I'm new to mySQLi / SQL in general, so I wanted to ask a question regarding retrieving a certain amount of results in a specific way. Basically what I want to do is get all available information about the three fastest ships in the table below (using maxWarp field), but I don't know how to quite write that in SQL. I don't think it would just be right to say "SELECT * FROM Fleet WHERE maxWarp > 6"
**Table name: Fleet**
name class crew maxWarp
Enterprise Constitution 430 8
Excalibur Ambassador 260 9
Farragut Constitution 420 9
Prokofiev Andromeda 100 6
Select * from fleet order by maxwrap desc limit 3;
Related
I have seen a similar question asked How to get second highest value among multiple columns in SQL ... however the solution won't work for Microsoft Access (Row_Number/Over Partition isn't valid in Access).
My Access query includes dozens of fields. I would like to create a new field/column that would return the second highest value of 10 specific columns that are included in the query, I will call this field "Cover". Something like this:
Product Bid1 Bid2 Bid3 Bid4 Cover
Watch 104 120 115 108 115
Shoe 65 78 79 76 18
Hat 20 22 19 20 20
I can do a really long SWITCH formula such as the following equivalent Excel formula:
IF( AND(Bid1> Bid2, Bid1 > Bid3, Bid1 > Bid4), Bid1,
AND(Bid2> Bid1, Bid2 > Bid3, Bid2 > Bid4), Bid2,
.....
But there must be a more efficient solution. A MAXIF equivalent would work perfectly if MS-Access Query had such a function.
Any ideas? Thank you in advance.
This would be easier if the data were laid out in a more normalized way. The clue is the numbered field names.
Your data is currently organized as a Pivot (known in Access as crosstab), but can easily be Unpivoted.
This data is much easier to work with if laid in a more normalized fashion which is this case would be:
Product Bid Amount
--------- ----- --------
Watch 1 104
Watch 2 120
Watch 3 115
Watch 4 108
Shoe 1 65
Shoe 2 78
Shoe 3 79
Shoe 4 76
Hat 1 20
Hat 2 22
Hat 3 19
Hat 4 20
This way querying becomes simpler.
It looks like you want the maximum of the bids, grouped by Product, so:
select Product, max(amount) as maxAmount
from myTable
group by product
Really, we shouldn't be storing text fields at all, so Product should be an ID number, with associated Product Names stored once in a separate table, instead of several times in the this one, like:
ProdID ProdName
-------- ----------
1 Watch
2 Shoe
3 Hat
... but that's another lesson.
Generally speaking repeating of anything should be avoided... that's pretty much the purpose of a database... but the links below will explain than I. :)
Quackit : Microsoft Access Tutorial
YouTube : DB Planning
Microsoft : Database Design Basics
Microsoft : Database Normalization Basics
Wikipedia : Database Normalization
Can I do SQL-style query on an in-memory dataset (or cellarray, or structure, etc) in MATLAB?
Why I ask is, sometimes, I don't want to talk to the database for 1000 times when I want to do different operations on each of the 1000 rows of data. Instead, I'd rather read all 1000 from the database and operate on them in MATLAB.
For example, I have read the following out of from the database:
age first_name last_name income
30 Mike Smith 45
17 David Oxgon 17
22 Osama Lumbermaster 3
Now I want to find out the full names of the people that are under the age of 25. I know how to do it, but is there any syntax as clean and intuitive as SQL like this?
SELECT first_name + ' ' + last_name AS name FROM people WHERE age < income
In the docs page Access Data in a Table (see the example Index Using a Logical Expression) it shows that your examples could be achieved as follows:
MyTable({'first_name','last_name'}, MyTable.age < MyTable.income)
These docs don't specifically explain how to merge the name and surname into one variable but I'm sure it's easy. Give it a try and let us know if you get it.
