this question was probably asked somewhere but I can't seem to phrase it correctly in the search to find an accurate answer.
I'm doing a query on a Postgres DB, it has quite a few joins, the results are something like this:
WON | name | item
1 Joe A
1 Joe B
2 Smith A
So one row for each entry, I need to somehow get the result back as such:
WON | name | item
1 Joe A, B
2 Smith A
This can be done in the query or with NodeJS, there are hundreds to thousands of results for the query, so getting a distinct row (WON 1) then searching the DB for all entries that match it then repeating for the rest isn't feasible, so this may be better done in Node / Javascript, but I'm somewhat new to that, what would be a (somewhat) efficient way to do this?
If there IS a way to do this in the query itself then that would be my preference though.
Thanks
A sql approach:
SELECT won, name
,STRING_AGG(item, ',' ORDER BY item) AS items
FROM myTable
GROUP BY won, name
ORDER BY won, name
You can use GROUP BY and string_agg to cancat rows, somelike this:
Create table:
CREATE TABLE test
(
won int,
name character varying(255),
item character varying(255)
);
insert into test (won, name, item) values (1,'Joe', 'A'),(1, 'Joe', 'B'),(2, 'Smith', 'A')
And do this in the query:
select won, name, string_agg(item, ',') from test group by won, name order by won
See this example in sqlFiddle
Related
All first name should randomly match with each other and when I tried to run query again the First Name should be match with others name. Not the match with FIRST time match.
For example I have 6 records in one table ...
First name column looks like:
JHON
LEE
SAM
HARRY
JIM
KRUK
So I want result like
First name1 First name2
Jhon. Harry
LEE. KRUK
HARRY SAM
The simplest solution is to first randomly sort the records, then calculate the grouping and a sequence number within the group and then finally select out the groups as rows.
You can follow along with the logic in this fiddle: https://dbfiddle.uk/9JlK59w4
DECLARE #Sorted TABLE
(
Id INT PRIMARY KEY,
FirstName varchar(30),
RowNum INT IDENTITY(1,1)
);
INSERT INTO #Sorted (Id, FirstName)
SELECT Id, FirstName
FROM People
ORDER BY NEWID();
WITH Pairs as
(
SELECT *
, (RowNum+1)/2 as PairNum
, RowNum % 2 as Ordinal
FROM #Sorted
)
SELECT
Person1.FirstName as [First name1], Person2.FirstName as [First name2]
FROM Pairs Person1
LEFT JOIN Pairs Person2 ON Person1.PairNum = Person2.PairNum AND Person2.Ordinal = 1
WHERE Person1.Ordinal = 0
ORDER BY Person1.PairNum
ORDER BY NEWID() is used here to randomly sort the records. Note that it is indeterminate and will return a new value with each execution. It's not very efficient, but is suitable for our requirement.
You can't easily use CTE's for producing lists of randomly sorted records because the result of a CTE is not cached. Each time the CTE is referenced in the subsequent logic can result in re-evaluating the expression. Run this fiddle a few times and watch how it often allocates the names incorrectly: https://dbfiddle.uk/rpPdkkAG
Due to the volatility of NEWID() this example stores the results in a table valued variable. For a very large list of records a temporary table might be more efficient.
PairNum uses the simple divide by n logic to assign a group number with a length of n
It is necessary to add 1 to the RowNum because the integer math will round down, see this in action in the fiddle.
Ordinal uses the modulo on the RowNumber and is a value we can use to differentiate between Person 1 and Person 2 in the pair. This helps us keep the rest of the logic determinate.
In the final SELECT we select first from the Pairs that have an Ordinal of 0, then we join on the Pairs that have an Ordinal of 1 matching by the PairNum
You can see in the fiddle I added a solution using groups of 3 to show how this can be easily extended to larger groupings.
I have 3 columns in the same table in SQL one for the number, a name, and another unrelated data. The numbers repeat for a certain amount of times and have a name next to them, there can't be a name twice on the same number, but the names can be present in multiple different numbers. I need to make an SQL query to find what names have been under the same number the most amount of times. Any help will be very appreciated.
Example: SQL query will find what names have been grouped together the most.
1 Bill
1 Bob
1 Dave
2 Bob
2 John
2 Bill
To confirm - you would like to find
The pairs of names that occur together within a 'number'
Of those, find the pair that occurs most often
The trick here is to get all the pairs, then count how many 'numbers' that pair appears in.
To get the pairs, join the table to itself (on the number) - and then to only have one pairing in each, also join on name with the first in the pair < second in the pair.
