I am trying to calculate values in a column called Peak, but I need to apply different calculations dependant on the 'ChargeCode'.
Below is kind of what I am trying to do, but it results in 3 columns called Peak - Which I know is what I asked for :)
Can anyone help with the correct syntax, so that I end up with one column called Peak?
Use Test
Select Chargecode,
(SELECT 1 Where Chargecode='1') AS [Peak],
(SELECT 1 Where Chargecode='1242') AS [Peak],
Peak*2 AS [Peak],
CallType
from Daisy_March2014
Thanks
You want a case statement. I think this is what you are looking for:
Select Chargecode,
(case when chargecode = '1'
when chargecode = '1242' then 2
else 2 * Peak
end) as Peak,
CallType
from Daisy_March2014;
Thanks Gordon, I have marked you response as Answered. Here is the final working code:
(case when chargecode in ('1') then 1 when chargecode in ('1264') then 2 else Peak*2 end) as Peak,
Since it depends on your charge code, I'm going to make a wild assumption that this might be an ongoing thing where new charge codes / rules could be added. Why not store this as metadata either in the charge code table or in a new table? You could generate the initial data with this:
SELECT ChargeCode,
Multiplier
INTO ChargeMeta
FROM (
Select 1 AS ChargeCode,
1 AS Multiplier
UNION ALL
SELECT 1242 AS ChargeCode,
1 AS Multiplier
UNION ALL
SELECT ChargeCode,
2 AS Multiplier
FROM Daisy_March2014
WHERE ChargeCode NOT IN (1,1242)
) SQ
Then just join to your original data.
SELECT a.ChargeCode,
a.Peak*b.Multiplier AS Peak
FROM Daisy_March2014 a
JOIN ChargeMeta b
ON a.ChargeCode = b.ChargeCode
If you do not want to maintain all charge code multipliers, you could maintain your non-standard ones, and store the standard one in the SQL. This would be about the same as a case statement, but it may still add benefit to store the overrides in a table. At the very least, it makes it easier to re-use elsewhere. No need to check all the queries that deal with Peak values and make them consistent, if ChargeCode 42 needs to have a new multiplier set.
If you want to store the default in the table, you could use two joins instead of one, storing the default charge code under a value that will never be used. (-1?)
SELECT a.ChargeCode,
a.Peak*COALESCE(b.Multiplier,c.Multiplier) AS Peak
FROM Daisy_March2014 a
LEFT JOIN ChargeMeta b ON a.ChargeCode = b.ChargeCode
LEFT JOIN ChargeMeta c ON c.ChargeCode = -1
Related
Consider the following tables:
Table A:
DOC_NUM
DOC_TYPE
RELATED_DOC_NUM
NEXT_STATUS
...
Table B:
DOC_NUM
DOC_TYPE
RELATED_DOC_NUM
NEXT_STATUS
...
The DOC_TYPE and NEXT_STATUS columns have different meanings between the two tables, although a NEXT_STATUS = 999 means "closed" in both. Also, under certain conditions, there will be a record in each table, with a reference to a corresponding entry in the other table (i.e. the RELATED_DOC_NUM columns).
I am trying to create a query that will get data from both tables that meet the following conditions:
A.RELATED_DOC_NUM = B.DOC_NUM
A.DOC_TYPE = "ST"
B.DOC_TYPE = "OT"
A.NEXT_STATUS < 999 OR B.NEXT_STATUS < 999
A.DOC_TYPE = "ST" represents a transfer order to transfer inventory from one plant to another. B.DOC_TYPE = "OT" represents a corresponding receipt of the transferred inventory at the receiving plant.
We want to get records from either table where there is an ST/OT pair where either or both entries are not closed (i.e. NEXT_STATUS < 999).
I am assuming that I need to use a FULL OUTER join to accomplish this. If this is the wrong assumption, please let me know what I should be doing instead.
UPDATE (11/30/2021):
I believe that #Caius Jard is correct in that this does not need to be an outer join. There should always be an ST/OT pair.
With that I have written my query as follows:
SELECT <columns>
FROM A LEFT JOIN B
ON
A.RELATED_DOC_NUM = B.DOC_NUM
WHERE
A.DOC_TYPE IN ('ST') AND
B.DOC_TYPE IN ('OT') AND
(A.NEXT_STATUS < 999 OR B.NEXT_STATUS < 999)
Does this make sense?
