I'm trying to format a select statement. The assignment specifies that it has to be formatted this way.
I have a database regarding a taxi service. I have to put together a view with the company name, passenger name, and taxi number. Easy. However, the output specifies that the company name should only appear once in the output, at the top of it's own group. So I have:
CREATE VIEW TAXITRIPS(COMPANYNAME, PASSENGERNAME, TAXI#) AS
(SELECT COMPANY.NAME, BOOKING.NAME, VEHICLES.TAXI#
FROM BOOKING JOIN VEHICLES ON BOOKING.TAXI# = VEHICLES.TAXI#
RIGHT OUTER JOIN COMPANY ON VEHICLES.NAME = COMPANY.NAME);
The right outer join is so that companies with no booking recorded are still displayed. If I now run:
SELECT * FROM TAXITRIPS ORDER BY COMPANYNAME ASC;
It will give me something like
COMPANYNAME PASSENGERNAME TAXI#
---------------------------------------------
ABC TAXIS DAVE 192
LEGION CABS
PREMIER CABS SHANE 2154
PREMIER CABS TIM 2169
SILVER SERVICE DAVE 18579
SILVER SERVICE TIM 18124
SILVER SERVICE AARON 18917
No result for legion cabs, all field displayed, et cetera. Assignment specification says it has to look like this.
COMPANYNAME PASSENGERNAME TAXI#
---------------------------------------------
ABC TAXIS DAVE 192
LEGION CABS
PREMIER CABS SHANE 2154
TIM 2169
SILVER SERVICE DAVE 18579
TIM 18124
AARON 18917
The company name should only be displayed on its first row. DISTINCT is not helping. Any advice?
Normally, you would do this at the application layer, because the result set relies on the ordering of the rows -- a bad thing in SQL.
But you can do it as:
SELECT (CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY c.NAME ORDER BY v.TAXI#) = 1
THEN c.NAME
END) as CompanyName, b.NAME, v.TAXI#
FROM COMPANY c LEFT JOIN
VEHICLES v
ON v.NAME = c.NAME LEFT JOIN
BOOKING b
ON b.TAXI# = v.FLIGHT#
ORDER BY c.name, v.taxi#;
Note: I rearranged the joins to be LEFT JOINs. Most people find that easier to follow than RIGHT JOINs.
Related
I'm very sorry to bother with minor problem, but I tried to search old answers for this one and since my skills in SQL are complete 0, I didn't even understand the answers :/! Neither is my English terminology great enough for properly searching.
I have these 2 tables: Cities and Flights.
Cities
+----+-------------+
|id | name |
+----+-------------+
|1 | Oslo |
|2 | New York |
|3 | Hong Kong |
+----+-------------+
Flights
+----+--------------------+-------------------+
|id | wherefrom_id | whereto_id |
+----+--------------------+-------------------+
|1 | 3 | 2 |
|2 | 3 | 1 |
|3 | 1 | 3 |
+----+--------------------+-------------------+
Now I have to write code where I need to make city ID's merge to wherefrom_id and whereto_id, in that manner that the answer shows table where you can see list of Flights (FROM/TO).
Example:
ANSWER:
+-----------+----------------+
|HONG KONG | NEW YORK |
+-----------+----------------+
|HONG KONG | OSLO |
+-----------+----------------+
|OSLO | HONG KONG |
+-----------+----------------+
This is what I wrote:
SELECT C.name, C.name
FROM Cities C, Flights F
WHERE C.id = F.wherefrom_id AND C.id = F.whereto_id;
For some reason this doesnt seem to work and I get nothing showing on my practice program. There is no error or anything it just doesnt show anything on the test answer. I really hope you get what I mean, English is not my first language and I truly tried my best to make it clear as possible :S
First things first - it's a lot easier to code in standard SQL join syntax. Converting your above to that is
SELECT C.name, C.name
FROM Cities C
INNER JOIN Flights F ON C.id = F.wherefrom_id AND C.id = F.whereto_id;
The question you've been asked requires logic people don't usually use at first so it can be confusing the first time you encounter it.
I will run through the logic jump in a moment.
Imagine your Flights table has the City names in it (not IDs).
It would have columns, say, FlightID, From_City_Name, To_City_Name.
An example row would be 1, 'Oslo', 'Prague'.
Getting the data for this would be easy e.g., SELECT Flight_ID, From_City_Name, To_City_name FROM Flights.
However, this has many problems. As your question has done, you decide to pull out the cities into their own reference tables.
For this first example, however, you decided to have two extra tables as reference tables: From_City and To_City. These would both have an ID and city name. You then change your Flights to refer to these.
Your code would look like
SELECT F.ID, FC.Name AS From_City, TC.Name AS To_City
FROM Flights
INNER JOIN From_City AS FC ON Flights.From_City_ID = FC.ID
INNER JOIN To_City AS TC ON Flights.To_City_ID = TC.ID
Notice how there are two joins there - one to From_City and one to To_City? That is because the From and To cities are referring to different things in the data.
