A query I am working on is showing a rather interesting behaviour that I couldn't debug so far.
This is the query before it gets buggy:
QryCount
SELECT EmpId, [Open/Close], Count([Open/Close]) AS Occurences, Attribute1, Market, Tier, Attribute2, MtSWeek
FROM qrySource
WHERE (Venue="NewYork") AND (Type="TypeA")
GROUP BY EmpId, [Open/Close], Attribute1, Market, Tier, Attribute2, MtSWeek;
The query gives precisely the results that I would expect it to:
#01542 | Open | 5 | Call | English | Tier1 | Complain | 01/01/2017
#01542 | Closed | 2 | Call | English | Tier2 | ProdInfo | 01/01/2017
#01542 | Open | 7 | Mail | English | Tier1 | ProdInfo | 08/01/2017
etc...
But as a matter of fact in doing so it provides more records than needed at a subsequent step thereby creating cartesians.
qrySource.[Open/Close] is a string type field with possible attributes (you guessed) "open", "Closed" and null and it is actually provided by a mapping table at the creation stage of qrySource (not sure, but maybe this helps).
Now, the error comes in when I try to limit qryCount only to records where Open/Close = "Open".
I tried both using WHERE and HAVING to no avail. The query would result in 0 records, which is not what I would like to see.
I thought that maybe it is because "open" is a reserved term, but even by changing it to "D_open" in the source table didn't fix the issue.
Also tried to filter for the desired records in a subsequent query
SELECT *
FROM QryCount
WHERE [Open/Close] ="D_Open"
But nothing, still 0 records found.
I am suspicious it might be somehow related to some inherent proprieties of the COUNT function but not sure. Any help would be appreciated.
Everyone who participated, thank you and apologies for providing you with insufficient/confusing information. I recon the question could have been drafted better.
Anyhow, I found that the problem was apparently caused by the "/" in the Open/Closed field name. As soon as I removed it from the field name in the original mapping table the query performed as expected.
Related
We have data that separates Paid and Rejected claims. I need to see results of both and therefore have to do a union.
(Our data is a mess. I am also aliasing for confidentiality/HIPPA compliance. Please try not to get hung up on those parts because I can't change it.)
SELECT CustID, code, date, 'Paid' AS Srce
FROM Paid.Claims
INNER JOIN Paid.Medical
ON Paid.Claims.id = Paid.Medical.id
AND Paid.Claims.blind = Paid.Medical.blind
WHERE Paid.Claims.date BETWEEN '2022-01-01' AND '2022-06-07'
AND Paid.Medical.code IN ('88521','88522','88523','88524','88525')
AND Paid.Claims.custID IN ('N065468','N095843','N001086')
UNION
SELECT CustID, code, date, 'Filter' AS Srce
FROM Rejected.Claims
INNER JOIN Rejected.Medical
ON Rejected.Claims.id = Rejected.Medical.id
AND Rejected.Claims.blind = Rejected.Medical.blind
WHERE Rejected.Claims.date BETWEEN '2022-01-01' AND '2022-06-07'
AND Rejected.Medical.code IN '88521','88522','88523','88524','88525')
AND Rejected.Claims.custID IN ('N065468','N095843','N001086')
It's based on a query that the person before me made, and that one works but it's also much simpler because it pulls less from less places. My outcomes so far have been:
Leave the where-clause out of the Paid data but still in the Rejected data and get EVERY RESULT. None of the filtering seems to be working.
Include the where-clause in both and get no results. filtering not working, but in the opposite direction.
I have also tried
SELECT *
FROM (
everything above with and without filters
) AS results
WHERE <filters same as above>
And results set is empty.
I have tried with and without aliasing with no changes in what's returned.
I'm expecting about 200 results that SHOULD look something like this:
| CustID | code | date | Srce |
| ------- | ----- | ---------- | ------ |
| N065468 | 88522 | 2022-04-04 | Paid |
| N095843 | 88521 | 2022-03-09 | Paid |
| N001086 | 88524 | 2022-05-20 | Filter |
Back to troubleshooting.
It's hard without sample data as someone else has requested. Without any data I'd recommend running each query individually and seeing what results you get ie. If you run just the top half for paid claims does that give you the rows you're expecting? Then the bottom half? The filtering arguments can be case sensitive so I'd recommend checking your medical codes are lower case.
