I am building a fairly large set of tabulated data. In this data I have employees and their receptive totals against company overall totals. I am having a problem in that I am using CTEs and one of my expressions counts for the number of a particular item. The count returns nothing and by including this expression in the final query makes the whole result set blank. I'm sure I'm missing something simple here:
...
COMPANY_TOTAL_A(A) AS
(
SELECT NVL(COUNT(ITEM),0)
FROM COMPANY_TOTALS_FINAL
WHERE ITEM = 'A'
GROUP BY ITEM
),
...
This query returns nothing and when I use it in my final query the whole result set is blank. If I exclude it then I get all the rows I expect back. It looks like this?
SELECT DISTINCT C.ID,
C.NAME,
P.LOCATION,
...
NVL(T.A, 0)
...
FROM COMPANY C
INNER JOIN PLACE P
ON P.P_ID = C.P_ID,
...
COMPANY_TOTAL_A T;
As tthis value is relevant to all employees I expected it to just return the company total for when item is in class A. Even if that is 0 I thought 0 would be returned?
Grouping by the same column you are counting on is useless. You want a simple:
SELECT count(*)
FROM company_totals_final
WHERE item = 'A'
count(item) counts all rows where item is not null, but the condition will ITEM = 'A' will already remove those rows anyway. So it's also not needed.
Related
SELECT distinct
A.PROPOLN, C.LIFCLNTNO, A.PROSASORG, sum (A.PROSASORG) as sum
FROM [FPRODUCTPF] A
join [FNBREQCPF] B on (B.IQCPLN=A.PROPOLN)
join [FLIFERATPF] C on (C.LIFPOLN=A.PROPOLN and C.LIFPRDCNT=A.PROPRDCNT and C.LIFBNFCNT=A.PROBNFCNT)
where C.LIFCLNTNO='2012042830507' and A.PROSASORG>0 and A.PROPRDSTS='10' and
A.PRORECSTS='1' and A.PROBNFLVL='M' and B.IQCODE='B10000' and B.IQAPDAT>20180101
group by C.LIFCLNTNO, A.PROPOLN, A.PROSASORG
This does not sum correctly, it returns two lines instead of one:
PROPOLN LIFCLNTNO PROSASORG sum
1 209814572 2012042830507 3881236 147486968
2 209814572 2012042830507 15461074 463832220
You are seeing two rows because A.PROSASORG has two different values for the "C.LIFCLNTNO, A.PROPOLN" grouping.
i.e.
C.LIFCLNTNO, A.PROPOLN, A.PROSASORG together give you two unique rows.
If you want a single row for C.LIFCLNTNO, A.PROPOLN, then you may want to use an aggregate on A.PROSASORG as well.
Your entire query is being filtered on your "C" table by the one LifClntNo,
so you can leave that out of your group by and just have it as a MAX() value
in your select since it will always be the same value.
As for you summing the PROSASORG column via comment from other answer, just sum it. Hour column names are not evidently clear for purpose, so I dont know if its just a number, a quantity, or whatever. You might want to just pull that column out of your query completely if you want based on a single product id.
For performance, I would suggest the following indexes on
Table Index
FPRODUCTPF ( PROPRDSTS, PRORECSTS, PROBNFLVL, PROPOLN )
FNBREQCPF ( IQCODE, IQCPLN, IQAPDAT )
FLIFERATPF ( LIFPOLN, LIFPRDCNT, LIFBNFCNT, LIFCLNTNO )
I have rewritten your query to put the corresponding JOIN components to the same as the table they are based on vs all in the where clause.
SELECT
P.PROPOLN,
max( L.LIFCLNTNO ) LIFCLNTNO,
sum (P.PROSASORG) as sum
FROM
[FPRODUCTPF] P
join [FNBREQCPF] N
on N.IQCODE = 'B10000'
and P.PROPOLN = N.IQCPLN
and N.IQAPDAT > 20180101
join [FLIFERATPF] L
on L.LIFCLNTNO='2012042830507'
and P.PROPOLN = L.LIFPOLN
and P.PROPRDCNT = L.LIFPRDCNT
and P.PROBNFCNT = L.LIFBNFCNT
where
P.PROPRDSTS = '10'
and P.PRORECSTS = '1'
and P.PROBNFLVL = 'M'
and P.PROSASORG > 0
group by
P.PROPOLN
Now, one additional issue you will PROBABLY be running into. You are doing a query with multiple joins, and it appears that there will be multiple records in EACH of your FNBREQCPF and FLIFERATPF tables for the same FPRODUCTPF entry. If you, you will be getting a Cartesian result as the PROSASORG value will be counted for each instance combination in the two other tables.
