How do I find a distinct set of records based upon one field while returning a different field from those records?
ExecuteSQL ( "SELECT DISTINCT account FROM Albums2"; ""; "" )
How do I get another field returned in this type of query?
My goal is fetch 1 record from 1 instance of each account in the list. I am going to populate a global with the id's from the records so that the accounts show in a portal. Then I want to select an account so that all records from the account will show in another portal.
Dan's answer below works perfectly:
SELECT account, MAX(id) FROM Albums2 GROUP BY account
I apologize for syntax error in my original answer. I no longer have Filemaker, but this code below will work with SQL. Does Filemaker 12 allow the SQL "GROUP BY" syntax? If so, it would solve the problem like this:
SELECT account, MAX(id) FROM Albums2 GROUP BY account
Explanation (assuming it works in Filemaker 12):
Rather than using DISTINCT to combine rows, you can use the GROUP BY syntax instead. To do that, you will also need to use an aggregate function like MAX() for the id column to indicate which of the non-duplicated id values to retain in the combined result.
Related
I am fairly new to SQL. I am using SQL Server 2014. I want to run a query on a database which returns a column of ID's. I am wondering if it is possible to loop over the column of ID's from the first database and pass them into another database to collect additional info.
Attempted to Google the answer but I'm not able to find a helpful scenario that mimics what I am looking for.
SELECT *
FROM dbo.MYDB1
WHERE CreatedLoc = 123
The above example spits out data but I only care about the ID column
I than want to loop over the ID column and for each run them on another database.
SELECT *
FROM dbo.MYDB2
WHERE ID IN (array of ids here, not hardcoded but dynamic)
Assuming appropriate permissions, you can access a different database than the one you're currently connected to using a fully qualified databasename.schemaname.tablename (or view, etc.)
If your databases are MyDB1 and MyDB2, you can run a query that looks something like this:
SELECT * from MyDB2.dbo.Table2
where ID IN (
SELECT ID from MyDB1.dbo.Table1 where CreatedLoc = 123
)
I am attempting to return the row of the highest value for timestamp (an integer) for each person (that has multiple entries) in a table. Additionally, I am only interested in rows with the field containing ABCD, but this should be done after filtering to return the latest (max timestamp) entry for each person.
SELECT table."person", max(table."timestamp")
FROM table
WHERE table."type" = 1
HAVING table."field" LIKE '%ABCD%'
GROUP BY table."person"
For some reason, I am not receiving the data I expect. The returned table is nearly twice the size of expectation. Is there some step here that I am not getting correct?
You can 1st return a table having max(timestamp) and then use it in sub query of another select statement, following is query
SELECT table."person", timestamp FROM
(SELECT table."person",max(table."timestamp") as timestamp, type, field FROM table GROUP BY table."person")
where type = 1 and field LIKE '%ABCD%'
Direct answer: as I understand your end goal, just move the HAVING clause to the WHERE section:
SELECT
table."person", MAX(table."timestamp")
FROM table
WHERE
table."type" = 1
AND table."field" LIKE '%ABCD%'
GROUP BY table."person";
This should return no more than 1 row per table."person", with their associated maximum timestamp.
As an aside, I surprised your query worked at all. Your HAVING clause referenced a column not in your query. From the documentation (and my experience):
The fundamental difference between WHERE and HAVING is this: WHERE selects input rows before groups and aggregates are computed (thus, it controls which rows go into the aggregate computation), whereas HAVING selects group rows after groups and aggregates are computed.
I am using SQL developer 3.2.2 to query an Oracle 12 database. I have a select query where I am expecting a certain row to be picked by the query. The results of this query is moved to a global temp table for further processing. But when I query the newly created temp table for the row mentioned above using its key, the query doesn't find the row.
I initially thought that my query had a problem and it wasn't picking up the row at the first place and was debugging the query. But when I ran the query separately on SQL developer and looked for the row by applying a filter on the key column, it shows the row. But when I sort the key column and manually go look for the row in the grid, I don't see the row. I believe it is the same reason why this particular row isn't copied over to the temp table. This is happening to quite a few rows in the database. Has anyone experienced this problem before?
The query is a simple one and has just two columns UserID and LocationID. The query does a union on multiple sub-queries.
select distinct * from (
SELECT distinct UserID, LocationID
FROM TRANSACTION
WHERE "Deleted" = 0 and "TransactionType" in ('E1513','E1514')
AND "Date" <= '31-DEC-2016'
UNION
SELECT distinct UserID, LocationID
FROM FORMHIS
WHERE "FormID" in ('358465','358455')
AND "Date" <= '31-DEC-2016'
)
The output of the above query is missing few rows that I am sure should be in results.
I'm having a table with an id and a name.
I'm getting a list of id's and i need their names.
In my knowledge i have two options.
Create a forloop in my code which executes:
SELECT name from table where id=x
where x is always a number.
or I'm write a single query like this:
SELECT name from table where id=1 OR id=2 OR id=3
The list of id's and names is enormous so i think you wouldn't want that.
The problem of id's is the id is not always a number but a random generated id containting numbers and characters. So talking about ranges is not a solution.
I'm asking this in a performance point of view.
What's a nice solution for this problem?
SQLite has limits on the size of a query, so if there is no known upper limit on the number of IDs, you cannot use a single query.
When you are reading multiple rows (note: IN (1, 2, 3) is easier than many ORs), you don't know to which ID a name belongs unless you also SELECT that, or sort the results by the ID.
There should be no noticeable difference in performance; SQLite is an embedded database without client/server communication overhead, and the query does not need to be parsed again if you use a prepared statement.
A "nice" solution is using the INoperator:
SELECT name from table where id in (1,2,3)
Also, the IN operator is syntactic sugar built for exactly this purpose..
SELECT name from table where id IN (1,2,3,4,5,6.....)
Hoping that you are getting the list of ID's on which you have to perform a query for names as input temp table #InputIDTable,
SELECT name from table WHERE ID IN (SELECT id from #InputIDTable)
How can i generate an ID value for every set of duplicate records as seen in the second table with ID column? In other words, how can I let the first table to look like the second table using SQL query?
Assume that first name and last name in the first table can appear in duplicates.
Each first name and last name can have one or many purchase yr and cost.
The given image is just a sample. Total records in table 1 can reach thousands.
I'm using Oracle SQL.
Note: I'm working with one table only that is the first one. The second table is what I want.
You can use the DENSE_RANK analytic function to assign ID's as below:
EDIT:
Simplified query to generate ID's.
SELECT
DENSE_RANK() OVER (ORDER BY First_Name, Last_Name) ID,
t.*
FROM Table1 t;
Reference:
DENSE_RANK on Oracle Database SQL Reference