I have used the answers from here to answer my questions before, but I cannot find the answer to this question.
I am writing a query that needs to pull in how many drops a driver makes. Fairly straight forward, however i need to add them together to give a total but when I use the SUM feature it does not return the correct information.
On the table Journey Header is a column with Number of drops, I need to add these up to give a total, which it does but i need my query to show the Driver, Vehicle, Total number of Drops and an Order Value, but I do not want each indivaidual record, I want them all grouped together, if that makes sense...
Below is the script i am using and part of the results beneath - for example I want the driver Chris Akwuba to show one line, with the total amount of drops he has done along with the order value (order value is working)
Thank you and I hope you can understand my rambling on....
select
sum(JH.NoofDrops) as [Number of Drops],
Jh.JourneyID,
JH.DriverName as [Driver],
VT.Name as [Vehicle Class],
SUM (OH.TotalSellPrice) as [Order Value]
from JourneyHeader JH with (NOLOCK)
LEFT JOIN VehicleType VT with (NOLOCK) on VT.VehicleTypeID=JH.VehicleTypeID
LEFT JOIN JourneyLine JL with (NOLOCK) on JL.JourneyID=JH.JourneyID
LEFT JOIN Orderheader OH with (NOLOCK) on OH.OrderID=JL.OrderID
where
JourneyDate between '2012-06-01 00:00:00' and '2012-07-20 00:00:00'
Group by JH.DriverName, VT.Name, Jh.NoOfDrops, JH.JourneyID
Number of Drops JourneyID Driver Vehicle Class Order Value
25 14520 Chris Akwuba Transit 2533.32
1 14521 Kevin O'Sullivan Hiab (Class2) 214.15
16 14522 Kevin O'Sullivan Hiab (Class2) 1672.29
9 14523 Chris Akwuba Transit 1136.69
16 14525 James O'Brien 7.5 tonne 633.18
9 14526 Errol Gray Transit 768.17
25 14527 John Hardy Transit 969.80
Remove Jh.NoOfDrops, JH.JourneyID from the group by and JourneyID from the select
eg
Group by JH.DriverName, VT.Name
Even if you write the correct SQL, your results will be incorrect, always. Since you added the with (NOLOCK) hint, your are asking to perform dirty reads you are getting back inconsistent data. See Previously committed rows might be missed if NOLOCK hint is used.
Now, if you're willing to ditch the 'gimme wrong results' hint, then you have a standing chance. But in order for that to happen, your requirements must not contradict themselves. When you say I want the driver Chris Akwuba to show one line you obviously cannot ask for the JourneyID column. You must make up your mind, either one row per Driver or one row per Journey. Not both. Once you settle one one of them, re-ask the question.
Related
Good evening. Could someone please help me with the following. I am trying to join two tables.The first id wbr_global.gl_ap_details. This stores historic GL information. The second table sandbox.utr_fixed_mapping is where account mapping is stored. For example, ana ccount number 60820 is mapped as Employee relation. The first table needs the mapping from the second table linked on the account number. The output I am getting is not right and way to bug. Any help would be appreciated!
Output
select sandbox.utr_fixed_mapping_na.new_mapping_1,sum(wbr_global.gl_ap_details.amount)
from wbr_global.gl_ap_details
LEFT JOIN sandbox.utr_fixed_mapping_na ON wbr_global.gl_ap_details.account_number = sandbox.utr_fixed_mapping_na.account_number
Where gl_ap_details.cost_center = '1172'
and gl_ap_details.period_name = 'JUL-21'
and gl_ap_details.ledger_name = 'Amazon.com, Inc.'
Group by 1;
I tried adding the cast function but after 5000 seconds of the query running I canceled it.
The query itself appears ok, but minor changes. Learn to use table "aliases". This way you don't have to keep typing long database.table.column all over. Additionally, SQL is easier to read doing it that way anyhow.
Notice the aliases "gl" and "fm" after the tables are declared, then these aliases are used to represent the columns.. Easier to read, would you agree.