Ex: FProductPF has ID = X with a Prosasorg value of 3
FNBreQCPF has matching records of Y1 and Y2
FLIFERATPF has matching records of Z1, Z2 and Z3.
So now your total will be equal to 3 times 6 = 18.
If you look at the combinations, Y1:Z1, Y1:Z2, Y1:Z3 AND Y2:Z1, Y2:Z2, Y2:Z3 giving your 6 entries that qualify, times the original value of 3, thus bloating your numbers -- IF such multiple records may exist in each respective table. Now, imagine if your tables have 30 and 40 matching instances respectively, you have just bloated your totals by 1200 times.
This is what I currently have (it doesn't work):
select MOCKSTEMS.WORD_ID,
MOCKSTEMS.STEM_ID,
MOCKSTEMS.LABSTEM,
MOCKSTEMS.LABSTEMCATEGORY,
MOCKLEMMAS.LEMMAFORM,
MOCKSTEMS.LEMMA_ID,
MOCKWORDS.ORIGINALWORD,
MOCKSTEMS.CONTAINEDIN,
COUNT(*) as SAMEVALUE from MOCKSTEMS where CONTAINEDIN=STEM_ID
from MOCKSTEMS
inner join MOCKWORDS on MOCKSTEMS.WORD_ID = MOCKWORDS.WORD_ID
inner join MOCKLEMMAS on MOCKSTEMS.LEMMA_ID = MOCKLEMMAS.LEMMA_ID
Basically, I wish to create a column called 'SAMEVALUE' that shows the number of rows in this query with 'CONTAINEDIN' values equal to the 'STEM_ID' value of each row. Is this possible, and if so, how can I do it with SQL?
EDITED:
This is what I get when I run the query without the 'COUNT(*) as SAMEVALUE from MOCKSTEMS where CONTAINEDIN=STEM_ID' row:
image of a few rows returned by the query.
For example, for the row with STEM_ID='stem-003' and LABSTEM='owotan okitz', I would like the SAMEVALUE column to have value 2, because there are 2 rows with CONTAINEDIN='stem-003', as circled in this image.
It would also be fine if the SAMEVALUE column just indicates true/false (or 0/1) depending on whether there are rows with CONTAINEDIN values equal to the STEM_ID of each row.
To get overall count alongside the query results, you need an analytic function. So to count only rows with some condition, we put this condition in case expression, which returns something in case of "true", and null in other cases. Then count will ignore nulls.
select MOCKSTEMS.WORD_ID,
MOCKSTEMS.STEM_ID,
MOCKSTEMS.LABSTEM,
MOCKSTEMS.LABSTEMCATEGORY,
MOCKLEMMAS.LEMMAFORM,
MOCKSTEMS.LEMMA_ID,
MOCKWORDS.ORIGINALWORD,
MOCKSTEMS.CONTAINEDIN,
COUNT(
case
when CONTAINEDIN=STEM_ID
then 1
end
) over() as SAMEVALUE
/*Over is empty to consider all the result set as a single window*/
from MOCKSTEMS
inner join MOCKWORDS on MOCKSTEMS.WORD_ID = MOCKWORDS.WORD_ID
inner join MOCKLEMMAS on MOCKSTEMS.LEMMA_ID = MOCKLEMMAS.LEMMA_ID
SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT SUM(quantity) AS quantity,
product_location_id,
location_bin_id,
product_lot_id,
product_serial_id,
CASE
WHEN GROUPING (product_location_id, location_bin_id, product_lot_id, product_serial_id) = 0 AND product_serial_id IS NOT NULL THEN
'Serial'
WHEN GROUPING (product_location_id, location_bin_id, product_lot_id, product_serial_id) = 0 THEN
'Lot'
ELSE
'Quantity'
END AS pick_by
FROM product_location_bins
WHERE status != 'Void'
AND has_quantity = 'Yes'
GROUP BY GROUPING SETS (
(product_location_id, location_bin_id, product_lot_id, product_serial_id),
(product_location_id, location_bin_id)
)
HAVING SUM(quantity) > 0
) x
WHERE x.product_serial_id = 5643
I have the above query. Using a normal GROUP BY postgres is able to "push down" the outer where clause and use the index on product_serial_id. When I use grouping sets it's unable to do so. It resolves the entire inner query and then filters the results. I'm wondering why this is. Is it a limitation with grouping sets?
