I am sorry for what may be a long post in advance.
Background:
I am using Rational Team Concert (RTC) which stores work item data in conjunction with Jazz Reporting Service to create reports. Using the Report Builder tool, it allows you to write your own queries to pull data as a table, and has its own interface to represent the table as a graph.
There is not much options for of graphing; the chart type defaults as a count, unless you specify it to show a sum. In order to graph by sum, the data must be a number rather than a string. By default, the Report Builder assumes all variables in the SELECT statement are strings.
The data which I will be using are a bunch of work items. Each work item is associated to a team (A, B) and has a work estimation number (count1, count2).
Item # | Team | Work |
------------------------
123 | A | count1 |
------------------------
124 | A | count2 |
------------------------
125 | B | count2 |
------------------------
....
Problem:
Since the work estimation is entered as a Tag, the first step was to use a CATCH WHEN block when using SELECT to transform count1 -> 1, and count2 -> 2 (the string tag to an actual number which can be summed). This resulted in a table with numbers 1 and 2 in place of the typed tag (good so far).
Item # | Team | Work |
------------------------
123 | A | 1 |
------------------------
124 | A | 2 |
------------------------
125 | B | 2 |
------------------------
....
The problem is that I am trying to graph by sum, which means getting the tool to identify the variables in the SELECT statement as numbers, except for some reason any variable I declare in a SELECT statement is always viewed as a string (The tool has a table of the current columns i.e. variables in the SELECT, along with that the tool identifies as its variable type).
Attempted Solutions:
The first query I did was to return a table of each work item with its team name and work estimate
SELECT T1.NAME,
(CASE WHEN T1.TAGs='count1' THEN 1 ELSE 2 END) AS WORK
FROM RIDW.VW_REQUEST T1
WHERE T1.PROJECT_ID = 73
Which resulted in
Team | Work |
----------------
A | 1 |
----------------
A | 2 |
----------------
B | 2 |
----------------
....
but the tool still sees the numbers as strings. I then tried explicitly casting the CASE to an integer, but resulted in the same issue
...
CAST(CASE WHEN T1.TAGs='count1' THEN 1 ELSE 2 END AS Integer) AS WORK
...
Which again the tool still represents as a string.
Current Goal:
As I cannot confirm if the tool has an underlying problem, compatibility issues with queries, etc. What I believe will work now would be to return a table with 2 rows: The sum of the work for each team
|Sum of 1's and 2's |
-----------------------------
Team A | SUM(1) + SUM(2) |
-----------------------------
Team B | SUM(1) + SUM(2) |
-----------------------------
What I am having trouble with is using sub queries to use SUM to sum the data. When I try
SUM(CASE WHEN ... END) AS TIME2 I get an error that "Column modifiers AVG and SUM apply only to number attributes". This has me thinking that I need to have a sub query which returns the column after the CASE, and then SUM that, but I am sailing into uncharted waters and can't seem to get the syntax to work.
I understand that a post like this would be better off on the product help forum. I have tried asking around but cannot get any help. The solution I am proposing of returning the 2 row/column table should bypass any issues the software may have, but I need help sub-querying the SUM when using a case.
I appreciate your time and help!
