I'm having quite a bit of trouble figuring out exactly how to rearrange a table. I have a large table that looks something like this:
+--------+-----------+
| NAME | ACCOUNT # |
+--------+-----------+
| Nike | 87 |
| Nike | 12 |
| Adidas | 80 |
| Adidas | 21 |
+--------+-----------+
And I want to rearrange it to look like this:
+------+--------+
| Nike | Adidas |
+------+--------+
| 87 | 80 |
| 12 | 21 |
+------+--------+
But I can't seem to figure out how. I tried using PIVOT, but that only works with aggregate functions. I tried using a FOR LOOP as well, but couldn't get it work just right.
You can do this in several ways, but all being by enumerating the rows. Here is an example using conditional aggregation:
select max(case when name = 'Nike' then account end) as Nike,
max(case when name = 'Adidas' then account end) as Adidas
from (select t.*,
row_number() over (partition by name order by account desc) as seqnum
from t
) t
group by seqnum;
Consider again a pivot solution but first adding a rownumber for rolling Name group counts. Below assumes an autonumber ID field:
SELECT * FROM
(
SELECT Name, "Account #",
(ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY Name ORDER BY ID)) GrpRowNum
/* ALT: (SELECT Count(*) FROM Table1 sub
* WHERE sub.Name = Table1.Name AND sub.ID <= Table1.ID) GrpRowNum */
FROM Table1
)
PIVOT
(
SUM("Account #")
FOR Name IN ('Nike', 'Adidas')
)
ORDER BY RowNum;
However, for your ~200 items, you cannot easily render the Pivot's IN clause without various workarounds including PIVOT XML output or stored procedures with PL/SQL. Similarly, you could use general purpose coding (Java, PHP, Python, R) to retreive SELECT DISTINCT Name FROM Table1 resultset in vector/array, joining element values (collapsing or imploding arrays) with quotes and comma separators, and dropping the entire list in IN clause.
Related
For example, I have a table of:
id | code | name | type | deviceType
---+------+------+------+-----------
1 | 23 | xyz | 0 | web
2 | 23 | xyz | 0 | mobile
3 | 24 | xyzc | 0 | web
4 | 25 | xyzc | 0 | web
I want the result to be:
id | code | name | type | deviceType
---+------+------+------+-----------
1 | 23 | xyz | 0 | web&mobile
2 | 24 | xyzc | 0 | web
3 | 25 | xyzc | 0 | web
How do I do this in SQL Server using UPDATE and DELETE statements?
Any help is greatly appreciated!
I might actually suggest just leaving the original data intact, and instead creating a view here:
CREATE VIEW yourView AS
SELECT ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY MIN(id)) AS id,
code, name, type,
STRING_AGG(deviceType, '&') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY id) AS deviceType
FROM yourTable
GROUP BY code, name, type;
Demo
One main reason for not actually doing the update is that every time new data comes in, you might possibly have to run that update, over and over. Instead, just keeping the original data and running the view occasionally might perform better here.
Note that I assume that you are using SQL Server 2017 or later. If not, then STRING_AGG would have to be replaced with an uglier approach, but you should consider upgrading in this case.
To do what you want, you would need two separate statements.
This updates the "first" row of each group with all the device types in the group:
update t
set t.devicetype = t1.devicetype
from mytable t
inner join (
select min(id) as id, string_agg(devicetype, '&') within group(order by id) as devicetype
from mytable
group by code, name, type
having count(*) > 1
) t1 on t1.id = t.id
This deletes everything but the first row per group:
with t as (
select row_number() over(partition by code, name, type order by id) rn
from mytable
)
delete from t where rn > 1
Demo on DB Fiddle
I have a table in Hive containing store names, order IDs, and User IDs (as well as some other columns including item ID). There is a row in the table for every item purchased (so there can be more than one row per order if the order contains multiple items). Order IDs are unique within a store, but not across stores. A single order can have more than one user ID associated with it.
I'm trying to write a query that will return a list of all stores and order IDs and the shortest user ID associated with each order.
