I have three tables:
T_ORDER_PLACEMENTS (ORDER_ID, CUSTOMER_ID, ORDER_DATE)
T_ORDER_DETAILS (ORDER_ID, STOCK_ID)
T_STOCK_DETAILS(STOCK_ID, STOCK_NAME, STOCK_PRICE)
Can someone please help me to write a query which generates the following output:
STOCK_ID, STOCK_NAME, STOCK_PRICE, ORDERED_STATUS
1 stock1 5000 ordered
2 stock2 10000 unordered
Populate the ORDERED_STATUS column with 'ordered' if the stock is ordered and 'unordered' if the stock is unordered.
SELECT
t_stock_details.*,
CASE WHEN order_check.stock_id IS NULL THEN 'unordered' ELSE 'ordered' END AS ordered_status
FROM
t_stock_details
LEFT JOIN
(
SELECT stock_id FROM t_order_details GROUP BY stock_id
)
order_check
ON order_check.stock_id = t_stock_details.stock_id
The sub-query checks to see which stock_ids have an order associated with them. It also uses GROUP BY to ensure only one row is returned per stock_id, no matter how many orders are found.
The LEFT JOIN ensures that every row in t_stock_details is returned, whether or not it is successfully joined to anything. Where there is a successful join, we know there has been an order. It will also only ever be joined on to one row at the most (thanks to the above mentioned GROUP BY, so no duplication is being caused).
An unsuccessful join will have NULL in the order_check.stock_id, so we use that to check which string to return, using a CASE statement.
Related
Retrieve the total number of orders made and the number of orders for which payment has been done(delivered).
TABLE ORDER
------------------------------------------------------
ORDERID QUOTATIONID STATUS
----------------------------------------------------
Q1001 Q1002 Delivered
O1002 Q1006 Ordered
O1003 Q1003 Delivered
O1004 Q1006 Delivered
O1005 Q1002 Delivered
O1006 Q1008 Delivered
O1007 Q1009 Ordered
O1008 Q1013 Ordered
Unable to get the total number of orderid i.e 8
select count(orderid) as "TOTALORDERSCOUNT",count(Status) as "PAIDORDERSCOUNT"
from orders
where status ='Delivered'
The expected output is
TOTALORDERDSCOUNT PAIDORDERSCOUNT
8 5
I think you want conditional aggregation:
select count(*) as TOTALORDERSCOUNT,
sum(case when status = 'Delivered' then 1 else 0 end) as PAIDORDERSCOUNT
from orders;
Try this-
SELECT COUNT(ORDERID) TOTALORDERDSCOUNT,
SUM(CASE WHEN STATUS = 'Delivered' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END ) PAIDORDERSCOUNT
FROM ORDER
You can also use COUNT in place of SUM as below-
SELECT COUNT(ORDERID) TOTALORDERDSCOUNT,
COUNT(CASE WHEN STATUS = 'Delivered' THEN 1 ELSE NULL END ) PAIDORDERSCOUNT
FROM ORDER
you could use cross join between the two count
select count(orderid) as TOTALORDERSCOUNT, t.PAIDORDERSCOUNT
from orders
cross join (
select count(Status) PAIDORDERSCOUNT
from orders where Status ='Delivered'
) t
What I've used in the past for summarizing totals is
SELECT
count(*) 'Total Orders',
sum( iif( orders.STATUS = 'Delivered', 1, 0 ) ) 'Total Paid Orders'
FROM orders
I personally don't like using CASE WHEN if I don't have to. This logic may look like its a little too much for a simple summation of totals, but it allows for more conditions to be added quite easily and also just involves less typing, at least for what I use this regularly for.
Using the iif( statement to set up the conditional where you're looking for all rows in the STATUS column with the value 'Delivered', with this set up, if the status is 'Delivered', then it marks it stores a value of 1 for that order, and if the status is either 'Ordered' or any other value, including null values or if you ever need a criteria such as 'Pending', it would still give an accurate count.
