I have a client with a large database of entries that need sorting.
In short, I have two tables I'm working with, they are in excel but i can import them into MySQL if I need to.
Table 1 Columns (List of apartments).
Owner ID
--------
350
350
1
169
169
Table 2 Columns (List of apartment owners).
Owner ID | Owner Name
---------|-----------
350 | Foo
1 | Bar
169 | Foorbar
Now I can either sit and do a search and replace for well over 1100 apartment listings but Im guessing that there is a regex or formulea out there that can basically search and replace all the ID's in the Table 1 apartments list and match them up to their owner name in Table 2.
The purpose of this is to ensure that when the CSV import to the new website happens, the apartment owner is saved as the Owners name, not the ID.
Thanks in advance
you can use vlookup: =Vlookup(Table1[#Owner_ID],Table2[[Owner ID]:[Owner Name]],2,0)
click me to see a video to see vlookup
Related
I managed to enter data to a database via a form;
actually works like a charm.
Now, what I need, is a lookup function (preferably not a form), with which I can search a table on another worksheet.
Let's say, I have an edit field or a cell, in which I enter a term which shall be looked for in a certain column on the table in another worksheet.
I would like to get a list of all entries which contain the word and the value from another cell (an ID).
Example:
Search term: Tom
Table:
Tim | 2
Tom | 3
Tommy | 5
The List should Show Tom and Tommy and their respective IDs,
but everything I tried didn't turn out as intended (mostly didn't work at all)...
N.B. I'm looking for a solution working on Apache Derby
I have two sql tables. The first, called links, contains links of the form
SOURCE | TARGET
1234 | 456
15 | 625
... | ...
where the integers here are the ids of the objects being linked. The second table, called redir, contains redirection links:
ID | REDIRTARGET
456 | 521
198 | 140
... | ...
If the target of a link is in the id column of redir, then it must be redirected to the object of id redirtarget.
Now, I would like to update my links table by replacing all targets which are in the id column of redir by the associated redirtarget.
For example, given the two tables above (without ellipses), the update instruction would replace 456 with 521 in the target column of links.
I haven't been able to find a working instruction on my own. I've tried things like
UPDATE links,redir SET target=redirtarget WHERE id=target
but that won't compile (specifically, derby points out at the comma between UPDATE and SET). Help anybody ?
You can't specify multiple tables in an UPDATE list.
If ID in the redir table is unique, you should be able do something like this:
update links
set target = (select redirtarget
from redir
where redir.id = links.target)
where exists (select *
from redir
where redir.id = links.target);
The where condition ensures that only rows in links are updated where there is actually a match in the redir table.
I am trying to figure out how to do something that I would think is commonplace, but I cannot find how to do.
Given two Custom Lists, one with a field that is essentially a primary key, and the other with what is essentially a foreign key, I want to show all the rows from the first in one area of the display, and the related records for the selected row of the first, in a second part of the screen.
I am thinking this would be side–by–side web parts on a web-part page.
So:
ID pkID Data ID fkID Data
___________________ ______________________________
| 1 100 Row one. | | 8 100 Related one/one |
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ | 9 100 Related one/two |
2 113 Row two. | 10 100 Related one/three |
3 118 Row n. ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
11 113 Related two/one
12 113 Related two/two
13 118 Related n/one
(That is my attempt to show what is established between the two lists. Top row selected on the left, related records from the other row on the right.)
Surely this is common enough that there is a way to readily do this?
I suppose I might need to create a means of asserting that a row is 'selected.'
You will note that I am not useing the ID field that "belongs" to SharePoint.
You can create look up fields to establish that relationship, sharepoint 2010 even allows you to enforce the relationship like in a SQL database. so for instace you can declare what happens if you try to delete a parent if there is childs (Cascade, Prevent, etc).
Have a read here:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-au/sharepoint-server-help/create-list-relationships-by-using-unique-and-lookup-columns-HA101729901.aspx
About visually displaying them, you might have to create some webparts for it, as the only support OOB is the link to the child entity from the main entity on the parent list.