So, for example, if the data looks like this:
STORE | ORDERID | USERID | ITEMID
------+---------+--------+-------
| a | 1 | bill | abc |
| a | 1 | susan | def |
| a | 2 | jane | abc |
| b | 1 | scott | ghi |
| b | 1 | tony | jkl |
Then the output would look like this:
STORE | ORDERID | USERID
------+---------+-------
a | 1 | bill
a | 2 | jane
b | 1 | tony
I've written a query that will do this, but I feel like there must be a more efficient way to go about it. Does anybody know a better way to produce these results?
This is what I have so far:
select
users.store, users.orderid, users.userid
from
(select
store, orderid, userid, length(userid) as len
from
sales) users
join
(select distinct
store, orderid,
min(length(userid)) over (partition by store, orderid) as len
from
sales) len on users.store = len.store
and users.orderid = len.orderid
and users.len = len.len
Check out probably this will work for you, here you can achieve your goal of single "SELECT" clause with no extra overhead on SQL.
select distinct
store, orderid,
first_value(userid) over(partition by store, orderid order by length(userid) asc) f_val
from
sales;
The result will be:
store orderid f_val
a 1 bill
a 2 jane
b 1 tony
Probably rank() is the best way:
select s.*
from (select s.*, rank() over (partition by store order by length(userid) as seqnum
from sales s
) s
where seqnum = 1;
With table table1 like below
+--------+-------+-------+------------+-------+
| flight | orig | dest | passenger | bags |
+--------+-------+-------+------------+-------+
| 1111 | sfo | chi | david | 3 |
| 1112 | sfo | dal | david | 7 |
| 1112 | sfo | dal | kim | 10|
| 1113 | lax | san | ameera | 5 |
| 1114 | lax | lfr | tim | 6 |
| 1114 | lax | lfr | jake | 8 |
+--------+-------+-------+------------+-------+
I'm aggregating the table by orig like below
select
orig
, count(*) flight_cnt
, count(distinct passenger) as pass_cnt
, percentile_cont(0.5) within group ( order by bags ASC) as bag_cnt_med
from table1
group by orig
I need to add the passenger with the longest name ( length(passenger) ) for each orig group - how do I go about it?
Output expected
+------+-------------+-----------+---------------+-------------------+
| orig | flight_cnt | pass_cnt | bags_cnt_med | pass_max_len_name |
+------+-------------+-----------+---------------+-------------------+
| sfo | 3 | 2 | 7 | david |
| lax | 3 | 3 | 6 | ameera |
+------+-------------+-----------+---------------+-------------------+
You can conveniently retrieve the passenger with the longest name per group with DISTINCT ON.
Select first row in each GROUP BY group?
But I see no way to combine that (or any other simple way) with your original query in a single SELECT. I suggest to join two separate subqueries:
SELECT *
FROM ( -- your original query
SELECT orig
, count(*) AS flight_cnt
, count(distinct passenger) AS pass_cnt
, percentile_cont(0.5) WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY bags) AS bag_cnt_med
FROM table1
GROUP BY orig
) org_query
JOIN ( -- my addition
SELECT DISTINCT ON (orig) orig, passenger AS pass_max_len_name
FROM table1
ORDER BY orig, length(passenger) DESC NULLS LAST
) pas USING (orig);
USING in the join clause conveniently only outputs one instance of orig, so you can simply use SELECT * in the outer SELECT.
If passenger can be NULL, it is important to add NULLS LAST:
PostgreSQL sort by datetime asc, null first?
From multiple passenger names with the same maximum length in the same group, you get an arbitrary pick - unless you add more expressions to ORDER BY as tiebreaker. Detailed explanation in the answer linked above.
Performance?
Typically, a single scan is superior, especially with sequential scans.
The above query uses two scans (maybe index / index-only scans). But the second scan is comparatively cheap unless the table is too huge to fit in cache (mostly). Lukas suggested an alternative query with only a single SELECT adding:
, (ARRAY_AGG (passenger ORDER BY LENGTH (passenger) DESC))[1] -- I'd add NULLS LAST
The idea is smart, but last time I tested, array_agg with ORDER BY did not perform so well. (The overhead of per-group ORDER BY is substantial, and array handling is expensive, too.)
