I have a column with varying values and some of these values can sometimes be repeated, so if there are two of the same value I need to have the first value followed by 1 and the second followed by 2.
For Example:
Apple1
Apple2
Lemon1
Apple3
Pear1
Lemon2
Apple4
Orange1
Pear2
I've tried using nested if loops but I can't seem to find an efficient way to do this.
You can use 2 loops to go through all the elements.
Btw, you can add 1 more step to check numeric the last character and skip for faster process
Related
I'm trying to make search a bit more friendly and wanted to exploit the Levenshtein distance. This works great but if a value in a column has a length of 25 characters long, the distance to only 3 characters is too far. In this case, it performs worse than the LIKE method. I solved this by splitting all words into their own rows using regexp_split_to_table. This is nice, but it's still not working if I have multiple words as input.
For example:
Let the data look as following
id
col1
col2
1
one two
three
2
two
one
3
horse
tree
4
house
three
using regexp_split_to_table would transform this to
id
col
1
one
1
two
1
three
2
one
2
two
2
two
3
horse
3
tree
4
house
4
three
If I search for one tree, I'd like to compare one with each word but also compare tree with each word and then order by the sum of both distances.
I have no idea where to start. I also do not know if this is the best approach to do this (it seems somewhat excessive but I'm also not an expert). Maybe I'm also overthinking this. I'd appreciate a hint into the right direction :).
I have a column with numbers with various lengths such as 50055, 1055,155 etc. How can I add a decimal before the last 2nd place of each so that it would be 500.55, 10.55, and 1.55?
I tried using replace by finding the last 2 numbers and replace it with .||last 2 number. That doesn't always work because of a possibility of multiple repetition of the same sequence in the same string.
replace(round(v_num/2),substr(round(v_num/2),-2),'.'||substr(round(v_num/2),-2))
You would divide by 100:
select v_num / 100
You can convert this into a string, if you want.
I’ve run into a problem, as I cannot get a proper working LINQ statement here.
Suppose I have a DataTable with x rows and I have to sort based on the sum of the Quantity column. Then I have a condition Requested Quantity = 20. I need to find the rows equal to the exact sum of RequestedQuantity, but only where the combination of 3 rows is equal to it.
+-----+----------+
| Bin | Quantity |
+-----+----------+
| 1 | 10 |
| 2 | 5 |
| 3 | 5 |
| 4 | 10 |
| 5 | 15 |
+-----+----------+
I can’t seem to figure out the proper LINQ syntax to get this to work. My starting point is this:
From row In StorageBins.AsEnumerable.GroupBy( _
Convert.ToDouble(Function (x) x("Quantity"), cultureInfo)).Sum( _
Function (y) Convert.ToDouble(y("Quantity"), cultureInfo) = _
Double.Parse(RequestedQuantity,cultureInfo))
Initially, I am just trying to get any rows that are equal to my condition. My end-goal, however, is getting any three rows that exactly sum up to my Requested quantity.
I’m not an expert in LINQ, unfortunately. I hope some of you might be!
Maybe I'm missing something, but this actually seems like a pretty complicated problem. Pick any 3 records, but only 3, that add up to exactly 20. How many rows are there in the database? Because this could get to be quite a few potential combinations pretty quickly. And what do you do after you get the 3? Do you have to go back through recursively and group up the other records as well? Or you just need the first set of 3 that add up to 20?
Assuming you just need the first 3, I would do something like this:
Get the first record that is less that 20. Remove it from your input list and put it into your target set.
Then get the first record that is less than 20 minus the first value. ie if the first value was a '5', get records that are less than 15 (20 minus 5). This ensures you 'leave room' for the third value. Remove it from the original list and into your target set.
Then get the first record that is exactly 20 minus number one minus number two. Remove it from the input list and into the target set.
Now you would have to do this in iterators. If there is no value that meets the third criterion, release the third value from your target set and put it back in your input list. Then go back to step 2 and pick the next record that matches step 2 (and ideally that is not equal to the previous value). And if you exhaust all of the iterations through step 2, go back to step one and pick the next value there, and start the whole thing over again...
Unless I'm misunderstanding your requirement...
I am trying to divide 2 different fields from 2 different datasets. Also using a lookup in the statement but for some reason it does the lookup part of the expression but doesn't do the division part. Any ideas?
=IIF(Fields!PACKSHORT_DESC.Value = "EA",(LOOKUP(TRIM(Fields!PRODUCT_CODE.value), TRIM(Fields!item.value),Fields!tcost.value,"Cost")/Fields!NO_OF_EACHES.Value),(LOOKUP(TRIM(Fields!PRODUCT_CODE.value), TRIM(Fields!item.value),Fields!tcost.value,"Cost")))
Get it to output the two numbers you are trying to divide first to see if they are pulling through correctly first, assign them names and then divide them instead.
I have a macro to sort different rows. However, once I sort one row, I want the adjacent data to be sorted within those sorts. The example below will give a good pictorial represenation.
1 B
1 A
1 C
1 D
2 A
3 C
3 A
3 B
Within each number I want the adjacent row in alphabetical order, thanks!!
You need to sort twice, first on one key and then on the other, BUT on the second sort you must use an algorithm that is stable. Stable sorts maintain order for equal elements.
Its ok to sort both keys with a stable sort (in two passes) but a stable sort may be slower than one that is not. This may matter if you have lots of entries to sort.
Stable sorts