I want to make queries for addresses to postgis database with data from openstreetmap, check if such address exist in database and if so, get coordinates. Database was filled from .pbf file using osmosis. This is schema for the database http://pastebin.com/Yigjt77f. I have addresses in form of city name, street name and number of street. The most important for me is this table:
CREATE TABLE node_tags (
node_id BIGINT NOT NULL,
k text NOT NULL,
v text NOT NULL
);
k column is in form of tags, one that I'm interested are: addr:housenumber, addr:street, addr:city and v is corresponding value. First I'm searching if name of city matches one in database, than in results set I'm searching for street and than for house number. The problem is that I don't know how to make SQL query that will get this result with asking only once. I can ask first only for city name, get all node_id that match my city and save them in java program, than make queries asking for each found(matching my city) id_number (list from my java program) for the street, and so on. This way is really slow, because asking for more detailed information (city than street than number) I have to make more and more queries and what is more I have to check a lot of addresses. Once I have matching node_id I can easily find coordinates, so that's not a problem.
Example of this table:
node_id | k | v <br>
123 | addr:housenumber | 50
123 | addr:street | Kingsway
123 | addr:city | London
123 | (some other stuff) | .....
100 | addr:housenumber | 121
100 | addr:street | Edmund St
100 | addr:city | London
I hope I explained clearly what is my problem.
This is not as easy as you might think. Addresses in OSM are hierarchically, like in the real world. Not all elements in OSM have a full address attached. Some only have addr:housenumber and simply belong to the nearest street. Some have addr:housenumber and addr:street but no addr:city because they simply belong to the nearest city. Or they are enclosed by a boundary relation which specifies the corresponding city. And instead of addr:housenumber there are sometimes also just address interpolations described by the addr:interpolation key. See the addr key wiki page for more information.
The Karlsruhe Schema page in the OSM wiki explains a lot about addresses in OSM. It also mentions associatedStreet relations which are sometimes used to group house numbers and their corresponding streets.
As you can see a single query in the database probably won't suffice. If you need some inspiration you can take a look at OSM's address search engine Nominatim. But note that Nominatim uses a different data base scheme than the usual one in order to optimize address queries. You can also take a look at one of the many routing applications which all have to do address lookups.
I have a spreadsheet that has information in groups. The header row contain company names and information and then the grouped rows beneath them contain names of people in the company.
Company Name | Number of Employees | Revenue |
Employee Name | Email | Phone
Is there anyway to sort by the number of employees and/or revenue and keep the grouped employee information below the company with the information?
Normally when I try it, it will sort the company information but keep the employee information in the order that it is entered.
If I understand your question correctly, I have a way you can accomplish what you want (don't know if there is a more efficient method).
Write code which will, for each company header row, copy the number of employess and revenue data into two of the chosen unused columns. The data needs to be copied into the columns for both the header company row and detail employee rows.
In the third column assign a sequence number. This is to keep data together and in order when sorting by employee/revenue.
Now you can sort by either the newly created number of employees and/or revenue columns (along with the sequence column to maintain ordering within company).
After the sort you can delete the extra copied data rows.
So if your data looked like this to start with...
A B C
Penetrode 200 750000
Micheal Bolton mbolton#pene.com 555-555-3333
Samir N samirn#pene.com
Initech 500 500000
Bill Lumbergh umumyeah#init.com 555-555-1212
Peter Gibbons pgibbons#init.com 555-555-2222
Your code would then copy the employee count and revenue data and sequencify the rows using three unused columns.
A B C D E F
Penetrode 200 750000 200 750000 1
Micheal Bolton mbolton#pene.com 555-555-3333 200 750000 2
Samir N samirn#pene.com 555-555-3334 200 750000 3
Initech 500 500000 500 500000 4
Bill Lumbergh umumyeah#init.com 555-555-1212 500 500000 5
Peter Gibbons pgibbons#init.com 555-555-2222 500 500000 6
Then you can code a sort on any of the column combos: (D,F), (E,F), (D,E,F), or (E,D,F)
Better late than never, I suppose, but I feel my LAselect plugin would have solved your problem. I created this plugin because I do much non-standard 'stuff' with my data and needed a tool to handle it. LAselect can produce your 'group' output too and you would not need hidden columns or anything. I mean, you would not need to change the screens you are used to to sort them in whatever way you wanted.