I'm using an MRP system for stocking inventory where I work. The interface it self isn't the best, so I have decided to open up the database file and do everything manually. I'm having some issues though. I'm trying to sort my database by using ORDER BY. I'm not getting the results I thought I would. It is showing them in this format:
1
10
100
101
101
11
110
111
etc
Instead of
1
2
3
4
5
etc
This is my query
SELECT *
FROM tblStockItems
Order By (`MasterPNo`)
I'm currently working in access, and then database is in the JET format. If you're wondering why I am using access instead of the MRP Interface, it is because later down the line I will be needing to re-organise the whole stock system, so a lot of fields will have their product numbers changed.
Thanks for reading
if possible, change the column type to number
if not, a cast should do it:
ORDER BY Val(MasterPNo)
In my journey to learn SQL, I'm writing various queries on an old database of mine, but getting into more complex things, I want to make sure I'm not over engineering this. I have a table Agent, with different agents offering different prices for cities. Multiple agents can serve the same city, each with different prices. I wanted to run a query which would return the total cost of hiring all of the agents for any given city, ordered by the most expensive.
WITH orderedPrices AS (
SELECT SUM(agtFMPrice)
OVER (PARTITION BY agtCity)
AS IX FROM Agent)
SELECT IX
FROM orderedPrices
ORDER BY IX DESC
I found that doing it without the view returned by orderedPrices, it wouldn't order the prices (I assume because it's an aggregate function, or whatever they're called). Did I do this in the best way I could have, or could it be simplified?
Also, if you're feeling particularly bored, go ahead and give me a new assignment/query to do on this table. I could use the practice.
What you have written in English doesn't seem to quite match qhat you have written in SQL.
English:
- One record per City
- One field per record, showing the total cost of all associated agents
SQL:
- One record per Agent
- One field per record, showing the total cost of all agents in the same city
AgentID | agtCity | agtFMPrice
---------+---------+------------
1 | 1 | 10
2 | 1 | 20
3 | 2 | 30
4 | 2 | 10
5 | 2 | 25
Results of SQL version Results of English version
------------------------ ----------------------------
30 30
30 65
65
65
65
If you want the English version, I'd do this...
SELECT
agtCity,
SUM(agtFMPrice) AS IX
FROM
Agent
GROUP BY
agtCity
ORDER BY
SUM(agtFMPrice) DESC
To assist performance, the table could (should?) also have an Index on (agtCity)
I am using SQL Server 2005.
I have a site that people can vote on awesome motorcycles. Each time a user votes, there is one for the first bike and one vote against the second bike. Two votes are stored in the database. The vote table looks like this:
VoteID VoteDate BikeID Vote
1 2012-01-12 123 1
2 2012-01-12 125 0
3 2012-01-12 126 0
4 2012-01-12 129 1
I want to tally the votes for each bike quite frequently, say each hour. My idea is to store the tally as a percentage of contest won versus lost on the bike table as an attribute of the bike. So, if a bike won 10 contests and lost 20 contest, they would have a score (tally) of 33. I would tally up daily, weekly, and monthly scores.
BikeID BikeName DailyTally WeeklyTally MonthlyTally
1 Big Dog 5 10 50
2 Big Cat 3 15 40
3 Small Dog 9 8 0
4 Fish Face 19 21 0
Right now, there are about 500 votes per day being cast. We anticipate 2500 - 5000 per day in the next month or so.
What is the best way to tally the data and what is the best way to store it? Should the tallies be on their own table? Should a trigger be used to run a new tally each time a bike is voted on? Should a stored procedure be run hourly to get all tallies?
Any ideas would be very helpful!
Store your VoteDate as a datetime value instead of just date.
For your tallies, you can just make that a view and calculate it on the fly. This should be very simple to do using GROUP BY and DATEPART functions. If you need exact code for how to do this, please open a new question.
For that low volume of rows it doesn't make any sense to store aggregations in a table when you can just calculate them whenever you want to see them and get accurate and immediate results that are up-to-date.
I agree with #JNK try a view or just a normal stored proc to calculate the outputs on the fly. If you find it becomes too slow as your data grows I would investigate other routes then (like caching the data in another table etc). Probably worth keeping it simple to start with; you can always resuse the logic from the SP/VIEW later if you do want to setup a scheduled task.
Edit :
Removed the index view as per #Damien_The_Unbeliever comments its not deterministic and i'm stupid :)