We have many duplicate fields as a result of our flattening process. My formatting may have been correct, but it turns out I was pulling from some of the wrong places. I solved the problem by creating a franken-query using several others made by my predecessor with a similar union element. Depending on how I was attempting to alias everything, the filters were likely pulling from different fields than the ones I was select-ing.
I apologise if this has been asked before. I'm still not certain how to phrase my question for the title, so wasn't sure what to search for.
I have a hundred or so databases in the same instance, one for each of my customers, named for the customer, and they all have the same structure. I want to select a single result set that includes the database name along with the most recent date entry in one of the tables. I can pull the database names from sys.databases, but then for each database I want to select the most recent date from Events.Date_Logged so that my result set looks something like this:
_______________________________
| | |
|Cust_Name |Latest_Event |
|_______________|_______________|
| | |
|Customer1 |01/02/2020 |
|_______________|_______________|
| | |
|Customer2 |02/02/2020 |
|_______________|_______________|
| | |
|Customer3 |03/02/2020 |
|_______________|_______________|
I'm really struggling with the syntax though. I either get just a single row returned or every single event for each customer. I think my joins are as rusty as hell.
Any help would be appreciated.
What I suggest you do:
Declare a result variable (of type table)
Use a cursor to go over every database
Inside the cursor: do a select top 1 ... order by date desc to get the most recent record. Save this result in the result variable.
After the cursor print the result variable.
That should do the trick.
I want in the output a hierarchical order like so:
My Data :
Name | Cost | Level
----------------+--------+------
Car1 | 2000 | 1
Component1.1 | 3000 | 2
Component1.2 | 2300 | 3
Computer2 | 5000 | 1
Component2.1 | 2000 | 2
Component2.2 | Null | 3
Output: Show all those data, which has money in it and order it by the level, something like first 1, then 2, then,3 and after that start with 1 again.
Name | Level
------------------+------
Car1 | 1
Component1.1 | 2
Component1.2 | 3
Computer | 1
Component2.1 | 2
What ORDER BY does is:
Name | Level
----------------+------
Car1 | 1
Computer1 | 1
Component1.1 | 2
Component2.1 | 2
Component1.2 | 3
Component2.2 | 3
I tried the CONNECT BY PRIOR function and it didn't work well
SELECT Name, Level
FROM Product
CONNECT BY PRIOR Level;
In MySQL you would normaly use 'order by'. So if you want to order on table row "level" your synntax would be something like this:
SELECT * FROM items ORDER BY level ASC
You can make use of ASC (Ascending) or DESC (descending).
Hope this will help you.
You can use below one
SELECT Name, Level
FROM Auction
ORDER BY Name, Level
WHERE Money!='Null' ;
Doing order by Name will print the result in hierarchical order, but if it has a column called parent id, then it would have been easier to show.
i suggest this for you :
SELECT Name, Level FROM Product ORDER BY Name, Level WHERE Money!='Null' ASC;
i wish this help you brother
It is still not clear whether this is what you are really expecting. It seems to me from your data set, you want to numerically order the components based on some kind of a version number at the end of the component. If that's truly what you want then you may ignore the non-numeric characters in the name and order by pure numbers towards the end of string ( with the required where clause ).
ORDER BY REPLACE ( name, TRANSLATE(name,' .0123456789',' '),'');
If that's the case, then the adding level too to the ORDER BY shouldn't make any difference unless your numeric order of versions and level are in sync.
A problem may appear if you have components like component2_name1.2 etc which could break this logic, for which you may require REGEXP to identify the required pattern. But, it doesn't appear so from your data and I assumed that to be the case and you may want to clarify if that's not what you may always have in your dataset.
Here's a demo of the result obtained for your sample data.
Demo
This will work of the numeric character is always a valid decimal and has only one decimal point. If you have complex versioning system like say 1.1.8, 2.1.1 etc, it needs far sophisticated ordering on top of REPLACE ( name, TRANSLATE(name,' .0123456789',' '),'').
You will find such examples in posts such as this one Here
Note: I would request you to also please read the instructions here to know how to ask a good question. This would avoid all confusion to people who try to understand and answer your question.
I am trying to write up a query for wordpress which will give me all the post_id's with the lowest fromprice field for each region. Now the trick is these are custom fields in wordpress, and due to such, the information is stored row based, so there is no region and fromprice columns.
