I am using MS Access and I have a rather complex situation.
I have Respondents who are linked to varying numbers of different Companies via 2 connecting tables. I want to be able to create a list of distinct customers which excludes any customer associated with Company X.
Here is a pic of the relationships that are involved with the query.
And here is an example of what I'm trying to achieve.
RespondentRef | Respondent Name
8 Joe Bloggs
.
RespondentRef | GroupRef
8 2
.
GroupRef | CompanyRef
2 10
.
CompanyRef | CompanyName
10 Ball of String
I want a query where I enter in 'Ball of String' for the company name, and then it produces a list of all the Respondents (taken from Tbl_Respondent) which completely excludes Respondent 8 (as he is linked to CompanyName: Ball of String).
Tbl_Respondent
RespondentRef | Respondent Name
... ...
7 Bob Carlyle
9 Anton Boyle
I have tried many combinations of subqueries with <> and NOT EXISTS and NOT IN and nothing seems to work. I suspect the way these tables are linked may have something to do with it.
Any help you could offer would be very much appreciated. If you have any questions let me know. (I have made best efforts, but please accept my apologies for any formatting conventions or etiquette faux-pas I may have committed.)
Thank you very much.
EDIT:
My formatted version of Frazz's code is still turning resulting in a syntax error. Any help would be appreciated.
SELECT *
FROM Tbl_Respondent
WHERE RespondentRef NOT IN (
SELECT tbl_Group_Details_Respondents.RespondentRef
FROM tbl_Group_Details_Respondents
JOIN tbl_Group_Details ON tbl_Group_Details.GroupReference = tbl_Group_Details_Respondents.GroupReference
JOIN tbl_Company_Details ON tbl_Company_Details.CompanyReference = tbl_Group_Details.CompanyReference
WHERE tbl_Company_Details.CompanyName = "Ball of String"
)
This should do what you need:
SELECT *
FROM Tbl_Respondent
WHERE RespondentRef NOT IN (
SELECT gdr.RespondentRef
FROM Tbl_Group_Details_Respondent gdr
JOIN Tbl_Group_Details gd ON gd.GroupRef=gdr.GroupRef
JOIN Tbl_Company_Details cd ON cd.CompanyRef=gd.CompanyRef
WHERE cd.CompanyName='Ball of String'
)
Related
This has been driving me and my team up the wall. I cannot compose a query that will strict match a single record that has a specific permutation of look ups.
We have a single lookup table
room_member_lookup:
room | member
---------------
A | Michael
A | Josh
A | Kyle
B | Kyle
B | Monica
C | Michael
I need to match a room with an exact list of members but everything else I've tried on stack overflow will still match room A even if I ask for a room with ONLY Josh and Kyle
I've tried queries like
SELECT room FROM room_member_lookup
WHERE member IN (Josh, Michael)
GROUP BY room
HAVING COUNT(1) = 2
However this will still return room A even though that has 3 members I need a exact member permutation and that matches the room even not partials.
SELECT room
FROM room_member_lookup a
WHERE member IN ('Monica', 'Kyle')
-- Make sure that the room 'a' has exactly two members
and (select count(*)
from room_member_lookup b
where a.room=b.room)=2
GROUP BY room
-- and both members are in that room
HAVING COUNT(1) = 2
Depending on the SQL dialect, one can build a dynamic table (CTE or select .. union all) to hold the member set (Monica and Kyle, for example), and then look for set equivalence using MINUS/EXCEPT sql operators.
I am trying to work with two tables on BigQuery. From table1 I want to find the accession ID of all records that are "World", and then from each of those accession numbers I want to create a column with every name in a separate row. Unfortunately, when I run this:
Select name
From `table2`
Where acc IN (Select acc
From `table1`
WHERE source = 'World')
Instead of getting something like this:
Acc1
Acc2
Acc3
Jeff
Jeff
Ted
Chris
Ted
Blake
Rob
Jack
Jack
I get something more like this:
row
name
1
Jeff
2
Chris
3
Rob
4
Jack
5
Jeff
6
Jack
7
Ted
8
Blake
Ultimately, I am hoping to download the data and somehow use python or something to take each name and count the number of times it shows up with each other name at a given accession number, and furthermore measure the degree to which each pairing is also found with third names in any given column, i.e. the degree to which they share a cohort. So I need to preserve the groupings which exist with each accession number, but I am struggling to find info on how one might do this.