Then, nesting this within the 'sum' function totals all of the 1's denoted from your matched values. I use this method regularly for report querying when there's a need for many conditions to be narrowed down to a summed value. This also opens up a lot of options in the case you need to join tables in your FROM statement.
Also just out of personal preference and depending on which SQL environment you're using this in, I tend to only use AS statements for renaming when absolutely necessary and instead just denote the column name with a single quoted string. Does the same thing, but that's just personal preference.
As stated before, this may seem like it's doing too much, but for me, good SQL allows for easy change to conditions without having to rewrite an entire query.
EDIT** I forgot to mention using count(*) only works if the orderid's are all unique values. Generally speaking for an orders table, orderid is an expected unique value, but just wanted to add that in as a side note.
SELECT DISTINCT COUNT(ORDERID) AS [TOTALORDERSCOUNT],
COUNT(CASE WHEN STATUS = 'ORDERED' THEN ORDERID ELSE NULL END) AS [PAIDORDERCOUNT]
FROM ORDERS
TotalOrdersCount will count all distinct values in orderID while the case statement on PaidOrderCount will filter out any that do not have the desired Status.
I need to update the following query so that it only returns one child record (remittance) per parent (claim).
Table Remit_To_Activate contains exactly one date/timestamp per claim, which is what I wanted.
But when I join the full Remittance table to it, since some claims have multiple remittances with the same date/timestamps, the outermost query returns more than 1 row per claim for those claim IDs.
SELECT * FROM REMITTANCE
WHERE BILLED_AMOUNT>0 AND ACTIVE=0
AND REMITTANCE_UUID IN (
SELECT REMITTANCE_UUID FROM Claims_Group2 G2
INNER JOIN Remit_To_Activate t ON (
(t.ClaimID = G2.CLAIM_ID) AND
(t.DATE_OF_LATEST_REGULAR_REMIT = G2.CREATE_DATETIME)
)
where ACTIVE=0 and BILLED_AMOUNT>0
)
I believe the problem would be resolved if I included REMITTANCE_UUID as a column in Remit_To_Activate. That's the REAL issue. This is how I created the Remit_To_Activate table (trying to get the most recent remittance for a claim):
SELECT MAX(create_datetime) as DATE_OF_LATEST_REMIT,
MAX(claim_id) AS ClaimID,
INTO Latest_Remit_To_Activate
FROM Claims_Group2
WHERE BILLED_AMOUNT>0
GROUP BY Claim_ID
ORDER BY Claim_ID
Claims_Group2 contains these fields:
REMITTANCE_UUID,
CLAIM_ID,
BILLED_AMOUNT,
CREATE_DATETIME
Here are the 2 rows that are currently giving me the problem--they're both remitts for the SAME CLAIM, with the SAME TIMESTAMP. I only want one of them in the Remits_To_Activate table, so only ONE remittance will be "activated" per Claim:
enter image description here
You can change your query like this:
SELECT
p.*, latest_remit.DATE_OF_LATEST_REMIT
FROM
Remittance AS p inner join
(SELECT MAX(create_datetime) as DATE_OF_LATEST_REMIT,
claim_id,
FROM Claims_Group2
WHERE BILLED_AMOUNT>0
GROUP BY Claim_ID
ORDER BY Claim_ID) as latest_remit
on latest_remit.claim_id = p.claim_id;
This will give you only one row. Untested (so please run and make changes).
Without having more information on the structure of your database -- especially the structure of Claims_Group2 and REMITTANCE, and the relationship between them, it's not really possible to advise you on how to introduce a remittance UUID into DATE_OF_LATEST_REMIT.