EDIT 1:
Below is the full query code which preforms the CASE correctly, but still causes with the interpreted type by the tool:
SELECT
T1.Name,
CAST(CASE WHEN T1.TAGS='|release_points_1|' THEN 1 ELSE (CASE WHEN T1.TAGS='|release_points_2|' THEN 2 ELSE 0 END) END AS Integer) AS TAG,
FROM RIDW.VW_REQUEST T1
WHERE T1.PROJECT_ID = 73
AND
(T1.ISSOFTDELETED = 0) AND
(T1.REQUEST_ID <> -1 AND T1.REQUEST_ID IS NOT NULL
This small adjustment to your current query should work:
SELECT
T1.Name,
SUM(CAST(CASE WHEN T1.TAGS='|release_points_1|' THEN 1 ELSE (CASE WHEN T1.TAGS='|release_points_2|' THEN 2 ELSE 0 END) END AS Integer)) AS TAG,
FROM RIDW.VW_REQUEST T1
WHERE T1.PROJECT_ID = 73
AND
(T1.ISSOFTDELETED = 0) AND
(T1.REQUEST_ID <> -1 AND T1.REQUEST_ID IS NOT NULL
GROUP BY T1.Name
Related
I have a database with a lot of columns with pass, fail, blank indicators
I want to create a function to count each type of value and create a table from the counts. The structure I am thinking is something like
| Value | x | y | z |
|-------|------------------|-------------------|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| pass | count if x=pass | count if y=pass | count if z=pass | | | | | | |
| fail | count if x=fail | count if y=fail |count if z=fail | | | | | | |
| blank | count if x=blank | count if y=blank | count if z=blank | | | | | | |
| total | count(x) | count(y) | count (z) | | | | | | |
where x,y,z are columns from another table.
I don't know which could be the best approach for this
thank you all in advance
I tried this structure but it shows syntax error
CREATE FUNCTION Countif (columnx nvarchar(20),value_compare nvarchar(10))
RETURNS Count_column_x AS
BEGIN
IF columnx=value_compare
count(columnx)
END
RETURN
END
Also, I don't know how to add each count to the actual table I am trying to create
Conditional counting (or any conditional aggregation) can often be done inline by placing a CASE expression inside the aggregate function that conditionally returns the value to be aggregated or a NULL to skip.
An example would be COUNT(CASE WHEN SelectMe = 1 THEN 1 END). Here the aggregated value is 1 (which could be any non-null value for COUNT(). (For other aggregate functions, a more meaningful value would be provided.) The implicit ELSE returns a NULL which is not counted.
For you problem, I believe the first thing to do is to UNPIVOT your data, placing the column name and values side-by-side. You can then group by value and use conditional aggregation as described above to calculate your results. After a few more details to add (1) a totals row using WITH ROLLUP, (2) a CASE statement to adjust the labels for the blank and total rows, and (3) some ORDER BY tricks to get the results right and we are done.
The results may be something like:
SELECT
CASE
WHEN GROUPING(U.Value) = 1 THEN 'Total'
WHEN U.Value = '' THEN 'Blank'
ELSE U.Value
END AS Value,
COUNT(CASE WHEN U.Col = 'x' THEN 1 END) AS x,
COUNT(CASE WHEN U.Col = 'y' THEN 1 END) AS y
FROM #Data D
UNPIVOT (
Value
FOR Col IN (x, y)
) AS U
GROUP BY U.Value WITH ROLLUP
ORDER BY
GROUPING(U.Value),
CASE U.Value WHEN 'Pass' THEN 1 WHEN 'Fail' THEN 2 WHEN '' THEN 3 ELSE 4 END,
U.VALUE
Sample data:
x
y
Pass
Pass
Pass
Fail
Pass
Fail
Sample results:
Value
x
y
Pass
3
1
Fail
1
1
Blank
0
2
Total
4
4
See this db<>fiddle for a working example.
I think you don't need a generic solution like a function with value as parameter.
Perhaps, you could create a view grouping your data and after call this view filtering by your value.
Your view body would be something like that
select value, count(*) as Total
from table_name
group by value
Feel free to explain your situation better so I could help you.
You can do this by grouping by the status column.
select status, count(*) as total
from some_table
group by status
Rather than making a whole new table, consider using a view. This is a query that looks like a table.
create view status_counts as
select status, count(*) as total
from some_table
group by status
You can then select total from status_counts where status = 'pass' or the like and it will run the query.
You can also create a "materialized view". This is like a view, but the results are written to a real table. SQL Server is special in that it will keep this table up to date for you.
create materialized view status_counts with distribution(hash(status))
select status, count(*) as total
from some_table
group by status
You'd do this for performance reasons on a large table which does not update very often.