Added GL Account number as described below the query.
select
gl.account_number,
fm.new_mapping_1,
sum(gl.amount)
from
wbr_global.gl_ap_details gl
LEFT JOIN sandbox.utr_fixed_mapping_na fm
ON gl.account_number = fm.account_number
Where
gl.cost_center = '1172'
and gl.period_name = 'JUL-21'
and gl.ledger_name = 'Amazon.com, Inc.'
Group by
gl.account_number,
fm.new_mapping_1
Now, as for your query and getting null. This just means that there are records within the gl_ap_details table with an account number that is not found in the utr_fixed_mapping_na table. So, to see WHAT gl account number does NOT exist, I have added it to the query. Its possible there are MULTIPLE records in the gl_ap_details that are not found in the mapping table. So, you may get
GLAccount Description SumOfAmount
glaccount1 null $someAmount
glaccount37 null $someAmount
glaccount49 null $someAmount
glaccount72 Depreciation $someAmount
glaccount87 Real Estate $someAmount
glaccount92 Building $someAmount
glaccount99 Salaries $someAmount
I obviously made-up glaccounts just to show the purpose. You may have multiple where the null's total amount is actually masking how many different gl account numbers were NOT found.
Once you find which are missing, you can check / confirm they SHOULD be in the mapping table.
FEEDBACK.
Since you do realize the missing numbers, lets consider a Cartesian result. If there are multiple entries in the mapping table for the same G/L account number, you will get a Cartesian result thus bloating your numbers. To clarify, lets say your mapping table has
Mapping file.
GL Descr1 NewMapping
1 test Salaries
1 testView Buildings
1 Another Depreciation
And your GL_AP_Details has
GL Amount
1 $100
Your total for the query would result in $300 because the query is trying to join the AP Details GL #1 to EACH of the entries in the mapping file thus bloating the amount. You could also add a COUNT(*) as NumberOfEntries to the query to see how many transactions it THINKS it is processing. Is there some "unique ID" in the GL_AP_Details table? If so, then you could also do a count of DISTINCT ID values. If they are different (distinct is lower than # of entries), I think THAT is your culprit.
select
fm.new_mapping_1,
sum(gl.amount),
count(*) as NumberOfEntries,
count( distinct gl.UniqueIdField ) as DistinctTransactions
from
wbr_global.gl_ap_details gl
LEFT JOIN sandbox.utr_fixed_mapping_na fm
ON gl.account_number = fm.account_number
Where
gl.cost_center = '1172'
and gl.period_name = 'JUL-21'
and gl.ledger_name = 'Amazon.com, Inc.'
Group by
fm.new_mapping_1
Might you also need to limit the mapping table for a specific prophecy or mec view?
If you "think" that the result of an aggregate is wrong, then the easiest way to verify this is to select the individual rows that correlate to 1 record in the aggregate output and inspect the records, looking for duplications.
For instance, pick 'Building Management':
SELECT fixed.new_mapping_1,details.amount,*
FROM wbr_global.gl_ap_details details
LEFT JOIN sandbox.utr_fixed_mapping_na fixed ON details.account_number = fixed.account_number
WHERE details.cost_center = '1172'
AND details.period_name = 'JUL-21'
AND details.ledger_name = 'Amazon.com, Inc.'
AND details.account_number = 'Building Management'
Notice that we tack on a ,* to the end of the projection, this will show you everything that the query has access to, you should look for repeating sections of data that you were not expecting, then depending on which table they originate from your might add additional criteria to the JOIN, or to the WHERE or you might need to group by additional columns.
This type of issue is really hard to comment on in a forum like this because it is highly specific to your schema, and the data contained within it, making solutions highly subjective to criteria you are not likely to publish online.
Generally if you think a calculation is wrong, you need to manually compute it to verify, this above advice helps you to inspect the data your query is using, you should either construct your own query or use other tools to build the data set that helps you to manually compute the correct values, then work them back into or replace your original query.