Could anybody point me in the right direct for this, or otherwise is the way I am going about this wise if that is my end goal?
Thanks!
This is not a direct answer to the question you asked. In general, it is easier to handle multiple rows rather than multiple columns.
So, I would recommend that you put each acc value in a separate row and then list the names as an array:
select t2.acc, array_agg(t2.name order by t2.name) as names
from `table2` t2
where t2.acc in (Select t1.acc
From `table1` t1
where t1.source = 'World'
)
group by t2.acc;
Otherwise, you are going to have a challenge just naming the columns in your result set.
I'm a complete beginner to databases and SQL and I've been smashing my head against the wall for a while with this question. I've tried looking for the answer before posting this but all I could find were more complex questions with answers that didn't really apply to me.
I apologize if by any chance this was already answered and I missed it.
Task: list names and last-names of all the workers that work in marketing.
Table1(workers) Table2(departments)
ID last-name name department# department# department-name
1 ... ... 2 2 marketing
2 ... ... 5 5 ...
3 ... ... 8 8 ...
4 ... ... 6 6 ...
This is what I wrote:
SELECT name, last-name
FROM workers, departments
WHERE departments.department# = workers.department# AND departments.department-name = "marketing"
Is this the correct way to write my query in this instance or is "departments" in the second line of the query redundant since I'm trying to list only names and last-names, which are both in the "workers" table and not "departments".
If it is the right way, is there a better, cleaner way to achieve the same result?
Thank you for your help.
edit: I've done some more reading and I'm curious if this would work, too:
SELECT name, last-name
FROM workers
WHERE department# IN
(SELECT department#
FROM departments
WHERE department-name LIKE "Marketing%");
Appreciate your time.
I would suggest :
SELECT name, last-name
FROM workers INNER JOIN departments
ON workers.department# = departments.department#
WHERE department-name = 'marketing'
Being new with SQL and SSRS and can do many things already, but I think I must be missing some basics and therefore bang my head on the wall all the time.
A report that is almost working, needs to have more results in it, based on conditions.
My working query so far is like this:
SELECT projects.project_number, project_phases.project_phase_id, project_phases.project_phase_number, project_phases.project_phase_header, project_phase_expensegroups.projectphase_expense_total, invoicerows.invoicerow_total
FROM projects INNER JOIN
project_phases ON projects.project_id = project_phases.project_id
LEFT OUTER JOIN
project_phase_expensegroups ON project_phases.project_phase_id = project_phase_expensegroups.project_phase_id
LEFT OUTER JOIN
invoicerows ON project_phases.project_phase_id = invoicerows.project_phase_id
WHERE ( projects.project_number = #iProjectNumber )
AND
( project_phase_expensegroups.projectphase_expense_total >0 )
The parameter is for selectionlist that is used to choose a project to the report.
How to have also records that have
( project_phase_expensegroups.projectphase_expense_total ) with value 0 but there might be invoices for that project phase?
Tried already to add another condition like this:
WHERE ( projects.project_number = #iProjectNumber )
AND
( project_phase_expensegroups.projectphase_expense_total > 0 )
OR
( invoicerows.invoicerow_total > 0 )
but while it gives some results - also the one with projectphase_expense_total with value 0, but the report is total mess.
So my question is: what am I doing wrong here?
There is a core problem with your query in that you are left joining to two tables, implying that rows may not exist, but then putting conditions on those tables, which will eliminate NULLs. That means your query is internally inconsistent as is.
The next problem is that you're joining two tables to project_phases that both may have multiple rows. Since these data are not related to each other (as proven by the fact that you have no join condition between project_phase_expensegroups and invoicerows, your query is not going to work correctly. For example, given a list of people, a list of those people's favorite foods, and a list of their favorite colors like so:
People
Person
------
Joe
Mary
FavoriteFoods
Person Food
------ ---------
Joe Broccoli
Joe Bananas
Mary Chocolate
Mary Cake
FavoriteColors
Person Color
------ ----------
Joe Red
Joe Blue
Mary Periwinkle
Mary Fuchsia
When you join these with links between Person <-> Food and Person <-> Color, you'll get a result like this:
Person Food Color
------ --------- ----------
Joe Broccoli Red
Joe Bananas Red
Joe Broccoli Blue
Joe Bananas Blue
Mary Chocolate Periwinkle
Mary Chocolate Fuchsia
Mary Cake Periwinkle
Mary Cake Fuchsia
This is essentially a cross-join, also known as a Cartesian product, between the Foods and the Colors, because they have a many-to-one relationship with each person, but no relationship with each other.
