I have a table "Bed" and a table "Component". Between those two I have a m:n relation and the table "BedComponent", where I store the Bed-ID and the Component-ID.
Every Component has a price. And now I want to write a select-statement that gives me the sum of prices for a certain bed.
This is what I have:
SELECT Bed.idBed, Bed.name, SUM(src.price) AS summe, Bed.idCustomer
FROM Bed,
(SELECT price
FROM dbo.Component AS C
WHERE (C.idComponent IN
(SELECT idComponent
FROM dbo.BedComponent AS BC
WHERE 1 = BC.idBed))) AS src
GROUP BY dbo.Bed.idBed, dbo.Bed.name, dbo.Bed.idCustomer;
This statement works. But of course I don't want to write the bed-ID hard coded into my select as it will always calculate the price for bed 1. Instead of the "1" i want to have the current bed-id.
I work with MS SQL Server
Thanks for your help.
I think you want:
select b.idBed, b.name, SUM(src.price) AS summe, b.idCustomer
from bed b join
bedcomponent bc
on b.idBed = bc.idBed join
component c
on c.idComponent = bc.idComponent
group by b.idBed, b.name, b.idCustomer;
The idCustomer looks strange to me in the select and group by, but I don't know what you are trying to achieve.
Also note the use of table aliases, which make the query easier to write and to read.
Related
What do I have to change to get different results from different names.The table should give me the debts of each of them, this is calculated by the amount and the price of the drink. Now it should show all the names with the corresponding invoice that happens after the select
%sql select name, sum(getraenk.preis*schulden.menge) schulden from schulden \
join person on (fk_person = person.id)\
join getraenk on (fk_getraenk = getraenk.id)\
where name like ("dani")
Edit: it should spend all the names with their debts, that is:
dani = 8.5
michael = 12.5
...
Just in case your problem is very simple, you should be able to see all names and values with an SQL that looks like this:
select name, getraenk.preis*schulden.menge schulden
from schulden
join person on (fk_person = person.id)
join getraenk on (fk_getraenk = getraenk.id)
Note that I removed the where clause... this was the part that limited it to one name.
You also don't need the sum clause here unless you are doing a group by
Have you considered simply using GROUP BY name at the end of this query?
https://www.w3schools.com/sql/sql_groupby.asp
This will give you the sum of total debt for all names in your table which sounds like the result you are looking for.
You're missing
GROUP BY name
in the query.
I have the following tables below and their schema:
INV
id, product code, name, ucost, tcost, desc, type, qoh
1,123,CPASS 700,1.00,5.00,CPASS 700 Lorem, COM,5
2,456,Shelf 5,2.00,6.00,Shelf 5 KJ, BR,3
GRP
id,type,desc
1,COM,COMPASS
2,BR,SHELF
Currently I have a query like this:
SELECT INV.*,GRP.DESCR AS CATEGORY
FROM INV LEFT JOIN GRP ON INV.TYPE = GRP.TYPE
WHERE INV.QOH = 0
There is no problems with that query.
Right now,I want to know the SUM of the TCOST of every INV record where their QOH is 0.
In this situation, does that I mean all I have to do is to write a separate query like the one below:
SELECT SUM(TCOST)
FROM INV
WHERE QOH = 0
Does it make any sense for me to try and combine those two queries as one ?
First understand that SUM is the aggregate function hence either you can run the Query like
(SELECT SUM(TCOST) FROM INV WHERE QOH=0) as total
This will return Sum of TCOST in INV Table for mentioned condition.
Another approach is finding the Sum based on the some column (e.g. Type)
you could write query like
SELECT Type , SUM(TCOST) FROM INV WHERE QOH=0 GROUP BY type ;
Its not clear on what criteria you want to sum . But I think above two approaches would provide you fare idea .
Mmm, you could maybe use a correlated query, though i'm not sure it's the best approach since I'm not sure I understand what your attempting to do:
SELECT INV.*,
GRP.DESCR AS CATEGORY ,
(SELECT SUM(TCOST) FROM INV WHERE QOH=0) as your_sum
FROM INV LEFT JOIN GRP ON INV.TYPE = GRP.TYPE
WHERE INV.QOH = 0
If you want only one value for the sum(), then your query is fine. If you want a new column with the sum, then use window functions:
SELECT INV.*, GRP.DESCR AS CATEGORY,
SUM(INV.TCOST) OVER () as sum_at_zero
FROM INV LEFT JOIN
GRP
ON INV.TYPE = GRP.TYPE
WHERE INV.QOH = 0;
It does not make sense to combine the queries by adding a row to the first one, because the columns are very different. A SQL result set requires that all rows have the same columns.