The speed issues are out of scope here, we can comment on the poor schema design but I suspect you don't have a choice. In the utr_fixed_mapping_na table you should make the account_number have the same column type as the source data, or add a new column that has the data in the original type, then you can setup indexes on the columns to improve the speed of the join.
I have the following tables and their fields
They ask me for a query that seems to me quite complex, I have been going around for two days and trying things, it says:
It is desired to obtain the average age of female athletes, medal winners (gold, silver or bronze), for the different modalities of 'Artistic Gymnastics'. Analyze the possible contents of the result field in order to return only the expected values, even when there is no data of any specific value for the set of records displayed by the query. Specifically, we want to show the gender indicator of the athletes, the medal obtained, and the average age of these athletes. The age will be calculated by subtracting from the system date (SYSDATE), the date of birth of the athlete, dividing said value by 365. In order to avoid showing decimals, truncate (TRUNC) the result of the calculation of age. Order the results by the average age of the athletes.
Well right now I have this:
select person.gender,score.score
from person,athlete,score,competition,sport
where person.idperson = athlete.idathlete and
athlete.idathlete= score.idathlete and
competition.idsport = sport.idsport and
person.gender='F' and competition.idsport=18 and score.score in
('Gold','Silver','Bronze')
group by
person.gender,
score.score;
And I got this out
By adding the person.birthdate field instead of leaving 18 records of the 18 people who have a medal, I'm going to many more records.
Apart from that, I still have to draw the average age with SYSDATE and TRUNC that I try in many ways but I do not get it.
I see it very complicated or I'm a bit saturated from so much spinning, I need some help.
Reading the task you got, it seems that you're quite close to the solution. Have a look at the following query and its explanation, note the differences from your query, see if it helps.
select p.gender,
((sysdate - p.birthday) / 365) age,
s.score
from person p join athlete a on a.idathlete = p.idperson
left join score s on s.idathlete = a.idathlete
left join competition c on c.idcompetition = s.idcompetition
where p.gender = 'F'
and s.score in ('Gold', 'Silver', 'Bronze')
and c.idsport = 18
order by age;
when two dates are subtracted, the result is number of days. Dividing it by 365, you - roughly - get number of years (as each year has 365 days - that's for simplicity, of course, as not all years have that many days (hint: leap years)). The result is usually a decimal number, e.g. 23.912874918724. In order to avoid that, you were told to remove decimals, so - use TRUNC and get 23 as the result
although data model contains 5 tables, you don't have to use all of them in a query. Maybe the best approach is to go step-by-step. The first one would be to simply select all female athletes and calculate their age:
select p.gender,
((sysdate - p.birthday) / 365 age
from person p
where p.gender = 'F'
Note that I've used a table alias - I'd suggest you to use them too, as they make queries easier to read (table names can have really long names which don't help in readability). Also, always use table aliases to avoid confusion (which column belongs to which table)
Once you're satisfied with that result, move on to another table - athlete It is here just as a joining mechanism with the score table that contains ... well, scores. Note that I've used outer join for the score table because not all athletes have won the medal. I presume that this is what the task you've been given says:
... even when there is no data of any specific value for the set of records displayed by the query.
It is suggested that we - as developers - use explicit table joins which let you to see all joins separated from filters (which should be part of the WHERE clause). So:
NO : from person p, athlete a
where a.idathlete = p.idperson
and p.gender = 'F'
YES: from person p join athlete a on a.idathlete = p.idperson
where p.gender = 'F'
Then move to yet another table, and so forth.
Test frequently, all the time - don't skip steps. Move on to another one only when you're sure that the previous step's result is correct, as - in most cases - it won't automagically fix itself.
I have a database in which there are 13 different products, sold in 6 different countries.
Prices increase once a year.
Prices need to be calculated using a linear interpolation method. I have 21 different price and quantity increments for each product for each country for each year.
