I'm struggling a bit at creating an SQL query to select some records from an Access Database (using Excel VBA).
A cut of one of the tables (let's call it 'table1') has the following columns:
| my_id | your_id | phase |
| 1 | 1 | Open |
| 2 | 1 | Close |
| 3 | 2 | Open |
| 4 | 3 | Close |
| 5 | 2 | Close |
| 6 | 3 | Open |
The field 'my_id' will always be a unique value whereas the 'your_id' field may contain duplicates.
What I would like to do is select everything from the table for the most recent record of the 'your_id' where the phase is 'Close'. So that means in the above example table it would select 5, 4 & 2.
Hope this makes sense, sorry if not - I'm struggling to articulate what I mean!
Thanks
Although from ur example if u just add where conditin as phase='Close' u will get the records of 5,4 and 2. But I am assuming that there might be scenarios (not in ur example) where more than 1 record can come with status as Close for any given your_id so query should look like this
Select * from table1 where my_id in (
Select Max(My_Id) from table1 where phase='Close' group by your_id)
Related
I have a table called groups in my postgres production server, they have a column called manager_id. What I'm trying to do is to create simulated look up tables base off the ids of the manager. For example, if I have the following rows for table groups:
| id |manager_id| ... |
| 1 | 1 | .
| 2 | 3 | .
| 4 | 1 |
| 5 | 2 |
| 7 | 2 |
I would like to access make believe tables like group-1
| id |manager_id| ... |
| 1 | 1 | .
| 4 | 1 | .
Or group-2
| id |manager_id| ... |
| 5 | 2 | .
| 7 | 2 | .
I am not sure if this is possible, and yes I'm aware I could query for it, but for the purpose of the question (and my very specific needs, which I am having trouble finding a workaround), can I do something like that? If yes, can I do it without duplicating data, just picking up references from the original one?
Generally: just a use a where clause to filter on the manager you want the result from:
select *
from groups
where manager_id = 1
You could take one step forward and create views:
create view v_groups_1 as
select *
from groups
where manager_id = 1
create view v_groups_2 as
select *
from groups
where manager_id = 2
You can then run queries against the views just like you would do with a regular table.
I was looking to provide an answer to this question in which the OP has two tables:
Table1
+--------+--------+
| testID | Status |
+--------+--------+
| 1 | |
| 2 | |
| 3 | |
+--------+--------+
Table2
+----+--------+--------+--------+
| ID | testID | stepID | status |
+----+--------+--------+--------+
| 1 | 1 | 1 | pass |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | fail |
| 3 | 1 | 3 | pass |
| 4 | 2 | 1 | pass |
| 5 | 2 | 2 | pass |
| 6 | 3 | 1 | fail |
+----+--------+--------+--------+
Here, the OP is looking to update the status field for each testID in Table1 with pass if the status of all stepID records associated with the testID in Table2 have a status of pass, else Table1 should be updated with fail for that testID.
In this example, the result should be:
+--------+--------+
| testID | Status |
+--------+--------+
| 1 | fail |
| 2 | pass |
| 3 | fail |
+--------+--------+
I wrote the following SQL code in an effort to accomplish this:
update Table1 a inner join
(
select
b.testID,
iif(min(b.status)=max(b.status) and min(b.status)='pass','pass','fail') as v
from Table2 b
group by b.testID
) c on a.testID = c.testID
set a.testStatus = c.v
However, MS Access reports the all-too-familiar, 'operation must use an updateable query' response.
I know that a query is not updateable if there is a one-to-many relationship between the record being updated and the set of values, but in this case, the aggregated subquery would yield a one-to-one relationship between the two testID fields.
Which left me asking, why is this query not updateable?
You're joining in a query with an aggregate (Max).
Aggregates are not updateable. In Access, in an update query, every part of the query has to be updateable (with the exception of simple expressions, and subqueries in WHERE part of your query), which means your query is not updateable.
You can work around this by using domain aggregates (DMin and DMax) instead of real ones, but this query will take a large performance hit if you do.
You can also work around it by rewriting your aggregates to take place in an EXISTS or NOT EXISTS clause, since that's part of the WHERE clause thus doesn't need to be updateable. That would likely minimally affect performance, but means you have to split this query in two: 1 query to set all the fields to "pass" that meet your condition, another to set them to "fail" if they don't.
I have tables below as follows:
tbl_tasks
+---------+-------------+
| Task_ID | Assigned_ID |
+---------+-------------+
| 1 | 8 |
| 2 | 12 |
| 3 | 31 |
+---------+-------------+
tbl_resources
+---------+-----------+
| Task_ID | Source_ID |
+---------+-----------+
| 1 | 4 |
| 1 | 10 |
| 2 | 42 |
| 4 | 8 |
+---------+-----------+
A task is assigned to at least one person (denoted by the "assigned_ID") and then any number of people can be assigned as a source (denoted by "source_ID"). The ID numbers are all linked to names in another table. Though the ID numbers are named differently, they all return to the same table.