I have an application in MVC5 C#. I want to add a feature where the admin can see how many parking spaces each parking lot has, along with how many spots are currently taken vs available.
Let's say, I have two tables (Lots and Staff).
the 'Lots' Table is the name of the existing parking lots and a count of how many spaces each lot has:
Name | Count
A | 200
B | 450
C | 375
The 'Staff' Table contains each person's ID, and an int column for each lot. These columns are either 1 (employee is assigned to this lot) or 0 (employee not assigned to this lot
StaffID | LotA | Lot B | Lot C
7264 | 0 | 1 | 0
2266 | 0 | 0 | 1
3344 | 1 | 0 | 0
4444 | 0 | 1 | 0
In the above scenario, the desired output would be . . . .
Lot | Total | Used | Vacant
A | 200 | 1 | 199
B | 450 | 2 | 448
C | 375 | 1 | 374
I have only done simple joins, in the past, and I am struggling to figure out whether it is best to use COUNT with a Where column = 1, or a Sum. But I also choke on the group by and get lost.
I have tried similar variations of the following (with no success)
SELECT Lots.Name,
Lots.Count,
SUM(Staff.LotA) As A_Occupied,
SUM(Staff.LotB) as B_Occupied,
SUM(Staff.LotC) as C_Occupied
FROM Lots
CROSS JOIN Staff
GROUP BY Lots.Name
In theory, I expected this to yield a listing of the lots, how many spaces in each lot, and how many occupied in each lot, grouped by the lot name.
This generates an error in the Group By because I am selecting columns that are not included in the Group by, but that just confuses me even more as to how to Group By for my needs.
In general, I have a bad habit of trying to over complicate things and so I apologize ahead of time. I am not a 'classically trained coder'. I did my best to organize the question and make it understandable
Firstly, your design would work better if it was properly normalised - your Staff table should have a single column representing the Lot that's used by each staff member (if you had 100 lots, would you have 100 columns?). Then there would be no need to pivot the data from columns into the rows you need.
With your current schema, you could use a cross apply to pivot the columns into rows which can then be correlated to each Lot name:
select l.[name] as Lot, q.Qty as Used, l.count - q.Qty as Vacant
from lots l
cross apply (
select Sum(LotA) A, Sum(LotB) B, Sum(LotC) C
from Staff s
)s
cross apply (
select Qty from (
select * from (values ('A', s.A),('B', s.B),('C', s.C))v(Lot, Qty)
)x
where x.Lot = l.[name]
)q;
See Demo Fiddle
is a layman solution. Hope it helps.
with parking as (
select 'A' as lot ,sum(case when lota >0 then 1 else 0 end ) as lots from staff
union all
select 'B' as lotb , sum(case when lotb >0 then 1 else 0 end ) as lots from staff
union all
select 'C' as lotc, sum(case when lotc >0 then 1 else 0 end ) as lots from staff
)
select a.name, a.count, b.lots, a.count-b.lots as places
from lots a join parking b on a.name=b.lot
As part of my SQL query, I first create a table called 'new' based on certain conditions and then insert into the new table some columns from a different table old based on certain conditions. Here's a simplified version of what I am trying to do:
item | subitem | stage | id |
-----------------------------------------------
i1 | s1 | picked | 1 |
i1 | s2 | shipped | 1 |
i2 | s4 | picked | 2 |
i3 | s10 | shipped | 2 |
i3 | s11 | eligible | 0 |
i4 | s2 |not eligible| 0 |
i1 | s1 | picked | 3 |
i1 | s2 | picked | 3 |
I want the output as following:
item1|subitem1|item2|subitem2|pair_volume|item1pick|item1ship|item2pick|item2ship|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i1 | s1 | i1 | s2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
i1 | s1 | i2 | s4 | 1 |1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
....
.....
....
Essentially, what I want to do here is the following:
I want to first make a cross-join of item, subitem with itself, so I have all possible combinations of item1, subitem1 and item2, subitem2.