The user needs to be able to see how much an order would cost for any given value (as you would expect).
What the database needs to do (in English!) is to:
If there is a matching quantity from TblOrderDetail in the TblPrices,
use the price for the current product, country and year
if there isn't a matching quantity but the quantity required is greater than 1000 for one product (GT) and greater than 100 for every other product:
Find the highest quantity for the product, country and year (so, 1000 or 100, depending on the product), and calculate a pro-rated price. eg. If someone wanted 1500 of product GT for the UK for 2015, we'd look at the price for 1000 GT in the UK for 2015 and multiply it by 1.5. If 1800 were required, we'd multiply it by 1.8. I haven't been able to get this working yet as I'm looking at it alongside the formula for the next possibility...
If there isn't a matching quantity and the quantity required is less than 1000 for the product GT but 100 for the other products (this is the norm)...
Find the quantity and price for the increment directly below the quantity required by the user for the required product, country and year (let's call these quantitybelow and pricebelow)
Find the quantity and price for the increment directly above the quantity required by the user for the required product, country and year (let's call these quantityabove and priceabove)
Calculate the price for the required number of products for an account holder in a particular country for a given year using this formula.
ActualPrice: PriceBelow + ((PriceAbove - PriceBelow) * (The quantity required in the order detail - QuantityBelow) / (QuantityAbove - QuantityBelow))
I have spent days on this and have sought advice about this before but I am still getting very stuck.
The tables I've been working with to try and make this work are as follows:
TblAccount (primary key is AccountID, it also has a Country field which joins to the TblCountry.Code (primary key)
TblOrders (primary key is Order ID) which joins to TblAccount via the AccountID field; TblOrderDetail via the OrderID. This table also holds the OrderDate and Recipient ID which links to a person in TblContact - I don't need that here but will need it later to generate an invoice
TblOrderDetail (primary key is DetailID) which joins to TblOrders via OrderID field; TblProducts via ProductID field, and holds the Quantity required as well as the product
TblProducts (primary key is ProductCode) which as well as joining to TblOrderDetail, also joins to TblPrice via the Product field
TblPrices links to the TblProducts (as you have just read). I've also created an Alias for the TblCountry (CountryAliasForProductCode) so I can link it to the TblPrices to show the country link. I'm not sure if I needed to do this - it doesn't work if I do or I don't do it, so I seek guidance again here.
This is the code I've been trying to use (and failing) to get my price and quantity steps above and I hope to replicate it, making a couple of tweaks to get the steps below:
SELECT MIN(TblPrices.stepquantity) AS QuantityAbove, MIN(TblPrices.StepPrice) AS PriceAbove, TblOrders.OrderID, TblOrders.OldOrderID, TblOrders.AccountID, TblOrders.OrderDate, TblOrders.RecipientID, TblOrders.OrderStatus, TblOrderDetail.DetailID, TblOrderDetail.Product, TblOrderDetail.Quantity
FROM (TblCountry INNER JOIN ((TblAccount INNER JOIN TblOrders ON TblAccount.AccountID = TblOrders.AccountID) INNER JOIN (TblOrderDetail INNER JOIN TblProducts ON TblOrderDetail.Product = TblProducts.ProductCode) ON TblOrders.OrderID = TblOrderDetail.OrderID) ON TblCountry.Code = TblAccount.Country) INNER JOIN (TblCountry AS CountryAliasForProduct INNER JOIN TblPrices ON CountryAliasForProduct.Code = TblPrices.CountryCode) ON TblProducts.ProductCode = TblPrices.Product
WHERE (StepQuantity >= TblOrderDetails.Quantity)
AND (TblPrices.CountryCode = TblAccount.Country)
AND (TblOrderDetail.Product = TblPrices.Product)
AND (DATEPART('yyyy', TblPrices.DateEffective) = DATEPART('yyyy', TblOrders.OrderDate));
I've also tried...