So, then the final part of the issue: why have two city tables (from and to). Why not have one? Well, you can. If you create just one table, and modify the above, you get something like this:
SELECT F.ID, FC.Name AS From_City, TC.Name AS To_City
FROM Flights
INNER JOIN City AS FC ON Flights.From_City_ID = FC.ID
INNER JOIN City AS TC ON Flights.To_City_ID = TC.ID
Note that all that has changed is that the From_City and To_City references have been pointed to a different table City. However, the rest is the same.
And that, actually, would be your answer. The complex part that most people don't get to straight away, is having two joins to the same table.
As an aside, your original code is technically valid.
SELECT C.name, C.name
FROM Cities C
INNER JOIN Flights F ON C.id = F.wherefrom_id AND C.id = F.whereto_id;
However, what it's effectively saying is to get the city names where the From_City is the same as the To_City - which is obviously not what you want (unless you're looking for turnbacks).
What you're doing is an old SQL way of expressing joins. The standard now has better ways to declare the relationships within the from clause and I take it that your material has postponed that slightly:
There are people who will yell at you for using this ancient syntax but the answer is easy enough:
SELECT C1.name, C2.name
FROM Cities C1, Cities C2, Flights F
WHERE C1.id = F.wherefrom_id AND C2.id = F.whereto_id
You can think of this as creating a "cross product" of all city-pair combinations and matching up the ones that match actual flights. The key is to references Cities twice by using different aliases (or correlation names.)
I think this is what you are looking for..
SELECT wf.name "wherefrom", wt.name "whereto"
FROM Flights f
JOIN Cities wf
ON f.wherefrom_id = wf.id
JOIN Cities wt
ON f.whereto_id = wt.id
order by f.id
I have a counselling appointment website. Currently I list clients in one table, but also have couples listed by id in a second table for when they book a couples session. ie:
client
id_no first last
564 John Smith
983 Mary Jones
999 Mark Fields
882 Joan Hancock
couple
id_no client1 client2
623 564 983
555 999 882
I would like to write a single select statement, using aliases, which will list out couples on a single line. Up until now, I have been doing a simple join then cleaning up the result using php after running the query, but would like to clean this up in sql so that I get a result like the following
id_no first_1 last_1 first_2 last_2
623 John Smith Mary Jones
555 Mark Fields Joan Hancock
I suspect that sub queries might be involved, but can't for the life of me wrangle them to get this result.
Update
I just tried the following:
SELECT id_no,first_1,last_1,first_2,last_2
FROM ( SELECT a.id_no AS id_no, b.first AS first_1,b.last AS last_1
FROM couple AS a, client AS b WHERE a.client1=b.id_no ) c1
JOIN ( SELECT a.id_no AS id_no, b.first AS first_2,b.last AS last_2
FROM couple AS a, client AS b WHERE a.client2=b.id_no ) c2 ON
(c1.id_no=c2.id_no)
And am getting a message that "Column 'id_no' in field list is ambiguous". Not sure if I am on the right track
You are getting the exception because you did not specified the table alias to id_no as this column belongs to both tables, so SQL is not sure which column to return, so it will throw ambiguous column error.
Also you don't have to use sub queries, you just need to join client table twice with couple table, one for client1 and other one for client2 like below
Select cp.id_no,
cl1.first as first_1,
cl1.last as last_1,
cl2.first as first_2,
cl2.last as last_2
From couple cp
inner join client cl1 on cl1.id_no = cp.client1
inner join client cl2 on cl2.id_no = cp.client2
I work on a help-desk and am doing some analysis of PC repair tickets.
I am needing to dump data from our call log system that returns history of tickets for issues on computers where they were recently repaired by another team. We are simply trying to improve QA on deployed machines and this data will help.
I have the query for the analysis of tickets, but I am wanting to return the ticket number of the last PC repair case.
My current query is as follows:
SELECT
CallLog.CallID,
CallLog.CustID,
Subset.Rep_num,
Subset.FirstName,
Subset.LastName,
CallLog.OpndetailCat,
CallLog.Tracker_Full,
CallLog.RecvdDate,
FROM
heatPrd.dbo.CallLog CallLog,
heatPrd.dbo.Subset Subset
WHERE
CallLog.CallID = Subset.CallID AND
CallLog.RecvdDate>='2015-10-01' AND
CallLog.OpnAreaCat='back from repair'
ORDER BY
CallLog.CallID DESC
This returns
CallID CustID Rep_num FirstName LastName OpndetailCat Tracker_Full
2182375 1234 Sarah Doe Missing Email Folde
2181831 1235 JENNIFER Doe ZOTHER
2180815 1236 123 Jason Smith ZOTHER
2180790 1237 124 DARCY Doe Wrong Proxy Config
2180787 1239 125 Jason Smith ZOTHER
I want to add a column to the query that would return something to the effect of
select max(callid)
from calllog
where calltype = 'in_for_service_pc' and custid = '1234'
where calltype = 'in_for_service_pc' resides on the CallLog table and custID would pull from the query result.