UPDATE 2 (11/30/2021):
The reality is that these are DB2 database tables being used by the JD Edwards ERP application. The only way I know of to see the table definitions is by using the web site http://www.jdetables.com/, entering the table ID and hitting return to run the search. It comes back with a ton of information about the table and its columns.
Table A is really F4211 and table B is really F4311.
Right now, I've simplified the query to keep it simple and keep variables to a minimum. This is what I have currently:
SELECT CAST(F4211.SDDOCO AS VARCHAR(8)) AS SO_NUM,
F4211.SDRORN AS RELATED_PO,
F4211.SDDCTO AS SO_DOC_TYPE,
F4211.SDNXTR AS SO_NEXT_STATUS,
CAST(F4311.PDDOCO AS VARCHAR(8)) AS PO_NUM,
F4311.PDRORN AS RELATED_SO,
F4311.PDDCTO AS PO_DOC_TYPE,
F4311.PDNXTR AS PO_NEXT_STATUS
FROM PROD2DTA.F4211 AS F4211
INNER JOIN PROD2DTA.F4311 AS F4311
ON F4211.SDRORN = CAST(F4311.PDDOCO AS VARCHAR(8))
WHERE F4211.SDDCTO IN ( 'ST' )
AND F4311.PDDCTO IN ( 'OT' )
The other part of the story is that I'm using a reporting package that allows you to define "virtual" views of the data. Virtual views allow the report developer to specify the SQL to use. This is the application where I am using the SQL. When I set up the SQL, there is a validation step that must be performed. It will return a limited set of results if the SQL is validated.
When I enter the query above and validate it, it says that there are no results, which makes no sense. I'm guessing the data casting is causing the issue, but not sure.
UPDATE 3 (11/30/2021):
One more twist to the story. The related doc number is not only defined as a string value, but it contains leading zeros. This is true in both tables. The main doc number (in both tables) is defined as a numeric value and therefore has no leading zeros. I have no idea why those who developed JDE would have done this, but that is what is there.
So, there are matching records between the two tables that meet the criteria, but I think I'm getting no results because when I convert the numeric to a string, it does not match, because one value is, say "12345", while the other is "00012345".
Can I pad the numeric -> string value with zeros before doing the equals check?
UPDATE 4 (12/2/2021):
Was able to finally get the query to work by converting the numeric doc num to a left zero padded string.
SELECT <columns>
FROM PROD2DTA.F4211 AS F4211
INNER JOIN PROD2DTA.F4311 AS F4311
ON F4211.SDRORN = RIGHT(CONCAT('00000000', CAST(F4311.PDDOCO AS VARCHAR(8))), 8)
WHERE F4211.SDDCTO IN ( 'ST' )
AND F4311.PDDCTO IN ( 'OT' )
AND ( F4211.SDNXTR < 999
OR F4311.PDNXTR < 999 )
You should write your query as follows:
SELECT <columns>
FROM A INNER JOIN B
ON
A.RELATED_DOC_NUM = B.DOC_NUM
WHERE
A.DOC_TYPE IN ('ST') AND
B.DOC_TYPE IN ('OT') AND
(A.NEXT_STATUS < 999 OR B.NEXT_STATUS < 999)
LEFT join is a type of OUTER join; LEFT JOIN is typically a contraction of LEFT OUTER JOIN). OUTER means "one side might have nulls in every column because there was no match". Most critically, the code as posted in the question (with a LEFT JOIN, but then has WHERE some_column_from_the_right_table = some_value) runs as an INNER join, because any NULLs inserted by the LEFT OUTER process, are then quashed by the WHERE clause
See Update 4 for details of how I resolved the "data conversion or mapping" error.