The answer to this question depends on your database (SQL Server, MySQL, etc). However, here is an example written in T-SQL but it is fairly generic that does most of the work: it shows the counts and orders them by the the relevant count.
Feel free to get the TOP or LIMIT 1 just to get a pair with the most matches (noting that if there is a tie, only one would be chosen this way)
Alternatively modify the query to work out what the maximum number is, then get the pairs with that number.
CREATE TABLE NameGrps (NameNum int, Name varchar(30));
INSERT INTO NameGrps (NameNum, Name)
VALUES
(1, 'Bill'),
(1, 'Bob'),
(1, 'Dave'),
(2, 'Bob'),
(2, 'John'),
(2, 'Bill');
SELECT NamePairs.FirstInPair, NamePairs.SecondInPair, COUNT(NameNum) AS Num_Paired
FROM
(SELECT A.Name AS FirstInPair, B.Name AS SecondInPair, A.NameNum
FROM NameGrps A
INNER JOIN NameGrps B ON A.NameNum = B.NameNum AND A.Name < B.Name
) AS NamePairs
GROUP BY NamePairs.FirstInPair, NamePairs.SecondInPair
ORDER BY COUNT(NameNum) DESC, NamePairs.FirstInPair, NamePairs.SecondInPair;
And here are the results of the above
FirstInPair SecondInPair Num_Paired
Bill Bob 2
Bill Dave 1
Bill John 1
Bob Dave 1
Bob John 1
If you take a TOP or LIMIT 1 of that, it will find the pair of Bill and Bob is the most frequent.
Here is a db<>fiddle with the query, as well as additional information (e.g., what the sub-query does, and adding a TOP 1 version).
I currently have a table called tempHouses that looks like:
avgprice | dates | city
dates are stored as yyyy-mm-dd
However I need to move the records from that table into a table called houses that looks like:
city | year2002 | year2003 | year2004 | year2005 | year2006
The information in tempHouses contains average house prices from 1995 - 2014.
I know I can use SUBSTRING to get the year from the dates:
SUBSTRING(dates, 0, 4)
So basically for each city in tempHouses.city I need to get the the average house price from the above years into one record.
Any ideas on how I would go about doing this?
This is an SQL Server approach, and a PIVOT may be a better, but here's one way:
SELECT City,
AVG(year2002) AS year2002,
AVG(year2003) AS year2003,
AVG(year2004) AS year2004
FROM (
SELECT City,
CASE WHEN Dates BETWEEN '2002-01-01T00:00:00' AND '2002-12-31T23:59:59' THEN avgprice
ELSE 0
END AS year2002,
CASE WHEN Dates BETWEEN '2003-01-01T00:00:00' AND '2003-12-31T23:59:59' THEN avgprice
ELSE 0
END AS year2003
CASE WHEN Dates BETWEEN '2004-01-01T00:00:00' AND '2004-12-31T23:59:59' THEN avgprice
ELSE 0
END AS year2004
-- Repeat for each year
)
GROUP BY City
The inner query gets the data into the correct format for each record (City, year2002, year2003, year2004), whilst the outer query gets the average for each City.
There many be many ways to do this, and performance may be the deciding factor on which one to choose.
The best way would be to use a script to perform the query execution for you because you will need to run it multiple times and you extract the data based on year. Make sure that the only required columns are city & row id:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/insert-select.html
INSERT INTO <table> (city) VALUES SELECT DISTINCT `city` from <old_table>;
Then for each city extract the average values, insert them into a temporary table and then insert into the main table.
SELECT avg(price), substring(dates, 0, 4) dates from <old_table> GROUP BY dates;
Otherwise you're looking at a combination query using joins and potentially unions to extrapolate the data. Because you're flattening the table into a single row per city it's going to be a little tough to do. You should create indexes first on the date column if you don't want the database query to fail with memory limits or just take a very long time to execute.
for example :
I have a table with student ID and student grades
-----------------------
ID | grades
-----------------------
1 | 80
2 | 28
-----------------------
I want to get 0 when I query about ID = 3
can I do that ?
like select grades from student where id = 3 .
I want to get 0 because ID is not in the table
Run a select command with the reserved function called count:
select count(*) from STUDENT.GRADES where ID=3
It should be just like that.
Maybe this will do what you want:
SELECT ID, MAX(Grades)
FROM (SELECT ID, Grade FROM Students WHERE ID = 3
UNION
VALUES (3, 0) -- Not certain of syntax here
)
GROUP BY ID
The basic idea is that students present in the table will have two rows and the MAX will pick their proper grade (assuming that there are no circumstances where the grade is coded as a negative value). Students that are not represented will have just the one row with a grade of 0. The repeated 3 is the ID of the student being sought.