Since you are using SQL Server, however, it is possible to use a window function to introduce a synthetic means to choose among remittances having the same timestamp. For example, it looks like you could approach the problem something like this:
select *
from (
select
r.*,
row_number() over (partition by cg2.claim_id order by cg2.create_datetime desc) as rn
from
remittance r
join claims_group2 cg2
on r.remittance_uuid = cg2.remittance_uuid
where
r.active = 0
and r.billed_amount > 0
and cg2.active = 0
and cg2.billed_amount > 0
) t
where t.rn = 1
Note that that that does not depend on your DATE_OF_LATEST_REMIT table at all, it having been subsumed into the inline view. Note also that this will introduce one extra column into your results, though you could avoid that by enumerating the columns of table remittance in the outer select clause.
It also seems odd to be filtering on two sets of active and billed_amount columns, but that appears to follow from what you were doing in your original queries. In that vein, I urge you to check the results carefully, as lifting the filter conditions on cg2 columns up to the level of the join to remittance yields a result that may return rows that the original query did not (but never more than one per claim_id).
A co-worker offered me this elegant demonstration of a solution. I'd never used "over" or "partition" before. Works great! Thank you John and Gaurasvsa for your input.
if OBJECT_ID('tempdb..#t') is not null
drop table #t
select *, ROW_NUMBER() over (partition by CLAIM_ID order by CLAIM_ID) as ROW_NUM
into #t
from
(
select '2018-08-15 13:07:50.933' as CREATE_DATE, 1 as CLAIM_ID, NEWID() as
REMIT_UUID
union select '2018-08-15 13:07:50.933', 1, NEWID()
union select '2017-12-31 10:00:00.000', 2, NEWID()
) x
select *
from #t
order by CLAIM_ID, ROW_NUM
select CREATE_DATE, MAX(CLAIM_ID), MAX(REMIT_UUID)
from #t
where ROW_NUM = 1
group by CREATE_DATE
I have at least 8 tables from where I need to match the customer name and fetch the quantities and get the sum of all the quantities fetched from these 8 tables. I am trying to write a code which will ignore the customer whose sum of quantities is zero.
For an example lets take two tables purchase_sugar and sales_sugar I have tried a lot of queries but only this one is returning some result which is wrong.
SELECT sum(purchase_sugar.qty + sales_sugar.qty) AS Total_Amount from purchase_sugar inner join sales_sugar on purchase_sugar.supplier = sales_sugar.customer WHERE purchase_sugar.supplier = "+str(x.id)+"
The Table structures are like:
purchase_sugar have two columns supplier and qty.
And sales_sugar have structure like customer and qty.
How can I get the SUM of QUANTITIES of these tables if I provide one name and search it through these tables and get the quantities. The other thing is that I dont want the customer to be found in all the tables. If it is found in one table we should just get the quantity from that one table and for that reason I don't think that JOIN is useful or may be i am wrong.
To take care of the situation where a supplier/customer is not in all the tables, you can use union all and group by:
select name, sum(p_qty) as sum_p, sum(s_qty) as sum_s,
sum(p_qty) + sum(s_qty)
from ((select ps.supplier as name, ps.qty as p_qty, 0 as s_qty
from purchase_sugar ps
) union all
(select ss.customer as name, 0, ss.qty
from sales_sugar ss
)
) s
group by name;
Notes:
This query gets results for all names. You can use a where clause to restrict the results to one name.
You don't have to split the quantities into two (or eight) different columns, if you just want the overall sum.
You can aggregate before the union all, but that is not necessary.
you should JOIN the sum and not sum the join
select t1.purchase_sum + sales_sum as Total_Amount
from (
select purchase_sugar.supplier, sum(purchase_sugar.qty) as purchase_sum
from purchase_sugar
group by purchase_sugar.supplier
) t1
inner join (
select sales_sugar.customer, sum(sales_sugar.qty) as sales_sum
from sales_sugar
group by sales_sugar.customer
) t2 on t1.supplier = t2.customer and t1.supplier = "+str(x.id)+"
I am still new to SQL and getting my head around the whole sub-query aggregation to display some results and was looking for some advice:
The tables might look something like:
Customer: (custID, name, address)
Account: (accountID, reward_balance)
Shop: (shopID, name, address)
Relational tables:
Holds (custID*, accountID*)
With (accountID*, shopID*)
How can I find the store that has the least reward_balance?