This is a lot of info so i hope my request is clear.
Disclaimer: Data resides in SQL Server 2000 so some of the newer commands may not work.
Something like this should be pretty close.
SELECT
cl.CallID,
cl.CustID,
s.Rep_num,
s.FirstName,
s.LastName,
cl.OpndetailCat,
cl.Tracker_Full,
cl.RecvdDate,
x.MaxCallID
FROM heatPrd.dbo.CallLog cl
JOIN heatPrd.dbo.Subset s ON cl.CallID = s.CallID
left join
(
select max(cl2.callid) as MaxCallID
, cl2.custid
from calllog cl2
where cl2.calltype = 'in_for_service_pc'
group by cl2.custid
) x on x.custid = cl.custid
WHERE cl.RecvdDate >= '2015-10-01' AND
cl.OpnAreaCat = 'back from repair'
ORDER BY cl.CallID DESC
I have 2 tables joined with political results and I need to have the votes SUM per county, and then the MAX of the vote counts per county, with the Party that relates to the MAX in another column. I'm having trouble getting the Party into the Query results without messing up the SUM and MAX columns.
This Table I can get with the Following SQL
County Name SumOfVoteCount MaxOfVoteCount OfficeID
Baker 7253 4008 S
SELECT NY_Race.[County Name], Sum(NY_Results.VoteCount) AS SumOfVoteCount, Max(NY_Results.VoteCount) AS MaxOfVoteCount
FROM NY_Race INNER JOIN NY_Results ON NY_Race.RaceCountyID = NY_Results.RaceCountyID
GROUP BY NY_Race.[County Name], NY_Race.OfficeID
HAVING (((NY_Race.OfficeID)="S"));
What I need is for the Party that has that 4008 vote total to be included in the query results, but when I try to select Party to be added, it shows all of them and messes up the SUM of the vote count, and I end of with this:
County Name SumOfVoteCount MaxOfVoteCount1 Party OfficeID
Baker 2927 2927 Dem S
Baker 4008 4008 GOP S
Baker 101 101 Lib S
Baker 53 53 Prg S
Baker 164 164 WF S
This is the SQL code I am using that gets the above Table:
SELECT NY_Race.[County Name], Sum(NY_Results.VoteCount) AS SumOfVoteCount, Max(NY_Results.VoteCount) AS MaxOfVoteCount, NY_Results.Party
FROM NY_Race INNER JOIN NY_Results ON NY_Race.RaceCountyID = NY_Results.RaceCountyID
GROUP BY NY_Race.[County Name], NY_Race.OfficeID, NY_Results.Party
HAVING (((OR_Race.OfficeID)="S"));
How can I get this table in the query results?
County Name SumOfVoteCount MaxOfVoteCount Party OfficeID
Baker 7253 4008 GOP S
I can't help but think I'm missing a WHERE claus somewhere that compares Party to MAXofVoteCount
One way to approach these is to have a nested subquery that gets the MAX() for the field of interest. Then, only select the record with that MAX(). Here's the structure:
select COUNTY_NAME, R1.*
, (select sum(votecount) from results R2 where R1.COUNTY_ID=R2.COUNTY_ID and R1.OFFICE_ID=R2.OFFICE_ID)
from RESULTS R1
join RACE on R1.COUNTY_ID=RACE.COUNTY_ID and R1.OFFICE_ID=RACE.OFFICE_ID
where R1.office_id = 'S'
and voteCount =
(select max(votecount) from results R3 where R1.COUNTY_ID=R3.COUNTY_ID and R1.OFFICE_ID=R3.OFFICE_ID)
I created a demo on SQLFiddle.
One issue: what if two get exactly the same number of votes. That's a functional issue you will have to resolve.
Imagine I have a query called QueryA that returns stuff like this:
Employee Description Rank
John Happy 1
John Depressed 3
James Happy 1
James Confused 2
Mark Depressed 3
I am trying to make a query that grabs the Employee and the Description, but only one description -- the one with the best "rank." (the lower the rank the better). I sort QueryA by Employee then by Rank (descending).
So I'd want my new query QueryB to show that John as Happy, James as Happy, and Mark as Depressed.
However I try selecting Employee and then First of Description and it doesn't always work.
I'm not able to check this for Access, but it should work fine. Check my SQL Fiddle
select
r.employee, d.description
from
table1 as d
inner join (select min(rank) as rank, employee
from
table1
group by employee) r on d.rank = r.rank
and d.employee = r.employee