I have the following query:
SELECT DISTINCT
CAB.CODPARC,
PAR.RAZAOSOCIAL,
BAI.NOMEBAI,
SUM(VLRNOTA) AS AMOUNT
FROM TGFCAB CAB, TGFPAR PAR, TSIBAI BAI
WHERE CAB.CODPARC = PAR.CODPARC
AND PAR.CODBAI = BAI.CODBAI
AND CAB.TIPMOV = 'V'
AND STATUSNOTA = 'L'
AND PAR.CODCID = 5358
GROUP BY
CAB.CODPARC,
PAR.RAZAOSOCIAL,
BAI.NOMEBAI
Which the result is this. Company names and neighborhood hid for obvious reasons
The query at the moment, for those who don't understand Latin languages, is giving me clients, company name, company neighborhood, and the total value of movements.
in the WHERE clause it is only filtering sales movements of companies from an established city.
But if you notice in the Select statement, the column that is retuning the value that aggregates the total amount of value of sales is a SUM().
My goal is to return only the company that have the maximum value of this column, if its a tie, display both of em.
This is where i'm struggling, cause i can't seem to find a simple solution. I tried to use
WHERE AMOUNT = MAX(AMOUNT)
But as expected it didn't work
You tagged the question with the whole bunch of different databases; do you really use all of them?
Because, "PL/SQL" reads as "Oracle". If that's so, here's one option.
with temp as
-- this is your current query
(select columns,
sum(vrlnota) as amount
from ...
where ...
)
-- query that returns what you asked for
select *
from temp t
where t.amount = (select max(a.amount)
from temp a
);
You should be able to achieve the same without the need for a subquery using window over() function,
WITH T AS (
SELECT
CAB.CODPARC,
PAR.RAZAOSOCIAL,
BAI.NOMEBAI,
SUM(VLRNOTA) AS AMOUNT,
MAX(VLRNOTA) over() AS MAMOUNT
FROM TGFCAB CAB
JOIN TGFPAR PAR ON PAR.CODPARC = CAB.CODPARC
JOIN TSIBAI BAI ON BAI.CODBAI = PAR.CODBAI
WHERE CAB.TIPMOV = 'V'
AND STATUSNOTA = 'L'
AND PAR.CODCID = 5358
GROUP BY CAB.CODPARC, PAR.RAZAOSOCIAL, BAI.NOMEBAI
)
SELECT CODPARC, RAZAOSOCIAL, NOMEBAI, AMOUNT
FROM T
WHERE AMOUNT=MAMOUNT
Note it's usually (always) beneficial to join tables using clear explicit join syntax. This should be fine cross-platform between Oracle & SQL Server.
im looking for solutions to my problem.
i have a query
select em_name, sum(abs_day_left)
from pp_employees,
pp_types_abs,
pp_abs
where em_id = abs_em_id and abs_abs_id = abs_id and
abs_kod in ('12','13','14','15')
group by em_name
i want to make more columns with another abs_kod number (image attachment)
for example
second column
... abs_kod in
('656','44','323','33')
third column
... abs_kod in
('63','55','565','556')
and more..
example table
thanks for help and nice weekend
One more thing...
the formula counts days from the whole month
how to make it count correctly the days when it sets the parameters for the half month, for example from 1980-01-01 to 1980-03-15
thanks in advance
bob
I think that you are looking for conditional aggregation:
select
em_name,
sum(case when abs_kod in (12,13,14,15) then abs_day_left end) abs_day_left_1,
sum(case when abs_kod in (656,44,323,33) then abs_day_left end) abs_day_left_2,
sum(case when abs_kod in (63,55,565,556) then abs_day_left end) abs_day_left_3
from pp_employees
inner join pp_abs on em_id = abs_em_id
inner join pp_types_abs on abs_abs_id = abs_id
where and abs_kod in (12,13,14,15,656,44,323,33,63,55,565,556)
group by em_name
Notes:
always use explicit joins instead of old-shool, implicit joins - I tried to fix this but I am unsure I did it correctly, for a reason that lies in the following point...
always qualify the columns in the query with the table they belong to
This select statement takes a long time running, after my investigation I found that the problem un subquery, stored procedure, please I appreciate your help.