(The customer info is not required at this point)
I tried:
SELECT accountID AS ACCOUNT_ID, shopID AS SHOP_ID, MIN(reward_balance) AS LOWEST_BALANCE
FROM Account, Shop, With
WHERE With.accountID = Account.accountID
AND With.shopID=Shop.shopID
GROUP BY
Account.accountID,
Shop.shopID
ORDER BY MIN(reward_balance);
This works in a way that is not intended:
ACCOUNT_ID | SHOP_ID | LOWEST_BALANCE
1 | 1 | 10
2 | 2 | 40
3 | 3 | 100
4 | 4 | 1000
5 | 4 | 5000
As you can see Shop_ID 4 actually has a balance of 6000 (1000+5000) as there are two customers registered with it. I think I need to SUM the lowest balance of the shops based on their balance and display it from low-high.
I have been trying to aggregate the data prior to display but this is where I come unstuck:
SELECT shopID AS SHOP_ID, MIN(reward_balance) AS LOWEST_BALANCE
FROM (SELECT accountID, shopID, SUM(reward_balance)
FROM Account, Shop, With
WHERE
With.accountID = Account.accountID
AND With.shopID=Shop.shopID
GROUP BY
Account.accountID,
Shop.shopID;
When I run something like this statement I get an invalid identifier error.
Error at Command Line : 1 Column : 24
Error report -
SQL Error: ORA-00904: "REWARD_BALANCE": invalid identifier
00904. 00000 - "%s: invalid identifier"
So I figured I might have my joining condition incorrect and the aggregate sorting incorrect, and would really appreciate any general advice.
Thanks for the lengthy read!
Approach this problem one step at time.
We're going to assume (and we should probably check this) that by least reward_balance, that refers to the total of all reward_balance associated with a shop. And we're not just looking for the shop that has the lowest individual reward balance.
First, get all of the individual "reward_balance" for each shop. Looks like the query would need to involve three tables...
SELECT s.shop_id
, a.reward_balance
FROM `shop` s
LEFT
JOIN `with` w
ON w.shop_id = s.shop_id
LEFT
JOIN `account` a
ON a.account_id = w.account_id
That will get us the detail rows, every shop along with the individual reward_balance amounts associated with the shop, if there are any. (We're using outer joins for this query, because we don't see any guarantee that a shops is going to be related to at least one account. Even if it's true for this use case, that's not always true in the more general case.)
Once we have the individual amounts, the next step is to total them for each shop. We can do that using a GROUP BY clause and a SUM() aggregate.
SELECT s.shop_id
, SUM(a.reward_balance) AS tot_reward_balance
FROM `shop` s
LEFT
JOIN `with` w
ON w.shop_id = s.shop_id
LEFT
JOIN `account` a
ON a.account_id = w.account_id
GROUP BY s.shop_id
At this point, with MySQL we could add an ORDER BY clause to arrange the rows in ascending order of tot_reward_balance, and add a LIMIT 1 clause if we only want to return a single row. We can also handle the case when tot_reward_balance is NULL, assigning a zero in place of the NULL.
SELECT s.shop_id
, IFNULL(SUM(a.reward_balance),0) AS tot_reward_balance
FROM `shop` s
LEFT
JOIN `with` w
ON w.shop_id = s.shop_id
LEFT
JOIN `account` a
ON a.account_id = w.account_id
GROUP BY s.shop_id
ORDER BY tot_reward_amount ASC, s.shop_id ASC
LIMIT 1
If there are two (or more) shops with the same least value of tot_reward_amount, this query returns only one of those shops.
Oracle doesn't have the LIMIT clause like MySQL, but we can get equivalent result using analytic function (which is not available in MySQL). We also replace the MySQL IFNULL() function with the Oracle equivalent NVL() function...