Would there be any way for me to combine the two tables based on ID such that I could search based on someone's ID number? For example- if I decide to search on or do a WHERE User_ID = 8, in order to see what Tasks that 8 is involved in, I would get back Task 1 and Task 4.
Right now, by joining all the tables together, I can easily filter on "Assigned" but not "Source" due to all the multiple entries in the table.
Use union all:
select distinct task_id
from ((select task_id, assigned_id as id
from tbl_tasks
) union all
(select task_id, source_id
from tbl_resources
)
) ti
where id = ?;
Note that this uses select distinct in case someone is assigned to the same task in both tables. If not, remove the distinct.
I have data on approx 1000 individuals, where each individual can have multiple rows, with multiple dates and where the columns indicate the program admitted to and a code number.
I need each row to contain a distinct date, so I need to delete the rows of duplicate dates from my table. Where there are multiple rows with the same date, I need to keep the row that has the lowest code number. In the case of more than one row having both the same date and the same lowest code, then I need to keep the row that also has been in program (prog) B. For example;
| ID | DATE | CODE | PROG|
--------------------------------
| 1 | 1996-08-16 | 24 | A |
| 1 | 1997-06-02 | 123 | A |
| 1 | 1997-06-02 | 123 | B |
| 1 | 1997-06-02 | 211 | B |
| 1 | 1997-08-19 | 67 | A |
| 1 | 1997-08-19 | 23 | A |
So my desired output would look like this;
| ID | DATE | CODE | PROG|
--------------------------------
| 1 | 1996-08-16 | 24 | A |
| 1 | 1997-06-02 | 123 | B |
| 1 | 1997-08-19 | 23 | A |
I'm struggling to come up with a solution to this, so any help greatly appreciated!
Microsoft SQL Server 2012 (X64)
The following works with your test data
SELECT ID, date, MIN(code), MAX(prog) FROM table
GROUP BY date
You can then use the results of this query to create a new table or populate a new table. Or to delete all records not returned by this query.
SQLFiddle http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/0ebb5/5
You can use min() function: (See the details here)
select ID, DATE, min(CODE), max(PROG)
from table
group by DATE
I assume that your table has a valid primary key. However i would recommend you to take IDas Primary key. Hope this would help you.
I'm generating test data for a new database, and I'm having trouble populating one of the foreign key fields. I need to create a relatively large number (1000) of entries in a table (SurveyResponses) that has a foreign key to a table with only 6 entries (Surveys)
The database already has a Schools table that has a few thousand records. For arguments sake lets say it looks like this
Schools
+----+-------------+
| Id | School Name |
+----+-------------+
| 1 | PS 1 |
| 2 | PS 2 |
| 3 | PS 3 |
| 4 | PS 4 |
| 5 | PS 5 |
+----+-------------+
I'm creating a new Survey table. It will only have about 3 rows.
Survey
+----+-------------+
| Id | Col2 |
+----+-------------+
| 1 | 2014 Survey |
| 2 | 2015 Survey |
| 3 | 2016 Survey |
+----+-------------+
SurveyResponses simply ties a school to a survey.
Survey Responses
+----+----------+----------+
| Id | SchoolId | SurveyId |
+----+----------+----------+
| 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 3 | 3 | 1 |
| 4 | 4 | 3 |
| 5 | 5 | 2 |
+----+----------+----------+
Populating the SurveyId field is what's giving me the most trouble. I can randomly select 1000 Schools, but I haven't figured out a way to generate 1000 random SurveyIds. I've been trying to avoid a while loop, but maybe that's the only option?
I've been using Red Gate SQL Data Generator to generate some of my test data, but in this case I'd really like to understand how this can be done with raw SQL.
Here is one way, using a correlated subquery to get a random survey associated with each school:
select s.schoolid,
(select top 1 surveyid
from surveys
order by newid()
) as surveyid
from schools s;
Note: This doesn't seem to work. Here is a SQL Fiddle showing the non-workingness. I am quite surprised it doesn't work, because newid() should be a
EDIT:
If you know the survey ids have no gaps and start with 1, you can do:
select 1 + abs(checksum(newid()) % 3) as surveyid
I did check that this does work.
EDIT II:
This appears to be overly aggressive optimization (in my opinion). Correlating the query appears to fix the problem. So, something like this should work:
select s.schoolid,
(select top 1 surveyid
from surveys s2
where s2.surveyid = s.schoolid or s2.surveyid <> s.schoolid -- nonsensical condition to prevent over optimization
order by newid()
) as surveyid
from schools s;
Here is a SQL Fiddle demonstrating this.