SELECT DISTINCT
COKE_CHQ_NUMBER,
COKE_PAY_SUPPLIER
FROM
apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_SIGN_STATUS_V
WHERE
plan_id = 40192
AND COKE_SIGNATURE__A = 'YES'
AND COKE_SIGNATURE__B = 'YES'
AND COKE_AUDIT = 'YES'
AND COKE_CHQ_NUMBER NOT IN (SELECT DISTINCT COKE_CHQ_NUMBER_DELIVER
FROM apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_DELIVERY_ST_V
WHERE UPPER(COKE_CHQ_NUMBER_DELIVER_STATUS) <> 'DELIVERED')
AND COKE_CHQ_NUMBER NOT IN (SELECT COKE_CHQ_NUMBER_DELIVER
FROM apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_DELIVERY_ST_V)
Well there are a few issues with your SELECT statement that you should address:
First let's look at this condition:
COKE_CHQ_NUMBER NOT IN (SELECT DISTINCT COKE_CHQ_NUMBER_DELIVER
FROM apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_DELIVERY_ST_V
WHERE UPPER(COKE_CHQ_NUMBER_DELIVER_STATUS) <> 'DELIVERED')
First you select DISTINCT cheque numbers with a not delivered status then you say you don't want this. Rather than saying I don't want non delivered it is much more readable to say I want delivered ones. However this is not really an issue but rather it would make your SELECT easier to read and understand.
Second let's look at your second cheque condition:
COKE_CHQ_NUMBER NOT IN (SELECT COKE_CHQ_NUMBER_DELIVER
FROM apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_DELIVERY_ST_V)
Here you want to exclude all cheques that have an entry in Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_DELIVERY_ST_V. This makes your first DISTINCT condition redundant as whatever cheques numbers will bring back would be rejected by this second condition of yours. I do't know if Oracle SQL engine is clever enough to work out this redundancy but this could cause your slowness as SELECT distinct can take longer to run
In addition to this if you don't have them already I would recommend adding the following indexes:
CREATE INDEX index_1 ON q_coke_ap_checks_sign_status_v(coke_chq_number, coke_pay_supplier);
CREATE INDEX index_2 ON q_coke_ap_checks_sign_status_v(plan_id, coke_signature__a, coke_signature__b, coke_audit);
CREATE INDEX index_3 ON q_coke_ap_checks_delivery_st_v(coke_chq_number_deliver);
I called the index_1,2,3 for easy to read obviously not a good naming convention.
With this in place your select should be optimized to retrieve you your data in an acceptable performance. But of course it all depends on the size and the distribution of your data which is hard to control without performing specific data analysis.
looking to you code .. seems you have redundant where condition the second NOT IN implies the firts so you could avoid
you could also transform you NOT IN clause in a MINUS clause .. join the same query with INNER join of you not in subquery
and last be careful you have proper composite index on table
Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_SIGN_STATUS_V
cols (plan_id,COKE_SIGNATURE__A , COKE_SIGNATURE__B, COKE_AUDIT, COKE_CHQ_NUMBER, COKE_PAY_SUPPLIER)
SELECT DISTINCT
COKE_CHQ_NUMBER,
COKE_PAY_SUPPLIER
FROM
apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_SIGN_STATUS_V
WHERE
plan_id = 40192
AND COKE_SIGNATURE__A = 'YES'
AND COKE_SIGNATURE__B = 'YES'
AND COKE_AUDIT = 'YES'
MINUS
SELECT DISTINCT
COKE_CHQ_NUMBER,
COKE_PAY_SUPPLIER
FROM apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_SIGN_STATUS_V
INNER JOIN (
SELECT COKE_CHQ_NUMBER_DELIVER
FROM apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_DELIVERY_ST_V
) T ON T.COKE_CHQ_NUMBER_DELIVER = apps.Q_COKE_AP_CHECKS_SIGN_STATUS_V
WHERE
plan_id = 40192
AND COKE_SIGNATURE__A = 'YES'
AND COKE_SIGNATURE__B = 'YES'
AND COKE_AUDIT = 'YES'
I have the following query below (view) in SQL Server. The query produces a result set that is needed to populate a grid. However, a new requirement has come up where the users would like to see data on one row in our app. The tblTasks table can produce 1 or 2 rows. The issue becomes when they're is two rows that have the same job_number but different fldProjectContextId (1 or 31). I need to get the MechApprovalOut and ElecApprovalOut columns on one row instead of two.
I've tried restructuring the query using CTE and over partition and haven't been able to get the necessary results I need.