SELECT v.shop_id
, v.tot_reward_balance
, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY v.tot_reward_balance ASC, v.shop_id ASC) AS rn
FROM (
SELECT s.shop_id
, NVL(SUM(a.reward_balance),0) AS tot_reward_balance
FROM shop s
LEFT
JOIN with w
ON w.shop_id = s.shop_id
LEFT
JOIN account a
ON a.account_id = w.account_id
GROUP BY s.shop_id
) v
HAVING rn = 1
Like the MySQL query, this returns at most one row, even when two or more shops have the same "least" total of reward_balance.
If we want to return all of the shops that have the lowest tot_reward_balance, we need to take a slightly different approach.
The best approach to building queries is step wise refinement; in this case, start by getting all of the individual reward_amount for each shop. Next step is to aggregate the individual reward_amount into a total. The next steps is to pickout the row(s) with the lowest total reward_amount.
In SQL Server, You can try using a CTE:
;with cte_minvalue as
(
select rank() over (order by Sum_Balance) as RowRank,
ShopId,
Sum_Balance
from (SELECT Shop.shopID, SUM(reward_balance) AS Sum_Balance
FROM
With
JOIN Shop ON With.ShopId = Shop.ShopId
JOIN Account ON With.AccountId = Account.AccountId
GROUP BY
Shop.shopID)ShopSum
)
select ShopId, Sum_Balance from cte_minvalue where RowRank = 1
My SQL is quite rusty, so much that I have not created a view before and I am not entirely sure how to do what I need. Perhaps I need a stored procedure. Here is the deal.
We have a a database of ticket history (purchases). We want to filter on a certain SKU, but we want all line items from each ticket that has that SKU. For isntance, Someone buys a shirt and a hat. I want to filter on the shirt to find everyone who wants a shirt but display the entire ticket showing the shirt and the hat.
I thought my query would be something like this but I don't think it would work.
select
ticket_id, post_date, qty_sold, total_price, sales_total
from
ticket_history
where
sku = 'xxxx'
Union
select
sku as trans_sku, qty_sold as trans_qty_sold, desc as trans_desc, total_price as trans_total_price
from
ticket_history
where
ticket_id = <the ticket id in first query>
Perhaps a sub-select is what is needed but I'm not too understanding of how to do that either.
Any suggestions would be great.
I am not sure what you are trying to do here and whether UNION is what you are looking for or not.
In your query the columns are different and doesn't matched between the two queries. Any way, you can use a Common table Expression so that you can reuse the subquery, this should solve your problem:
WITH FirstQuery
AS
(
select
ticket_id,
post_date,
qty_sold,
total_price,
sales_total
from ticket_history
where sku = 'xxxx'
)
SELECT *
FROM FirstQuery
UNION
SELECT
... -- You should select the same number of columns
... -- and with the same data types to match the first columns
from ticket_history
where ticket_id IN(SELECT ticket_id FROM FirstQuery);
Here the FirstQuery acts like a subquery, but here you can reuse it later like what we did and use it in the where clause.
But, again the columns you selected in the first query:
ticket_id,
post_date,
qty_sold,
total_price,
sales_total
are different than the columns you selected in the second query:
sku as trans_sku,
qty_sold as trans_qty_sold,
desc as trans_desc,
total_price as trans_total_price
These columns should be matched (the count of them and data types). Otherwise you will got an error.
Things to note about UNION:
the columns count should be the same between the two queries.
The columns' names are driven from the first query.
When doing a UNION, the selected columns must match between the two select's. (Same number of columns, and matching data types.)
Maybe you want a self join instead?
select th1.ticket_id, th1.post_date, th1.qty_sold, th1.total_price, th1.sales_total,
th2.sku as trans_sku, th2.qty_sold as trans_qty_sold,
th2.desc as trans_desc, th2.total_price as trans_total_price
from ticket_history th1
left join ticket_history th2 on th2.ticket_id = th1.ticket_id
where th1.sku = 'xxxx'
LEFT JOIN to get th1 rows even if there are no matching th2 row.