There are a few ways to deal with this in the report.
Create ExpenseGroup and InvoiceRow subreports, that are called from the main report by a combination of project_id and project_phase_id parameters.
Summarize one or the other set of data into a single value. For example, you could sum the invoice rows. Or, you could concatenate the expense groups into a single string separated by commas.
Some notes:
Please, please format your query before posting it in a question. It is almost impossible to read when not formatted. It seems pretty clear that you're using a GUI to create the query, but do us the favor of not having to format it ourselves just to help you
While formatting, please use aliases, Don't use full table names. It just makes the query that much harder to understand.
You need an extra parentheses in your where clause in order to get the logic right.
WHERE ( projects.project_number = #iProjectNumber )
AND (
(project_phase_expensegroups.projectphase_expense_total > 0)
OR
(invoicerows.invoicerow_total > 0)
)
Also, you're using a column in your WHERE clause from a table that is left joined without checking for NULLs. That basically makes it a (slow) inner join. If you want to include rows that don't match from that table you also need to check for NULL. Any other comparison besides IS NULL will always be false for NULL values. See this page for more information about SQL's three value predicate logic: http://www.firstsql.com/idefend3.htm
To keep your LEFT JOINs working as you intended you would need to do this:
WHERE ( projects.project_number = #iProjectNumber )
AND (
project_phase_expensegroups.projectphase_expense_total > 0
OR project_phase_expensegroups.project_phase_id IS NULL
OR invoicerows.invoicerow_total > 0
OR invoicerows.project_phase_id IS NULL
)
I found the solution and it was kind easy after all. I changed the only the second LEFT OUTER JOIN to INNER JOIN and left away condition where the query got only results over zero. Also I used SELECT DISTINCT
Now my report is working perfectly.
Basically, I'm dealing with a horribly set up table that I'd love to rebuild, but am not sure I can at this point.
So, the table is of addresses, and it has a ton of similar entries for the same address. But there are sometimes slight variations in the address (i.e., a room # is tacked on IN THE SAME COLUMN, ugh).
Like this:
id | place_name | place_street
1 | Place Name One | 1001 Mercury Blvd
2 | Place Name Two | 2388 Jupiter Street
3 | Place Name One | 1001 Mercury Blvd, Suite A
4 | Place Name, One | 1001 Mercury Boulevard
5 | Place Nam Two | 2388 Jupiter Street, Rm 101
What I would like to do is in SQL (this is mssql), if possible, is do a query that is like:
SELECT DISTINCT place_name, place_street where [the first 4 letters of the place_name are the same] && [the first 4 characters of the place_street are the same].
to, I guess at this point, get:
Plac | 1001
Plac | 2388
Basically, then I can figure out what are the main addresses I have to break out into another table to normalize this, because the rest are just slight derivations.
I hope that makes sense.
I've done some research and I see people using regular expressions in SQL, but a lot of them seem to be using C scripts or something. Do I have to write regex functions and save them into the SQL Server before executing any regular expressions?
Any direction on whether I can just write them in SQL or if I have another step to go through would be great.
Or on how to approach this problem.
Thanks in advance!
Use the SQL function LEFT:
SELECT DISTINCT LEFT(place_name, 4)
I don't think you need regular expressions to get the results you describe. You just want to trim the columns and group by the results, which will effectively give you distinct values.
SELECT left(place_name, 4), left(place_street, 4), count(*)
FROM AddressTable
GROUP BY left(place_name, 4), left(place_street, 4)
The count(*) column isn't necessary, but it gives you some idea of which values might have the most (possibly) duplicate address rows in common.
I would recommend you look into Fuzzy Search Operations in SQL Server. You can match the results much better than what you are trying to do. Just google sql server fuzzy search.
Assuming at least SQL Server 2005 for the CTE:
;with cteCommonAddresses as (
select left(place_name, 4) as LeftName, left(place_street,4) as LeftStreet
from Address
group by left(place_name, 4), left(place_street,4)
having count(*) > 1
)
select a.id, a.place_name, a.place_street
from cteCommonAddresses c
inner join Address a
on c.LeftName = left(a.place_name,4)
and c.LeftStreet = left(a.place_street,4)
order by a.place_name, a.place_street, a.id