Your query is odd. Your outer where clause eliminates the second set of results from grouping sets, because product_serial_id would be NULL for the second set. This gets filtered out in the outer where.
I think you want something like this for the outer query:
WHERE x.product_serial_id = 5643 OR x.product_serial_id IS NULL
I suppose that Postgres could add optimizations for poorly written code -- that is, eliminate the work for the second grouping sets set because it is filtered out by the outer where. However, that is not usually the focus of optimizations.
I'm in need of some assistance. I have search and not found what I'm looking for. I have an assigment for school that requires me to use SQL. I have a query that pulls some colunms from two tables:
SELECT Course.CourseNo, Course.CrHrs, Sections.Yr, Sections.Term, Sections.Location
FROM Course
INNER JOIN Sections ON Course.CourseNo = Sections.CourseNo
WHERE Sections.Term="spring";
I need to add a Totals row at the bottom to count the CourseNo and Sum the CrHrs. It has to be done through SQL query design as I need to paste the code. I know it can be done with the datasheet view but she will not accept that. Any advice?
To accomplish this, you can union your query together with an aggregation query. Its not clear from your question which columns you are trying to get "Totals" from, but here's an example of what I mean using your query and getting counts of each (kind of useless example - but you should be able to apply to what you are doing):
SELECT
[Course].[CourseNo]
, [Course].[CrHrs]
, [Sections].[Yr]
, [Sections].[Term]
, [Sections].[Location]
FROM
[Course]
INNER JOIN [Sections] ON [Course].[CourseNo] = [Sections].[CourseNo]
WHERE [Sections].[Term] = [spring]
UNION ALL
SELECT
"TOTALS"
, SUM([Course].[CrHrs])
, count([Sections].[Yr])
, Count([Sections].[Term])
, Count([Sections].[Location])
FROM
[Course]
INNER JOIN [Sections] ON [Course].[CourseNo] = [Sections].[CourseNo]
WHERE [Sections].[Term] = “spring”
You can prepare your "total" query separately, and then output both query results together with "UNION".
It might look like:
SELECT Course.CourseNo, Course.CrHrs, Sections.Yr, Sections.Term, Sections.Location
FROM Course
INNER JOIN Sections ON Course.CourseNo = Sections.CourseNo
WHERE Sections.Term="spring"
UNION
SELECT "Total", SUM(Course.CrHrs), SUM(Sections.Yr), SUM(Sections.Term), SUM(Sections.Location)
FROM Course
INNER JOIN Sections ON Course.CourseNo = Sections.CourseNo
WHERE Sections.Term="spring";
Whilst you can certainly union the aggregated totals query to the end of your original query, in my opinion this would be really bad practice and would be undesirable for any real-world application.
Consider that the resulting query could no longer be used for any meaningful analysis of the data: if displayed in a datagrid, the user would not be able to sort the data without the totals row being interspersed amongst the rest of the data; the user could no longer use the built-in Totals option to perform their own aggregate operation, and the insertion of a row only identifiable by the term totals could even conflict with other data within the set.
Instead, I would suggest displaying the totals within an entirely separate form control, using a separate query such as the following (based on your own example):
SELECT Count(Course.CourseNo) as Courses, Sum(Course.CrHrs) as Hours
FROM Course INNER JOIN Sections ON Course.CourseNo = Sections.CourseNo
WHERE Sections.Term = "spring";
However, since CrHrs are fields within your Course table and not within your Sections table, the above may yield multiples of the desired result, with the number of hours multiplied by the number of corresponding records in the Sections table.