Here's how the stages are defined. If a stage is eligible, then it is just eligible, whereas if a stage is picked, then it means that item is both eligible and picked. If a stage is shipped, then it means that item is eligible, picked and shipped. Only the last stage is mentioned.
Now, for every item1, subitem1 - item2, subitem2 pair, I want to calculate the count of id sessions where this pair occurs and has stage in (eligible, shipped, picked) and populate the value in pair_volume. For eg, (i1,s1)-(i1,s2) pair occurs twice (once in id 1 and once in id 3) and in both these id sessions, both the items in the pair were eligible (which is implied from picked and shipped) stages. Out of the 2 times that this eligible pair occurred, how many times is item1 picked, item2 picked, item1 shipped and item2 shipped? This is what I am trying to solve.
I can do fine until cross join. But I don't know how to insert values into the cross joined table. The real problem is more complex than what I have mentioned here. Any help is much appreciated!
Here's the query I have so far:
with new as
(
select combination.item1, combination.subitem1, combination.item2,
combination.subitem2,
(
select tmp.item1, tmp.subitem1, tmp.item2, tmp.subitem2,
case when ((tmp.item1 = tmp.item2) and
(tmp.subitem1 = tmp.subitem2)) then 'TRUE' else
'FALSE' end as indicator from
(
select distinct item as item1, subitem as subitem2
from old
cross join
select distinct item as item2, subitem as subitem2
from old
) tmp
) combination
where combination.indicator = 'FALSE'
)
insert into new (pair_volume)
select count(id) as pair_volume
from old
where ((new.item1 = old.item) and (new.subitem1 = old.subitem) and
stage
in ('picked', 'eligible', 'shipped')) and
((new.item2 = old.item) and (new.subitem2 = old.subitem) and
stage
in ('picked', 'eligible', 'shipped')
This is essentially what I am trying to do here and the insert into statement keeps throwing error. The part until cross join works fine. But I am having trouble inserting values into the table as well as making the right conditions for the output table I want. Any help is much much appreciated!!
However, this throws an error for me as follows:
SQL compilation error: syntax error line 4 at position 0 unexpected 'insert'.
I tried including a semi colon before the insert into statement, this is what I get:
SQL compilation error: syntax error line 3 at position 1 unexpected ';'.
I tried including a comma , before the insert into statement, this is what I get:
SQL compilation error: syntax error line 4 at position 0 unexpected 'insert'. syntax error line 5 at position 0 unexpected 'select'.
What am I doing wrong here? Based on a lot of other posts, I figured this is how we use insert into with a CTE.
If you are not obliged to use CTE (basically using CTE does not make much sense when you want to create a new Table), you can try, like:
INSERT INTO new (tmp1, tmp2)
SELECT tmp1,tmp2
FROM old
Edit: Assuming SQL Server
As stated in the comments, you are very close but a CTE doesn't create a table, which is why it doesn't work.
This bit is fine:
with new as
(
select combination.item1, combination.subitem1, combination.item2,
combination.subitem2,
(
select tmp.item1, tmp.subitem1, tmp.item2, tmp.subitem2,
case when ((tmp.item1 = tmp.item2) and
(tmp.subitem1 = tmp.subitem2)) then 'TRUE' else
'FALSE' end as indicator from
(
select distinct item as item1, subitem as subitem2
from old
cross join
select distinct item as item2, subitem as subitem2
from old
) tmp
) combination
where combination.indicator = 'FALSE'
)
The next line:
insert into new (pair_volume)
You cannot insert into new. There is no table called "new". Even if you could insert into the CTE, there is no column called pair_volume.
You need to create a seperate table to contain the data output that you are creating.
Do you have a fixed number of subitems? If not, it becomes more complex and you will need to use dynamic SQL to build a query to get the result that you want, or if your RDBMS supports it you could use SELECT INTO to dynamically create a table from the resultset.
is it possible in sql server to detect if 2 cells are the same, for example
ID | Quantity |SerialNo | QuantityRemaining
1 | 1 | 1234 | 0
2 | -1 | 1234 | 0
and then based on the Serial matching, ammend the overall quantity for that field to 0 in this case as ive typed above? or a more efficient way maybe? or is it better to simply update the total quantity field within a view I have which calculates the total based upon a product code?