I am fairly new in Access and SQL programming. I am trying to do the following:
Sum(SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.Amount) AS [Sum Of PaymentPerYear]
and group by year even when there is no amount in some of the years. I would like to have these years listed as well for a report with charts. I'm not certain if this is possible, but every bit of help is appreciated.
My code so far is as follows:
SELECT
Base_CustomerT.SalesRep,
SO_SalesOrderT.CustomerId,
Base_CustomerT.Customer,
SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.DatePaid,
Sum(SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.Amount) AS [Sum Of PaymentPerYear]
FROM
Base_CustomerT
INNER JOIN (
SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT
INNER JOIN SO_SalesOrderT
ON SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.SalesOrderId = SO_SalesOrderT.SalesOrderId
) ON Base_CustomerT.CustomerId = SO_SalesOrderT.CustomerId
GROUP BY
Base_CustomerT.SalesRep,
SO_SalesOrderT.CustomerId,
Base_CustomerT.Customer,
SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.DatePaid,
SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.PaymentType,
Base_CustomerT.IsActive
HAVING
(((SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.PaymentType)=1)
AND ((Base_CustomerT.IsActive)=Yes))
ORDER BY
Base_CustomerT.SalesRep,
Base_CustomerT.Customer;
You need another table with all years listed -- you can create this on the fly or have one in the db... join from that. So if you had a table called alltheyears with a column called y that just listed the years then you could use code like this:
WITH minmax as
(
select min(year(SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.DatePaid) as minyear,
max(year(SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.DatePaid) as maxyear)
from SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT
), yearsused as
(
select y
from alltheyears, minmax
where alltheyears.y >= minyear and alltheyears.y <= maxyear
)
select *
from yearsused
join ( -- your query above goes here! -- ) T
ON year(T.SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.DatePaid) = yearsused.y
You need a data source that will provide the year numbers. You cannot manufacture them out of thin air. Supposing you had a table Interesting_year with a single column year, populated, say, with every distinct integer between 2000 and 2050, you could do something like this:
SELECT
base.SalesRep,
base.CustomerId,
base.Customer,
base.year,
Sum(NZ(data.Amount)) AS [Sum Of PaymentPerYear]
FROM
(SELECT * FROM Base_CustomerT INNER JOIN Year) AS base
LEFT JOIN
(SELECT * FROM
SO_SalesOrderT
INNER JOIN SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT
ON (SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT.SalesOrderId = SO_SalesOrderT.SalesOrderId)
) AS data
ON ((base.CustomerId = data.CustomerId)
AND (base.year = Year(data.DatePaid))),
WHERE
(data.PaymentType = 1)
AND (base.IsActive = Yes)
AND (base.year BETWEEN
(SELECT Min(year(DatePaid) FROM SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT)
AND (SELECT Max(year(DatePaid) FROM SO_SalesOrderPaymentHistoryLineT))
GROUP BY
base.SalesRep,
base.CustomerId,
base.Customer,
base.year,
ORDER BY
base.SalesRep,
base.Customer;
Note the following:
The revised query first forms the Cartesian product of BaseCustomerT with Interesting_year in order to have base customer data associated with each year (this is sometimes called a CROSS JOIN, but it's the same thing as an INNER JOIN with no join predicate, which is what Access requires)
In order to have result rows for years with no payments, you must perform an outer join (in this case a LEFT JOIN). Where a (base customer, year) combination has no associated orders, the rest of the columns of the join result will be NULL.
I'm selecting the CustomerId from Base_CustomerT because you would sometimes get a NULL if you selected from SO_SalesOrderT as in the starting query
I'm using the Access Nz() function to convert NULL payment amounts to 0 (from rows corresponding to years with no payments)
I converted your HAVING clause to a WHERE clause. That's semantically equivalent in this particular case, and it will be more efficient because the WHERE filter is applied before groups are formed, and because it allows some columns to be omitted from the GROUP BY clause.
Following Hogan's example, I filter out data for years outside the overall range covered by your data. Alternatively, you could achieve the same effect without that filter condition and its subqueries by ensuring that table Intersting_year contains only the year numbers for which you want results.
Update: modified the query to a different, but logically equivalent "something like this" that I hope Access will like better. Aside from adding a bunch of parentheses, the main difference is making both the left and the right operand of the LEFT JOIN into a subquery. That's consistent with the consensus recommendation for resolving Access "ambiguous outer join" errors.
