I have a value table and I need to write a case statement that touches 2 columns: Below is the example
Type State Min Max Value
A TX 2 15 100
A TX 16 30 200
A TX 31+ 500
Let say I have another table that has the following
Type State Weight Value
A TX 14 ?
So when I join the table , I need a case statement that looks at weight from table 2 , type and state - compare it to the table 1 , know that the weight falls between 2 and 15 from row 1 and update Value in table 2 with 100
Is this doable ?
Thanks
It returns 0 if there aren't rows in this range of values.
select Type, State, Weight,
(select coalesce(Value, 0)
from table_b
where table_b.Type = table_a.Type
and table_b.State = table_a.State
and table_a.Value between table_b.Min and table_b.Max) as Value
from table_a
For an Alteryx solution: (1) run both tables into a Join tool, joining on Type and State; (2) Send the output to a Filter tool where you force Weight to be between Min and Max; (3) Send that output to a Select tool, where you grab only the specific columns you want; (since the Join will give you all columns from all tables). Done.
Caveats: the data running from Join to Filter could be large, since you are joining every Type/State combination in the Lookup table to the other table. Depending on the size of your datasets, that might be cumbersome. Alteryx is very fast though, and at least we're limiting on State and Type, so if your datasets aren't too large, this simple solution will work fine.
With larger data, try to do it as part of your original select, utilizing one of the other solutions given here for your SQL query.
Considering that Min and Max columns in first table are of Integer type
You need to use INNER JOIN on ranges
SELECT *
FROM another_table a
JOIN first_table b
ON a.type = b.type
AND a.State = b.State
AND a.Weight BETWEEN b.min AND b.max
Related
Suppose I have a database containing two tables, similar to below:
Table 1:
tweet_id tweet
1 Scrap the election results
2 The election was great!
3 Great stuff
Table 2:
politician tweet_id
TRUE 1
FALSE 2
FALSE 3
I'm trying to write a SQL query which returns the percentage of tweets that contain the word 'election' broken down by whether they were a politician or not.
So for instance here, the first 2 tweets in Table 1 contain the word election. By looking at Table 2, you can see that tweet_id 1 was written by a politician, whereas tweet_id 2 was written by a non-politician.
Hence, the result of the SQL query should return 50% for politicians and 50% for non-politicians (i.e. two tweets contained the word 'election', one by a politician and one by a non-politician).
Any ideas how to write this in SQL?
You could do this by creating one subquery to return all election tweets, and one subquery to return all election tweets by politicians, then join.
Here is a sample. Note that you may need to cast the totals to decimals before dividing (depending on which SQL provider you are working in).
select
politician_tweets.total / election_tweets.total
from
(
select
count(tweet) as total
from
table_1
join table_2 on table_1.tweet_id = table_2.tweet_id
where
tweet like '%election%'
) election_tweets
join
(
select
count(tweet) as total
from
table_1
join table_2 on table_1.tweet_id = table_2.tweet_id
where
tweet like '%election%' and
politician = 1
) politician_tweets
on 1 = 1
You can use aggregation like this:
select t2.politician, avg( case when t.tweet like '%election%' then 1.0 else 0 end) as election_ratio
from tweets t join
table2 t2
on t.tweet_id = t2.tweet_id
group by t2.politician;
Here is a db<>fiddle.
I'm just getting started with sql and have the objective to transform this:
select X.persnr
from Pruefung X
where X.persnr in (
select Y.persnr
from pruefung Y
where X.matrikelnr <> Y.matrikelnr)
output:
into the same output but using a form of join. I tried it the way below but I can't seem to get "rid" of the cartesian product as far as i can see. Or maybe i misunderstood the above statement what it should actually do. For me the above says "for each unique matrikelnr display all corresponding persnr".
select X.persnr
from Pruefung X
join pruefung y on x.persnr=y.persnr
where x.matrikelnr<>y.matrikelnr
output: A long list (I don't want to fill the entire question with it) - i am guessing the cartesian product from the join
This is the relation I am using.
Edit: Distinct (unless i am using it in the wrong place) won't work because then persnr is only displayed once, thats not the objective though.
Your initial query actually does:
select persnr from Pruefung if the same persnr exists for a a diferent matrikelnr.
"for each unique matrikelnr display all corresponding persnr"
This is achieved using aggregation:
Depending on the DBMS you are using you could use something like (SQL Server uses STRING_AGG, but MySQL uses GROUP_CONCAT)
SELECT matrikelnr,STRING_AGG(matrikelnr,',')
GROUP BY matrikelnr
You cannot easily achieve what you got from a correlated query (your first attempt) by using a join.
Edit:
A join does not result in a "Cartesian product" expect from when there is no join condition (CROSS JOIN).
A join matches two sets based on a join condition. The reason why you get more entries is that the join looks at the join key (PERSNR) and does its matching.
For example for 101 you have 3 entries. That means you will get 3x3 reults.
You then filter out the results for the cases where X.matrikelnr <> Y.matrikelnr If we assume matrikelnr is unique that would mean the row matched with itself. so you will lose 3 results ending up with 3x3 - 3 = 6.
If you want to achieve something in SQL you must first define what you are expecting to use and then use the appropiate tools (in this case correlated queries not joins)
You can write your 1st query with EXISTS instead of IN like:
select X.persnr
from Pruefung X
where exists (
select 1
from pruefung Y
where X.persnr = Y.persnr and X.matrikelnr <> Y.matrikelnr
)
This way it's obvious that this query means:
return all the persnrs of the table for which there exists another
row with the same persnr but different matrikelnr
For your sample data the result is all the persnrs of the table.
Your 2nd query though, does something different.
It links every row of the table with all the rows of the same table with the same persnr but different matrikelnr.