You can use an aggregate function:
SELECT SerialNo,
SUM(Quantiy) AS QuantityRemaining
FROM YourTable
GROUP BY SerialNo
ORDER BY SerialNo
I am running into a rather annoying thingy in Access (2007) and I am not sure if this is a feature or if I am asking for the impossible.
Although the actual database structure is more complex, my problem boils down to this:
I have a table with data about Units for specific years. This data comes from different sources and might overlap.
Unit | IYR | X1 | Source |
-----------------------------
A | 2009 | 55 | 1 |
A | 2010 | 80 | 1 |
A | 2010 | 101 | 2 |
A | 2010 | 150 | 3 |
A | 2011 | 90 | 1 |
...
Now I would like the user to select certain sources, order them by priority and then extract one data value for each year.
For example, if the user selects source 1, 2 and 3 and orders them by (3, 1, 2), then I would like the following result:
Unit | IYR | X1 | Source |
-----------------------------
A | 2009 | 55 | 1 |
A | 2010 | 150 | 3 |
A | 2011 | 90 | 1 |
I am able to order the initial table, based on a specific order. I do this with the following query
SELECT Unit, IYR, X1, Source
FROM TestTable
WHERE Source In (1,2,3)
ORDER BY Unit, IYR,
IIf(Source=3,1,IIf(Source=1,2,IIf(Source=2,3,4)))
This gives me the following intermediate result:
Unit | IYR | X1 | Source |
-----------------------------
A | 2009 | 55 | 1 |
A | 2010 | 150 | 3 |
A | 2010 | 80 | 1 |
A | 2010 | 101 | 2 |
A | 2011 | 90 | 1 |
Next step is to only get the first value of each year. I was thinking to use the following query:
SELECT X.Unit, X.IYR, first(X.X1) as FirstX1
FROM (...) AS X
GROUP BY X.Unit, X.IYR
Where (…) is the above query.
Now Access goes bananas. Whatever order I give to the intermediate results, the result of this query is.
Unit | IYR | X1 |
--------------------
A | 2009 | 55 |
A | 2010 | 80 |
A | 2011 | 90 |
In other words, for year 2010 it shows the value of source 1 instead of 3. It seems that Access does not care about the ordering of the nested query when it applies the FIRST() function and sticks to the original ordering of the data.
Is this a feature of Access or is there a different way of achieving the desired results?
Ps: Next step would be to use a self join to add the source column to the results again, but I first need to resolve above problem.
Rather than use first it may be better to determine the MIN Priority and then join back e.g.
SELECT
t.UNIT,
t.IYR,
t.X1,
t.Source ,
t.PrioritySource
FROM
(SELECT
Unit,
IYR,
X1,
Source,
SWITCH ( [Source]=3, 1,
[Source]=1, 2,
[Source]=2, 3) as PrioritySource
FROM
TestTable
WHERE
Source In (1,2,3)
) as t
INNER JOIN
(SELECT
Unit,
IYR,
MIN(SWITCH ( [Source]=3, 1,
[Source]=1, 2,
[Source]=2, 3)) as PrioritySource
FROM
TestTable
WHERE
Source In (1,2,3)
GROUP BY
Unit,
IYR ) as MinPriortiy
ON t.Unit = MinPriortiy.Unit and
t.IYR = MinPriortiy.IYR and
t.PrioritySource = MinPriortiy.PrioritySource
which will produce this result (Note I include Source and priority source for demonstration purposes only)
UNIT | IYR | X1 | Source | PrioritySource
----------------------------------------------
A | 2009 | 55 | 1 | 2
A | 2010 | 150 | 3 | 1
A | 2011 | 90 | 1 | 2
Note the first subquery is to handle the fact that Access won't let you join on a Switch
Yes, FIRST() does use an arbitrary ordering. From the Access Help:
These functions return the value of a specified field in the first or
last record, respectively, of the result set returned by a query. If
the query does not include an ORDER BY clause, the values returned by
these functions will be arbitrary because records are usually returned
in no particular order.
