NOM_TEC-----LINEA_TEC
and other whit cases
ID_CASE----DESCRIPTION_CASE
The problem arises because I have to assign cases to each technician. The assignment must be cyclic, that is:
CASE1 TECH1
CASE2 TECH2
CASE3 TECH3
CASE4 TECH1 ...
and when you load the data in the table and rerun the SP or run the job that assigns them, go back to the table, re-count the values and reassign them according to the last assigned TECn. I hope the description is clearer!
You can assign the numbers 1-5 randomly to the tasks by doing:
select t.*,
(1 + row_number() over (order by newid()) % 5) as user_assignment
from t
Related
SELECT ID_worker, Name_worker, salary+500,
FROM Supermarket
WHERE ID_worker IN ("2","4");
The above query works, as it adds 500 to the salary of workers whose ID is either 2 or 4. The problem is that only the workers with the ID 2 and 4 appear. I want all of them to appear even the ones whose salary remains the same. How do I do that?
There are several ways to do this, but the most straightforward is to use a case conditional and completely remove the select's where condition, for example:
select
ID_worker,
Name_worker,
case when ID_worker in ('2','4') then salary+500 else salary end,
from Supermarket
TRANSACTION_NUMBER
UPC_CODE
PURCHASED_UNIT
COPURCHASED_FREQUENCY
T123456
1040-1204-8612
2
2
T123456
4020-4104-2120
1
0
T123456
1040-1204-8612
3
2
T123456
2994-8182-9311
5
0
T191201
9879-8712-3456
2
2
T191201
2387-1928-1247
1
0
T191201
7417-2741-4245
4
0
T191201
9879-8712-3456
2
2
[Also please refer to a screenshot example of the hypothetical table]
Please refer to the image above:
Let's hypothesize that the data contains information such as 'TRANSACTION_NUMBER' (indicating the unique instances of each transaction), 'UPC_CODE' (indicating unique product identifiers information), and 'PURCHASED_UNIT' (indicating how many times that particular product is purchased).
My goal is to generate a column called "COPURCHASED_FREQUENCY". This columnn should contain information about number of times that pairs of UPCs are co-purchased within the same transaction instance indicated by a column 'Transaction Number".
The tricky thing is that we cannot perform this operation on neither R nor Python; instead, this column should be created by SQL operation.
I think what I am trying to create is something similar to co-occurence instance. I cannot think of a particular way to do this as of now, and I would appreciate your help! If you can help with this, that would be great!
that would be achievable by using window functions & if you want to show 0 for the ones that have not bought more that once , you can use a case statement :
select *
, count(*) over (partition by TRANSACTION_NUMBER,UPC_CODE) as COPURCHASED_FREQUENCY
from youratble
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 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 trying to figure out the SQL for doing some relatively simple operations on sets of records in a table but I am stuck. Consider a table with multiple rows per item, all identified by a common key.
For example:
serial model color
XX1 A blue
XX2 A blue
XX3 A green
XX5 B red
XX6 B blue
XX1 B blue
What I would for example want to do is:
Assuming that all model A rows must have the same color, find the rows which dont. (for example, XX3 is green).
Assuming that a given serial number can only point to a single type of model, find out the rows which that does not occur (for example XX1 points both to A and B)
These are all simple logically things to do. To abstract it, I want to know how to group things by using a single key (or combination of keys) and then compare the values of those records.
Should I use a join on the same table? should i use some sort of array or similar?
thanks for your help
For 1:
SELECT model, color, COUNT(*) AS num FROM yourTable GROUP BY model, color;
This will give you a list of each model and each color for that model along with the count. So the output from your dataset would be:
model color num
A blue 2
A green 1
B red 1
B blue 2
From this output you can easily see what's incorrect and fix it using an UPDATE statement or do a blanket operation where you assign the most popular color to each model.
For 2:
SELECT serial, COUNT(*) AS num FROM yourTable GROUP BY serial HAVING num > 1
The output for this would be:
serial num
XX1 2
To address #1, I would use a self-join (a join on the same table, as you put it).
For example,
select *
from mytable
where serial in (select serial
from mytable
group by model, color
having count(*) = 1)
would find all the serial numbers that only exist in one color. I did not test this, but I hope you see what it does. The inner select finds all the records that only occur once, then the outer select shows all detail for those serials.
Of course, having said that, this is a poor table design. But I don't think that was your question. And I hope this was a made up example for a real situation. My concern would be that there is no reason to assume that the single occurrence is actually bad -- it could be that there are 10 records, all of which have a distinct color. This approach would tell you that all of them are wrong, and you would be unable to decide which was correct.