So for every row of the table you will get as many as rows as there are for the same persnrs but different matrikelnrs.
For example for the 1st row with persnr = 101 and matrikelnr = 8532478 you will get 2 rows because there are 2 rows in the table with persnr = 101 and matrikelnr <> 8532478.
You are right. It's the cartesian product's fault. Suppose you have persnr 1,1,1,2,2,2 in the first table and persnr 1,1,1,2,2 in the second. How many lines are you expecting to be returned?
In pdeuso-code it would go like this
Select
...
WHERE persnr in (second table)
-- 6 lines
Select persnr
FROM ...
JOIN ... ON a.persnr = b.persnr
-- 3X3 + 3X2 = 15 lines.
SELECT DISTINCT persnr
FROM ...
JOIN ... ON a.persnr = b.persnr
-- 2 lines (1 and 2)
Take your pick
Is there any way of joining the result of a case statement with a reference table without creating a CTE, ect.
Result AFTER CASE statement:
ID Name Bonus Level (this is the result of a CASE statement)
01 John A
02 Jim B
01 John B
03 Jake C
Reference table
A 10%
B 20%
C 30%
I want to then get the % next to each employee, then the max %age using the MAX function and grouping by ID, then link it back again to the reference so that each employee has the single correct (highest) bonus level next to their name. (This is a totally fictitious scenario, but very similar to what I am looking for).
Just need help with joining the result of the CASE statement with the reference table.
Thanks in advance.
In place of a temporary value as the result of the case statement, you could use a select statement from the reference table.
So if your case statement looks like:
case when variable1=value then bonuslevel =A
Then, replacing it like this might help
case when variable1=value then (select percentage from ReferenceTable where variable2InReferenceTable=A)
Don't know if I am overly simplifying, but based on the results of your case result query, why not just join that to the reference table, and do a max grouped by ID/Name. Since the ID and persons name wont change anyhow since they are the same person, you are just getting the max you want. To complete the Bonus level, rejoin just that portion after the max percentage determined for the person.
select
lvl1.ID,
lvl1.Name,
lvl1.FinalBonus,
rt2.BonusLvl
from
( select
PQ.ID,
PQ.Name,
max( rt.PcntBonus ) as FinalBonus
from
(however you
got your
data query ) PQ
JOIN RefTbl rt
on PQ.BonusLvl = rt.BonusLvl
) lvl1
JOIN RefTbl rt2
on lvl1.FinalBonus = rt2.PcntBonus
Since the Bonus levels (A,B,C) do not guarantee corresponding % levels (10,20,30), I did it this way... OTHERWISE, you could have just used max() on both the bonus level and percent. But what if your bonus levels were listed as something like
Limited 10%
Aggressive 20%
Ace 30%
You could see that a max of the level above would have "Limited", but the max % = 30 is associated with an "Ace" sales rep... Get the 30% first, then see what the label that matched that is.
I just joined after having a problem writing a query in MS Access. I am trying to write a query that will pull out the first two valid samples in from a list of replicated sample results and then would like to average the sample values. I have written a query that does pull samples with only two valid samples and averages these values. However, my query doesn't pull samples where there are more than two valid sample results. Here's my query:
SELECT temp_platevalid_table.samp_name AS samp_name, avg (temp_platevalid_table.mean_conc) AS fin_avg, count(temp_platevalid_table.samp_valid) AS sample_count
FROM Temp_PlateValid_table
WHERE (Temp_PlateValid_table.id In (SELECT TOP 2 S.id
FROM Temp_PlateValid_table as S
WHERE S.samp_name = S.samp_name and s.samp_valid=1 and S.samp_valid=1
ORDER BY ID))
GROUP BY Temp_PlateValid_table.samp_name
HAVING ((Count(Temp_PlateValid_table.samp_valid))=2)
ORDER BY Temp_PlateValid_table.samp_name;
Here's an example of what I'm trying to do:
ID Samp_Name Samp_Valid Mean_Conc
1 54d2d2 1 15
2 54d2d2 1 20
3 54d2d2 1 25
The average mean_conc should be 17.5, however, with my current query, I wouldn't receive a value at all for 54d2d2. Is there a way to tweak my query so that I get a value for samples that have more than two valid values? Please note that I'm using MS Access, so I don't think I can use fancier SQL code (partition by, etc.).
Thanks in advance for your help!
Is this what you want?
select pv.samp_name, avg(pv.value_conc)
from Temp_PlateValid_table pv
where pv.samp_valid = 1 and
pv.id in (select top 2 id
from Temp_PlateValid_table as pv2
where pv2.samp_name = pv.samp_name and pv2.samp_valid = 1
)
group by pv.samp_name;
You might need avg(pv.value_conc * 1.0).
i have 2 queries, where in one table the amount is shown for cars such as
Amount_Table Cars
800 Car A
900 Car B
2100 Car C
Second Table shows discount respectively for Car A, B & C.
Discount_table
40
10
80
I wish to have a final query where in the Amount-Discount values are displayed
The amount table has one query made and discount table has another query. hence i wish to do
(amount-query) - (discount query)
I did
Select ( (amount-query) - (discount-query))
but that threw error of
Only one expression can be specified in the select list when the subquery is not introduced with EXISTS.
Please help!
try something like this:
Select AmountTable.Amount-isnull(DiscountTable.Discount, 0)
from AmountTable left join
on AmountTable.Car = DiscountTable.Car
You cannot "subtract" queries. You have to do a join between tables (or subqueries), and make expressions using columns' names.
You need to join:
SELECT *
,cars_table.amount - discounts_table.discount
FROM cars_table
INNER JOIN discounts_table
ON cars.some_key = discounts_table.some_key