I don't know whether FROM (...) AS X means you are using an ORDER BY inline (assuming that is actually possible) or if you are using a VIEW ('stored Query object') here but either way I assume the ORDER BY is being disregarded (because an ORDER BY should only apply to the final result).
The alternative is to use MIN() (or possibly MAX()).
This is the most concise way I have found to write such queries in Access that require pulling back all columns that correspond to the first row in a group of records that are ordered in a particular way.
First, I added a UniqueID to your table. In this case, it's just an AutoNumber field. You may already have a unique value in your table, in which case you can use that.
This will choose the row with a Source 3 first, then Source 1, then Source 2. If there is a tie, it picks the one with the higher X1 value. If there is a further tie, it is broken by the UniqueID value:
SELECT t.* INTO [Chosen Rows]
FROM TestTable AS t
WHERE t.UniqueID=
(SELECT TOP 1 [UniqueID] FROM [TestTable]
WHERE t.IYR=IYR ORDER BY Choose([Source],2,3,1), X1 DESC, UniqueID)
This yields:
Unit IYR X1 Source UniqueID
A 2009 55 1 1
A 2010 150 3 4
A 2011 90 1 5
I recommend (1) you create an index on the IYR field -- this will dramatically increase your performance for this type of query, and (2) if you have a lot (>~100K) records, this isn't the best choice. I find it works quite well for tables in the 1-70K range. For larger datasets, I like to use my GroupIncrement function to partition each group (similar to SQL Server's ROW_NUMBER() OVER statement).
The Choose() function is a VBA function and may not be clear here. In your case, it sounds like there is some interactivity required. For that, you could create a second table called "Choices", like so:
Rank Choice
1 3
2 1
3 2
Then, you could substitute the following:
SELECT t.* INTO [Chosen Rows]
FROM TestTable AS t
WHERE t.UniqueID=(SELECT TOP 1 [UniqueID] FROM
[TestTable] t2 INNER JOIN [Choices] c
ON t2.Source=c.Choice
WHERE t.IYR=t2.IYR ORDER BY c.[Rank], t2.X1 DESC, t2.UniqueID);
Indexing Source on TestTable and Choice on the Choices table may be helpful here, too, depending on the number of choices required.
Q:
Can you get this to work without the need for surrogate key? For
example what if the unique key is the composite of
{Unit,IYR,X1,Source}
A:
If you have a compound key, you can do it like this-- however I think that if you have a large dataset, it will totally kill the performance of the query. It may help to index all four columns, but I can't say for sure because I don't regularly use this method.
SELECT t.* INTO [Chosen Rows]
FROM TestTable AS t
WHERE t.Unit & t.IYR & t.X1 & t.Source =
(SELECT TOP 1 Unit & IYR & X1 & Source FROM [TestTable]
WHERE t.IYR=IYR ORDER BY Choose([Source],2,3,1), X1 DESC, Unit, IYR)
In certain cases, you may have to coalesce some of the individual parts of the key as follows (though Access generally will coalesce values automatically):
t.Unit & CStr(t.IYR) & CStr(t.X1) & CStr(t.Source)
You could also use a query in your FROM statements instead of the actual table. The query itself would build a composite of the four fields used in the key, and then you'd use the new key name in the WHERE clause of the top SELECT statement, and in the SELECT TOP 1 [key] of the subquery.
In general, though, I will either: (a) create a new table with an AutoNumber field, (b) add an AutoNumber field, (c) add an integer and populate it with a unique number using VBA - this is useful when you get a MaxLocks error when trying to add an AutoNumber, or (d) use an already indexed unique key.