If this is the case, the following may be more suitable:
SELECT Count(Course.CourseNo) as Courses, Sum(Course.CrHrs) as Hours
FROM
Course INNER JOIN
(SELECT DISTINCT s.CourseNo FROM Sections s WHERE s.Term = "spring") q
ON Course.CourseNo = q.CourseNo
Edited
I am running into an error and I know what is happening but I can't see what is causing it. Below is the sql code I am using. Basically I am getting the general results I want, however I am not accurately giving the query the correct 'where' clause.
If this is of any assistance. The count is coming out as this:
Total Tier
1 High
2 Low
There are 4 records in the Enrollment table. 3 are active, and 1 is not. Only 2 of the records should be displayed. 1 for High, and 1 for low. The second Low record that is in the total was flagged as 'inactive' on 12/30/2010 and reflagged again on 1/12/2011 so it should not be in the results. I changed the initial '<=' to '=' and the results stayed the same.
I need to exclude any record from Enrollments_Status_Change that where the "active_status" was changed to 0 before the date.
SELECT COUNT(dbo.Enrollments.Customer_ID) AS Total,
dbo.Phone_Tier.Tier
FROM dbo.Phone_Tier as p
JOIN dbo.Enrollments as eON p.Phone_Model = e.Phone_Model
WHERE (e.Customer_ID NOT IN
(Select Customer_ID
From dbo.Enrollment_Status_Change as Status
Where (Change_Date >'12/31/2010')))
GROUP BY dbo.Phone_Tier.Tier
Thanks for any assistance and I apologize for any confusion. This is my first time here and i'm trying to correct my etiquette on the fly.
If you don't want any of the fields from that table dbo.Enrollment_Status_Change, and you don't seem to use it in any way — why even include it in the JOINs? Just leave it out.
Plus: start using table aliases. This is very hard to read if you use the full table name in each JOIN condition and WHERE clause.
Your code should be:
SELECT
COUNT(e.Customer_ID) AS Total, p.Tier
FROM
dbo.Phone_Tier p
INNER JOIN
dbo.Enrollments e ON p.Phone_Model = e.Phone_Model
WHERE
e.Active_Status = 1
AND EXISTS (SELECT DISTINCT Customer_ID
FROM dbo.Enrollment_Status_Change AS Status
WHERE (Change_Date <= '12/31/2010'))
GROUP BY
p.Tier
Also: most likely, your EXISTS check is wrong — since you didn't post your table structures, I can only guess — but my guess would be:
AND EXISTS (SELECT * FROM dbo.Enrollment_Status_Change
WHERE Change_Date <= '12/31/2010' AND CustomerID = e.CustomerID)
Check for existence of any entries in dbo.Enrollment_Status_Change for the customer defined by e.CustomerID, with a Change_Date before that cut-off date. Right?
Assuming you want to:
exclude all customers whose latest enrollment_status_change record was since the start of 2011
but
include all customers whose latest enrollment_status_change record was earlier than the end of 2010 (why else would you have put that EXISTS clause in?)
Then this should do it:
SELECT COUNT(e.Customer_ID) AS Total,
p.Tier
FROM dbo.Phone_Tier p
JOIN dbo.Enrollments e ON p.Phone_Model = e.Phone_Model
WHERE dbo.Enrollments.Active_Status = 1
AND e.Customer_ID NOT IN (
SELECT Customer_ID
FROM dbo.Enrollment_Status_Change status
WHERE (Change_Date >= '2011-01-01')
)
GROUP BY p.Tier
Basically, the problem with your code is that joining a one-to-many table will always increase the row count. If you wanted to exclude all the records that had a matching row in the other table this would be fine -- you could just use a LEFT JOIN and then set a WHERE clause like Customer_ID IS NULL.
But because you want to exclude a subset of the enrollment_status_change table, you must use a subquery.
Your intention is not clear from the example given, but if you wanted to exclude anyone who's enrollment_status_change as before 2011, but include those who's status change was since 2011, you'd just swap the date comparator for <.
Is this any help?