I've even tried going back to basics and trying again to generate the steps below in 1 query, then try the steps above in another and finally, create the final calculation in another query.
This is what I have been trying to get my prices and quantities below:
SELECT Max(StepQuantity) AS quantity_below, Max(StepPrice) AS price_below, TblOrderDetails.Quantity, TblAccounts.Country
FROM
(TblProducts INNER JOIN TblPrices ON TblProducts.ProductCode = TblPrices.Product)
(TblOrderDetail INNER JOIN TblProducts ON TblOrderDetail.Product = TblProducts.ProductCode)
(TblOrders INNER JOIN TblOrderDetail ON TblOrders.OrderID = TblOrderDetail.OrderID)
(TblAccount INNER JOIN TblOrders ON TblAccount.AccountID = TblOrders.AccountID),
WHERE (((TblPrices.StepQuantity)<=(TblOrderDetail.Quantity)) AND ((TblPrices.CountryCode)=([TblAccounts].[country])) AND ((TblPrices.Product)=([TblOrderDetail].[product])) AND ((DatePart('yyyy',[TblPrices].[DateApplicable]))=(DatePart('yyyy',[TblOrders].[OrderDate]))));
You may be able to see glaring errors in this but I'm afraid I can't. I've tried re-jigging it and I'm getting nowhere.
I need to be able to tie the information in to the OrderDetail records as the price generated will need to be added to a financial transactions table as a debit amount and will show as an amount owing on statements.
I'm really not very good at SQL. I've read and worked though several self-study books and I have asked part of this question before; but I really am struggling with it. If anyone has any ideas on how to proceed, or even where I've gone wrong with my code, I'd be delighted, even if you tell me I shouldn't be using SQL. For the record, I originally posted this question on a different forum under Visual Basic. Responses from that forum brought me to SQL - however, anything that works would be good!
I've even tried, using Excel, concatenating the Year&Product&Country&Quantity to get a unique product code, interpolating the prices for every quantity between 1 and 1000 for each product, country and year and bringing them into a TblProductsAndPrices table. In Access, I created a query to concatenate the Year(of order date from tblOrders)&Product(of tblorderdetails)&Country(of tblAccount) in order to get the required product code for the order. Another query would find a price for me. However, any product code that doesn't appear on the list (such as where a quantity isn't listed in the tblProductsAndPrices as it is larger than the highest price increment) doesn't have a price.
If there was a workable solution to what I've just described that would generate a price for everything, then I'd be so pleased.
I'd really like to be able to generate an order for any quantity of any product for any account based in any country on any date and retrieve a price which will be used to "debit" a financial account in the database, who in a transaction history for an account and appear on statements. I'd also like to be able to do an ad-hoc price check on the spot.
Thank you very much for taking the time to read this. I really appreciate it. If you could offer any help or words of encouragement, I'd be very grateful.
Many thanks
Karen
Maybe no one thinks on an easy solution to the problem, since not all minds work in database thinking.
Easy solution: Create one view that gives all calculated values, not only the final one you need, each one as a column. Then you can use such view in a relation view and use on some rows one of the values and on other rows other values, etc.
How to think is simple, think in reverse order, instead of thinking "if that then I need to calculate such else I need this other", think as "I need "such" and I need "this other", both are columns of an intermediate view, then think on top level "if" that would be another view, such view will select the correct value ignoring the rest.
Never ever try to solve all in one step, that can be a really big headache.
Pros: You can isolate calculated values (needed or not), sql is much more easy to write and maintain.
Cons: Resources use is bigger than minimal, but most of times that extra calculated values does not represent a really big impact.
In terms of tutorial out there: Instead of a Top-Down method, use a Down-Top method.
Sometimes it is better (with your example) to calculate all three values (you write sentences on bold) ignoring the if part, and have all three possible values for your order and after that discard the ones not wanted, than trying to only calculate one.
Trying to calculate only one is thinking as a procedural programming, when working with databases most times one must get rid of such thinking and think as reverse, first do the most internal part of such procedural programming to have all data collected, then do the external selection of the procedural programing.