Thank you John for your help. I found a solution which works for me. It looks quiet different but I learned a lot out of it. If you are interested here is how it looks now.
SELECT DISTINCTROW
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.SalesRep,
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.CustomerId,
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.Customer,
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.RevenueYear,
CustomerPaymentPerYearQ.[Sum Of PaymentPerYear]
FROM
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ
LEFT JOIN CustomerPaymentPerYearQ
ON (Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.RevenueYear = CustomerPaymentPerYearQ.[RevenueYear])
AND (Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.CustomerId = CustomerPaymentPerYearQ.CustomerId)
GROUP BY
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.SalesRep,
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.CustomerId,
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.Customer,
Base_Customer_RevenueYearQ.RevenueYear,
CustomerPaymentPerYearQ.[Sum Of PaymentPerYear]
;
I have two tables, with structures like this:
roomlist:
-room (unique)
-totalDesks
userlist:
-room (has duplicates)
-deskOwned
I need a SQL statement that will spit out the following:
room
totalDesks
desksUsed (COUNT(DISTINCT userlist.desk))
desksOpen (totalDesks-(COUNT(DISTINCT userlist.desk)))
I have this so far:
SELECT
DISTINCT roomList.room, userlist.room, roomList.totalDesks,
COUNT(DISTINCT userlist.desk) AS desksUsed,
roomlist.totalDesks - COUNT(DISTINCT userlist.desk) AS desksOpen
FROM
roomlist, userlist
WHERE
roomlist.room = userlist.room
The problem is that not all rooms currently have users in them. If I have rooms A, B, C and D, but only records of people in A, B and C, it won't include room D in the result - even though room D has 5 totalDesks, none of which are taken.
How can I get a result that will still give me results on a room from roomlist, even if no records exist for that room in userlist?
Try a LEFT JOIN instead. I assume you need to group by room as well:
SELECT DISTINCT
roomList.room,
userlist.room,
roomList.totalDesks,
COUNT(DISTINCT userlist.desk) AS desksUsed,
roomlist.totalDesks-COUNT(DISTINCT userlist.desk) AS desksOpen
FROM roomlist
LEFT JOIN userlist ON roomlist.room=userlist.room
GROUP BY roomList.room,
userlist.room,
roomList.totalDesks
I would suggest mocking this up in http://sqlfiddle.com/ it will be much easier to help you then
I have a PHP page running in postgres. I have 3 tables - workorders, wo_parts and part2vendor. I am trying to multiply 2 table column row datas together, ie wo_parts has a field called qty and part2vendor has a field called cost. These 2 are joined by wo_parts.pn and part2vendor.pn. I have created a query like this:
$scoreCostQuery = "SELECT SUM(part2vendor.cost*wo_parts.qty) as total_score
FROM part2vendor
INNER JOIN wo_parts
ON (wo_parts.pn=part2vendor.pn)
WHERE workorder=$workorder";
But if I add the costs of the parts multiplied by the qauntities supplied, it adds to a different number than what the script is doing. Help....I am new to this but if someone can show me in SQL I can modify it for postgres. Thanks
Without seeing example data, there's no way for us to know why you're query totals are coming out differently that when you do the math by hand. It could be a bad join, so you are getting more/less records than you expected. It's also possible that your calculations are off. Pick an example with the smallest number of associated records & compare.
My suggestion is to add a GROUP BY to the query:
SELECT SUM(p.cost * wp.qty) as total_score
FROM part2vendor p
JOIN wo_parts wp ON wp.pn = p.pn
WHERE workorder = $workorder
GROUP BY workorder
FYI: MySQL was designed to allow flexibility in the GROUP BY, while no other db I've used does - it's a source of numerous questions on SO "why does this work in MySQL when it doesn't work on db x...".
To Check that your Quantities are correct:
SELECT wp.qty,
p.cost
FROM WO_PARTS wp
JOIN PART2VENDOR p ON p.pn = wp.pn
WHERE p.workorder = $workorder
Check that the numbers are correct for a given order.
You could try a sub-query instead.
(Note, I don't have a Postgres installation to test this on so consider this more like pseudo code than a working example... It does work in MySQL tho)
SELECT
SUM(p.`score`) AS 'total_score'
FROM part2vendor AS p2v
INNER JOIN (
SELECT pn, cost * qty AS `score`
FROM wo_parts
) AS p
ON p.pn = p2v.pn
WHERE p2n.workorder=$workorder"
In the question, you say the cost column is in part2vendor, but in the query you reference wo_parts.cost. If the wo_parts table has its own cost column, that's the source of the problem.