Have fun chasing down the full syntax. I started at Queries in the DB2 9.7 Information Centre, but ran out of patience before I got a good answer — and I don't have DB2 to experiment on. You might need to write SELECT ID, Grades FROM VALUES (3, 0), or there might be some other magical incantation that does the job. You could probably use SELECT 3 AS ID, 0 AS Grades FROM SYSIBM.SYSTABLES WHERE TABID = 1, but that's a clumsy expression.
I've kept with the column name Grades (plural) even though it looks like it contains one grade. It is depressing how often people ask questions about anonymous tables.
Goal is to replace a integer value that is returned in a SQL query with the char value that the number represents. For example:
A table attribute labeled ‘Sport’ is defined as a integer value between 1-4. 1 = Basketball, 2 = Hockey, etc. Below is the database table and then the desired output.
Database Table:
Player Team Sport
--------------------------
Bob Blue 1
Roy Red 3
Sarah Pink 4
Desired Outputs:
Player Team Sport
------------------------------
Bob Blue Basketball
Roy Red Soccer
Sarah Pink Kickball
What is best practice to translate these integer values for String values? Use SQL to translate the values prior to passing to program? Use scripting language to change the value within the program? Change database design?
The database should hold the values and you should perform a join to another table which has that data in it.
So you should have a table which has say a list of people
ID Name FavSport
1 Alex 4
2 Gnats 2
And then another table which has a list of the sports
ID Sport
1 Basketball
2 Football
3 Soccer
4 Kickball
Then you would do a join between these tables
select people.name, sports.sport
from people, sports
where people.favsport = sports.ID
which would give you back
Name Sport
Alex Kickball
Gnat Football
You could also use a case statement eg. just using the people table from above you could write something like
select name,
case
when favsport = 1 then 'Basketball'
when favsport = 2 then 'Football'
when favsport = 3 then 'Soccer'
else 'Kickball'
end as "Sport"
from people
But that is certainly not best practice.
MySQL has a CASE statement. The following works in SQL Server:
SELECT
CASE MyColumnName
WHEN 1 THEN 'First'
WHEN 2 THEN 'Second'
WHEN 3 THEN 'Third'
ELSE 'Other'
END
In oracle you can use the DECODE function which would provide a solution where the design of the database is beyond your control.
Directly from the oracle documentation:
Example: This example decodes the value warehouse_id. If warehouse_id is 1, then the function returns 'Southlake'; if warehouse_id is 2, then it returns 'San Francisco'; and so forth. If warehouse_id is not 1, 2, 3, or 4, then the function returns 'Non domestic'.
SELECT product_id,
DECODE (warehouse_id, 1, 'Southlake',
2, 'San Francisco',
3, 'New Jersey',
4, 'Seattle',
'Non domestic') "Location"
FROM inventories
WHERE product_id < 1775
ORDER BY product_id, "Location";
The CASE expression could help. However, it may be even faster to have a small table with an int primary key and a name string such as
1 baseball
2 football
etc, and JOIN it appropriately in the query.
Do you think it would be helpful to store these relationships between integers and strings in the database itself? As long as you have to store these relationships, it makes sense to store it close to your data (in the database) instead of in your code where it can get lost. If you use this solution, this would make the integer a foreign key to values in another table. You store integers in another table, say sports, with sport_id and sport, and join them as part of your query.
Instead of SELECT * FROM my_table you would SELECT * from my_table and use the appropriate join. If not every row in your main column has a corresponding sport, you could use a left join, otherwise selecting from both tables and using = in the where clause is probably sufficient.
definitely have the DB hold the string values. I am not a DB expert by any means, but I would recommend that you create a table that holds the strings and their corresponding integer values. From there, you can define a relationship between the two tables and then do a JOIN in the select to pull the string version of the integer.
tblSport Columns
------------
SportID int (PK, eg. 12)
SportName varchar (eg. "Tennis")
tblFriend Columns
------------
FriendID int (PK)
FriendName (eg. "Joe")
LikesSportID (eg. 12)
In this example, you can get the following result from the query below:
SELECT FriendName, SportName
FROM tblFriend
INNER JOIN tblSport
ON tblFriend.LikesSportID = tblSport.SportID
Man, it's late - I hope I got that right. by the way, you should read up on the different types of Joins - this is the simplest example of one.