The same approach can be cheaper with a custom aggregate function first() like instructed in the Postgres Wiki here. Or, faster, yet, with a version written in C, available on PGXN. Eliminates the extra cost for array handling, but we still need per-group ORDER BY. May be faster for only few groups. You would then add:
, first(passenger ORDER BY length(passenger) DESC NULLS LAST)
Gordon and Lukas also mention the window function first_value(). Window functions are applied after aggregate functions. To use it in the same SELECT, we would need to aggregate passenger somehow first - catch 22. Gordon solves this with a subquery - another candidate for good performance with standard Postgres.
first() does the same without subquery and should be simpler and a bit faster. But it still won't be faster than a separate DISTINCT ON for most cases with few rows per group. For lots of rows per group, a recursive CTE technique is typically faster. There are yet faster techniques if you have a separate table holding all relevant, unique orig values. Details:
Optimize GROUP BY query to retrieve latest record per user
The best solution depends on various factors. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. To optimize performance you have to test with your setup. The above query should be among the fastest.
One method uses the window function first_value(). Unfortunately, this is not available as an aggregation function:
select orig,
count(*) flight_cnt,
count(distinct passenger) as pass_cnt,
percentile_cont(0.5) within group ( order by bags ASC) as bag_cnt_med,
max(longest_name) as longest_name
from (select t1.*,
first_value(name) over (partition by orig order by length(name) desc) as longest_name
from table1
) t1
group by orig;
You are looking for something like Oracle's KEEP FIRST/LAST where you get a value (the passenger name) according to an aggregate (the name length). PostgreSQL doesn't have such function as far as I know.
One way to go about this is a trick: Combine length and name, get the maximum, then extract the name: '0005david' > '0003kim' etc.
select
orig
, count(*) flight_cnt
, count(distinct passenger) as pass_cnt
, percentile_cont(0.5) within group ( order by bags ASC) as bag_cnt_med,
, substr(max(to_char(char_length(passenger), '0000') || passenger), 5) as name
from table1
group by orig
order by orig;
For small group sizes, you could use array_agg()
SELECT
orig
, COUNT (*) AS flight_cnt
, COUNT (DISTINCT passenger) AS pass_cnt
, PERCENTILE_CONT (0.5) WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY bags ASC) AS bag_cnt_med
, (ARRAY_AGG (passenger ORDER BY LENGTH (passenger) DESC))[1] AS pass_max_len_name
FROM table1
GROUP BY orig
Having said so, while this is shorter syntax, a first_value() window function based approach might be faster for larger data sets as array accumulation might become expensive.
bot it does not solve problem if you have several names wqith same length:
t=# with p as (select distinct orig,passenger,length(trim(passenger)),max(length(trim(passenger))) over (partition by orig) from s127)
, o as ( select
orig
, count(*) flight_cnt
, count(distinct passenger) as pass_cnt
, percentile_cont(0.5) within group ( order by bags ASC) as bag_cnt_med
from s127
group by orig)
select distinct o.*,p.passenger from o join p on p.orig = o.orig where max=length;
orig | flight_cnt | pass_cnt | bag_cnt_med | passenger
---------+------------+----------+-------------+--------------
lax | 3 | 3 | 6 | ameera
sfo | 3 | 2 | 7 | david
(2 rows)
populate:
t=# create table s127(flight int,orig text,dest text, passenger text, bags int);
CREATE TABLE
Time: 52.678 ms
t=# copy s127 from stdin delimiter '|';
Enter data to be copied followed by a newline.
End with a backslash and a period on a line by itself.
>> 1111 | sfo | chi | david | 3
>> 1112 | sfo | dal | david | 7
1112 | sfo | dal | kim | 10
1113 | lax | san | ameera | 5
1114 | lax | lfr | tim | 6
1114 | lax | lfr | jake | 8 >> >> >> >>
>> \.
COPY 6
The title was hard to word but the question is pretty simple. I searched all over here and could not find something for my specific issue so here it is. I'm usuing Microsoft SQL Server Management Studio 2010.