Note: If one of the values can not be calculated, just generate a Null.
I know it is hard to think on First in, last out (Down-Top) model, but it is great for things as the one you want.
Step1 (on specific view, or a join from one view per calculation):
Calculate column 1 as price for the current product, country and
year
Calculate column 2 as calculate a pro-rated price as if 1000
Calculate column 3 as calculate a pro-rated price as if 100
Calculate column 4 as etc
Calculate column N as etc
Step 2 (Another view, the one you want):
Calculate the if part, so you can choose adequate column from previous view (you can use immediately if or a calculated auxiliary field).
Hope you can follow theese way of thinking, I have solved a lot of things like that one (and more complex) thinking in that way, but it is not easy to think as that, needs an extra effort.
Good morning. I'm working in Responsys Interact, which is an Oracle-based email campaign management type SAAS product. I'm creating a query to basically filter a target list for an email campaign designed to target a specific sub-set of our master email contact list. Here's the query I created a few weeks ago that appears to work:
/*
Table Symbolic Name
CONTACTS_LIST $A$
Engaged $B$
TRANSACTIONS_RAW $C$
TRANSACTION_LINES_RAW $D$
-- A Responsys Filter (Engaged) will return only an RIID_, nothing else, according to John # Responsys....so,....let's join on that to contact list...
*/
SELECT
DISTINCT $A$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_,
$A$.RIID_,
$A$.FIRST_NAME,
$A$.LAST_NAME,
$A$.EMAIL_PERMISSION_STATUS_
FROM
$A$
JOIN $B$ ON $B$.RIID_ = $A$.RIID_
LEFT JOIN $C$ ON $C$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_ = $A$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_
LEFT JOIN $D$ ON $D$.TRANSACTION_ID = $C$.TRANSACTION_ID
WHERE
$A$.EMAIL_DOMAIN_ NOT IN ('none.com', 'noemail.com', 'mailinator.com', 'nomail.com') AND
/* don't include hp customers */
$A$.HP_PLAN_START_DATE IS NULL AND
$A$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_ NOT IN
(
SELECT
$C$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_
FROM
$C$
JOIN $D$ ON $D$.TRANSACTION_ID = $C$.TRANSACTION_ID
WHERE
/* Get only purchase transactions for certain item_id's/SKU's */
($D$.ITEM_FAMILY_ID IN (3,4,5,8,14,15) OR $D$.ITEM_ID IN (704,769,1893,2808,3013) ) AND
/* .... within last 60 days (i.e. 2 months) */
$A$.TRANDATE > ADD_MONTHS(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, -2)
)
;
This seems to work, in that if I run the query without the sub-query, we get 720K rows; and if I add back the 'AND NOT IN...' subquery, we get about 700K rows, which appears correct based on what my user knows about her data. What I'm (supposedly) doing with the NOT IN subquery is filtering out any email addresses where the customer has purchased certain items from us in the last 60 days.
So, now I need to add in another constraint. We still don't want customers who made certain purchases in the last 60 days as above, but now also we want to exclude customers who have purchased another particular item, but now within the last 12 months. So, I thought I would add another subquery, as shown below. Now, this has introduced several problems:
Performance - the query, which took a couple minutes to run before, now takes quite a few more minutes to run - in fact it seems to time out....
So, I wondered if there's an issue having two subqueries, but before I went to think about alternatives to this, I decided to test my new subquery by temporarily deleting the first subquery, so that I had just one subquery similar to above, but with the new item = 11 and within the last 12 months logic. And so with this, the query finally returned after a few minutes now, but with zero rows.
Trying to figure out why, I tried simply changing the AND NOT IN (subquery) to AND IN (subquery), and that worked, in that it returned a few thousand rows, as expected.
So why would the same SQL when using AND IN (subquery) "work", but the exact same SQL simply changed to AND NOT IN (subquery) return zero rows, instead of what I would expect which would be my 700 something thousdand plus rows, less the couple thousand encapsulated by the subquery result?