SELECT TOP (100) PERCENT
CAST(dbo.Job_Control.job_number AS int) AS Job_Number,
dbo.tblTasks.fldSalesOrder, dbo.tblTaskCategories.fldTaskCategoryName,
dbo.Job_Control.Dwg_Sent, dbo.Job_Control.Approval_done,
dbo.Job_Control.fldElecDwgSent, dbo.Job_Control.fldElecApprovalDone,
CASE WHEN DATEDIFF(day, dbo.Job_Control.Dwg_Sent, GETDATE()) > 14
AND dbo.Job_Control.Approval_done IS NULL
AND dbo.tblProjectContext.fldProjectContextID = 1
THEN 1 ELSE 0
END AS MechApprovalOut,
CASE WHEN DATEDIFF(day, dbo.Job_Control.fldElecDwgSent, GETDATE()) > 14
AND dbo.Job_Control.fldElecApprovalDone IS NULL
AND dbo.tblProjectContext.fldProjectContextID = 31
THEN 1 ELSE 0
END AS ElecApprovalOut,
dbo.tblProjectContext.fldProjectContextName,
dbo.tblProjectContext.fldProjectContextId, dbo.Job_Control.Drawing_Info,
dbo.Job_Control.fldElectricalAppDwg
FROM dbo.tblTaskCategories
INNER JOIN dbo.tblTasks
ON dbo.tblTaskCategories.fldTaskCategoryId = dbo.tblTasks.fldTaskCategoryId
INNER JOIN dbo.Job_Control
ON dbo.tblTasks.fldSalesOrder = dbo.Job_Control.job_number
INNER JOIN dbo.tblProjectContext
ON dbo.tblTaskCategories.fldProjectContextId = dbo.tblProjectContext.fldProjectContextId
WHERE (dbo.tblTaskCategories.fldTaskCategoryName = N'Approval'
OR dbo.tblTaskCategories.fldTaskCategoryName = N'Re-Approval')
AND (CASE WHEN DATEDIFF(day, dbo.Job_Control.Dwg_Sent, GETDATE()) > 14
AND dbo.Job_Control.Approval_done IS NULL
AND dbo.tblProjectContext.fldProjectContextID = 1
THEN 1 ELSE 0
END = 1)
OR (dbo.tblTaskCategories.fldTaskCategoryName = N'Approval'
OR dbo.tblTaskCategories.fldTaskCategoryName = N'Re-Approval')
AND (CASE WHEN DATEDIFF(day, dbo.Job_Control.fldElecDwgSent, GETDATE()) > 14
AND dbo.Job_Control.fldElecApprovalDone IS NULL
AND dbo.tblProjectContext.fldProjectContextID = 31
THEN 1 ELSE 0
END = 1)
ORDER BY dbo.Job_Control.job_number, dbo.tblTaskCategories.fldProjectContextId
The above query gives me the following result set:
I've created a work around via code (which I don't like but it works for now) where i've used code to populate a "temp" table the way i need it to display the data, that is, one record if duplicate job numbers to get the MechApprovalOut and ElecApprovalOut columns on one row (see first record in following screen shot).
Example:
With the desired result set and one row per job_number, this is how the form looks with the data and how I am using the result set.
Any help restructuring my query to combine duplicate rows with the same job number where MechApprovalOut and ElecApproval out columns are on one row is greatly appreciated! I'd much prefer to use a view on SQL then code in the app to populate a temp table.
Thanks,
Jimmy
What I would do is LEFT JOIN the main table to itself at the beginning of the query, matching on Job Number and Sales Order, such that the left side of the join is only looking at Approval task categories and the right side of the join is only looking at Re-Approval task categories. Then I would make extensive use of the COALESCE() function to select data from the correct side of the join for use later on and in the select clause. This may also be the piece you were missing to make a CTE work.
There is probably also a solution that uses a ranking/windowing function (maybe not RANK itself, but something that category) along with the PARTITION BY clause. However, as those are fairly new to Sql Server I haven't used them enough personally to be comfortable writing an example solution for you without direct access to the data to play with, and it would still take me a little more time to get right than I can devote to this right now. Maybe this paragraph will motivate someone else to do that work.