Table Currently looks like this
| Value | Product Name|
| 300 | Bike |
| 400 | Bike |
| 300 | Car |
| 300 | Car |
I need the table to show me the sum of Values where Product Name matches - like this
| TOTAL | ProductName |
| 700 | Bike |
| 600 | Car |
I've tried a simple
SELECT
SUM(Value) AS 'Total'
,ProductName
FROM TableX
But the above doesn't work. I end up getting the sum of all values in the column. How can I sum based on the product name matching?
Thanks!
SELECT SUM(Value) AS 'Total', [Product Name]
FROM TableX
GROUP BY [Product Name]
SQL Fiddle Example
Anytime you use an aggregate function, (SUM, MIN, MAX ... ) with a column in the SELECT statement, you must use GROUP BY. This is a group function that indicates which column to group the aggregate by. Further, any columns that are not in the aggregate cannot be in your SELECT statement.
For example, the following syntax is invalid because you are specifying columns (col2) which are not in your GROUP BY (even though MySQL allows for this):
SELECT col1, col2, SUM(col3)
FROM table
GROUP BY col1
The solution to your question would be:
SELECT ProductName, SUM(Value) AS 'Total'
FROM TableX
GROUP BY ProductName
Need help with Min Function in SQL
I have a table as shown below.
+------------+-------+-------+
| Date_ | Name | Score |
+------------+-------+-------+
| 2012/07/05 | Jack | 1 |
| 2012/07/05 | Jones | 1 |
| 2012/07/06 | Jill | 2 |
| 2012/07/06 | James | 3 |
| 2012/07/07 | Hugo | 1 |
| 2012/07/07 | Jack | 1 |
| 2012/07/07 | Jim | 2 |
+------------+-------+-------+
I would like to get the output like below
+------------+------+-------+
| Date_ | Name | Score |
+------------+------+-------+
| 2012/07/05 | Jack | 1 |
| 2012/07/06 | Jill | 2 |
| 2012/07/07 | Hugo | 1 |
+------------+------+-------+
When I use the MIN() function with just the date and Score column I get the lowest score for each date, which is what I want. I don't care which row is returned if there is a tie in the score for the same date. Trouble starts when I also want name column in the output. I tried a few variation of SQL (i.e min with correlated sub query) but I have no luck getting the output as shown above. Can anyone help please:)
Query is as follows
SELECT DISTINCT
A.USername, A.Date_, A.Score
FROM TestTable AS A
INNER JOIN (SELECT Date_,MIN(Score) AS MinScore
FROM TestTable
GROUP BY Date_) AS B
ON (A.Score = B.MinScore) AND (A.Date_ = B.Date_);
Use this solution:
SELECT a.date_, MIN(name) AS name, a.score
FROM tbl a
INNER JOIN
(
SELECT date_, MIN(score) AS minscore
FROM tbl
GROUP BY date_
) b ON a.date_ = b.date_ AND a.score = b.minscore
GROUP BY a.date_, a.score
SQL-Fiddle Demo
This will get the minimum score per date in the INNER JOIN subselect, which we use to join to the main table. Once we join the subselect, we will only have dates with names having the minimum score (with ties being displayed).
Since we only want one name per date, we then group by date and score, selecting whichever name: MIN(name).
If we want to display the name column, we must use an aggregate function on name to facilitate the GROUP BY on date and score columns, or else it will not work (We could also use MAX() on that column as well).
Please learn about the GROUP BY functionality of RDBMS.
SELECT Date_,Name,MIN(Score)
FROM T
GROUP BY Name
This makes the assumption that EACH NAME and EACH date appears only once, and this will only work for MySQL.
To make it work on other RDBMSs, you need to apply another group function on the Date column, like MAX. MIN. etc
SELECT T.Name, T.Date_, MIN(T.Score) as Score FROM T
GROUP BY T.Date_
Edit: This answer is not corrected as pointed out by JNK in comments
SELECT Date_,MAX(Name),MIN(Score)
FROM T
GROUP BY Date_
Here I am using MAX(NAME), it will pick one name if two names were found with the same goal numbers.
This will find Min score for each day (no duplicates), scored by any player. The name that starts with Z will be picked first than the name that starts with A.
Edit: Fixed by removing group by name