So the data I have is (but of course containing a lot more rows):
Post_ID | Meta_Key | Meta_Value
1 | Region | Location1
1 | FromPrice | 150
2 | Region | Location1
2 | FromPrice | 160
3 | Region | Location2
3 | FromPrice | 145
The query I am endeavoring to build should return the post_id of the "lowest priced" matching post grouped by each region with results like:
Post_ID | Region | From Price
1 | Location1 | 150
3 | Location2 | 145
This will allow me to easily iterate the post_id's and print the required information, in fact, I would be just happy with returning post_id's if the rest is harder, I can then fetch the information independently if need be.
Thanks a lot, tearing my hair out over this one; don't often have to think about shifting results on their side from row based to column based that often, but this time I need it!
So you get an idea of the table structure I have, you can use the below as a guide. I thought I had this, but it turned out yes, this query prints out each distinct region WITH the lowest from price found attached to that post in the region, but the post_id is completely incorrect. I don't know why, it seems to be just getting the first result of the post_id and using that.
SELECT pm.post_id,
pm2.meta_value as region,
MIN(pm.meta_value) as price
FROM `wp_postmeta` pm
inner join `wp_postmeta` pm2
on pm2.post_id = pm.post_id
AND pm2.meta_key = 'region'
AND pm.meta_key = 'fromprice'
group by region
I suggest changing MIN(pm.meta_value) in your query to be MIN(CAST(pm.meta_value AS DECIMAL)). Meta_value is a character field, so your existing query will be returning the minimum string value, not the minimum numeric value; for example, "100" will be deemed to be lower than "21".
EDIT - amended CAST syntax.
It's hard to figure out without being able to execute the query, but would it help to just change your group by to:
group by pm.post_id, region
I'm aware of IDENTITY fields but I have a feeling that I couldn't use one to solve my problem.
Let's say I have multiple clients. Each client has multiple orders. Each client needs to have their orders numbered sequentially, specific to them.
Example table structure:
Orders:
OrderID | ClientID | ClientOrderID | etc...
Some example rows for this table would be:
OrderID | ClientID | ClientOrderID | etc...
1 | 1 | 1 | ...
2 | 1 | 2 | ...
3 | 2 | 1 | ...
4 | 3 | 1 | ...
5 | 1 | 3 | ...
6 | 2 | 2 | ...
I know the naive way would be to take the MAX ClientOrderID for any client and use that value for INSERTs but that would be subject to concurrency issues. I was considering using a transaction but I'm not quite sure what the broadest isolation scope that can be used for this. I'll be using LINQ to SQL but I have feeling that isn't relevant.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but as long as your MAX() call is in the same step as your insert, you won't have a problem with concurrency.
So, you could not do
select #newOrderID=max(ClientOrderID) + 1
from orders
where clientid=#myClientID;
insert into ( ClientID, ClientOrderID, ...)
values( #myClientID, #newOrderID, ...);
But you can do
insert into ( ClientID, ClientOrderID, ...)
select #myClientID, max(ClientOrderID) + 1, ...
from orders
where clientid=#myClientID;
I'm assuming OrderID is an identity column.
Again, if I'm incorrect on this, please let me know. Preferably with a URL
You could use a Repository pattern to handle your Orders and let it control the number of each specific clients order number. If you implement the OrderRepository correctly it could control the concurrency and number the order before saving it to the database (let the repository and not the db set the number).
Repository pattern: http://martinfowler.com/eaaCatalog/repository.html
One possibility (though I don't like to do this) is to have a lookup table that would tell you the greatest Order Number given for each vendor. Inside of a transaction, you'd fetch the most recent one from VendorOrderNumber, save your new order, increment the value in VendorOrderNumber, commit transaction.
This is an odd way to store data, but assuming you need it, there is nothing built-in that you can use.
Your suggestion of Max(ClientOrderID) is straight forward and pretty easy to implement (follow John MacIntyre's advice). It will probably work acceptably well on tables with a few thousand orders. As the table grows this approach will of course slow down.
Nick DeVore's suggestion of a lookup table is a little messier to implement but won't substantially be affected by data growth.
Depending on where/when you actually need the ClientOrderID, you could calculate the id when needed like this:
SELECT *,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY OrderID) AS ClientOrderID
FROM Orders
WHERE ClientID = 1
This assumes that the ClientOrderIDs are in the same sequence as the OrderID. Without actually persisting the ID, it is awkward to use as a key to anything else. This approach should not be affected by data growth.