Also, what is the best i.e. most performant way to accomplish what I'm trying to do, which is filter by some purchases made within one date range, AND by some other purchases made within a different date range?
Here's the modified version:
SELECT
DISTINCT $A$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_,
$A$.RIID_,
$A$.FIRST_NAME,
$A$.LAST_NAME,
$A$.EMAIL_PERMISSION_STATUS_
FROM
$A$
JOIN $B$ ON $B$.RIID_ = $A$.RIID_
LEFT JOIN $C$ ON $C$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_ = $A$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_
LEFT JOIN $D$ ON $D$.TRANSACTION_ID = $C$.TRANSACTION_ID
WHERE
$A$.EMAIL_DOMAIN_ NOT IN ('none.com', 'noemail.com', 'mailinator.com', 'nomail.com') AND
/* don't include hp customers */
$A$.HP_PLAN_START_DATE IS NULL AND
$A$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_ NOT IN
(
SELECT
$C$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_
FROM
$C$
JOIN $D$ ON $D$.TRANSACTION_ID = $C$.TRANSACTION_ID
WHERE
/* Get only purchase transactions for certain item_id's/SKU's */
($D$.ITEM_FAMILY_ID IN (3,4,5,8,14,15) OR $D$.ITEM_ID IN (704,769,1893,2808,3013) ) AND
/* .... within last 60 days (i.e. 2 months) */
$C$.TRANDATE > ADD_MONTHS(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, -2)
)
AND
$A$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_ NOT IN
(
/* get purchase transactions for another type of item within last year */
SELECT
$C$.EMAIL_ADDRESS_
FROM
$C$
JOIN $D$ ON $D$.TRANSACTION_ID = $C$.TRANSACTION_ID
WHERE
$D$.ITEM_FAMILY_ID = 11 AND $C$.TRANDATE > ADD_MONTHS(CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, -12)
)
;
Thanks for any ideas/insights. I may be missing or mis-remembering some basic SQL concept here - if so please help me out! Also, Responsys Interact runs on top of Oracle - it's an Oracle product - but I don't know off hand what version/flavor. Thanks!
Looks like my problem with the new subquery was due to poor performance due to lack of indexes. Thanks to Alex Poole's comments, I looked in Responsys and there is a facility to get an 'explain' type analysis, and it was throwing warnings, and suggesting I build some indexes. Found the way to do that on the data sources, went back to the explain, and it said, "The query should run without placing an unnecessary burden on the system". And while it still ran for quite a few minutes, it did finally come back with close to the expected number of rows.
Now, I'm on to tackle the other half of the issue, which is to now incorporate this second sub-query in addition to the first, original subquery....
Ok, upon further testing/analysis and refining my stackoverflow search critieria, the answer to the main part of my question dealing with the IN vs. NOT IN can be found here: SQL "select where not in subquery" returns no results
My performance was helped by using Responsys's explain-like feature and adding some indexes, but when I did that, I also happened to add in a little extra SQL in my sub-query's WHERE clause.... when I removed that, even after indexes built, I was back to zero rows returned. That's because as it turned out at least one of the transactions rows for the item family id I was interested in for this additional sub-query had a null value for email address. And as further explained in the link above, when using NOT IN, as soon as you have a null value involved, SQL can't definitively say it's NOT IN, since you can't really compare to null, so as soon as you have a null, the sub-query's going to evaluate 'false', thus zero rows. When using IN, even though there are nulls present, if you get one positive match, well, that's a match, so the sub-query returns 'true', so that's why you'll get rows with IN, but not with NOT IN. I hadn't realized that some of our transaction data may have null email addresses - now I know, so I just added a where not null to the where clause for the email address, and now all's good.
This is a pretty basic problem and for whatever reason I can't find a reasonable solution. I'll do my best to explain.
Say you have an event ticket (section, row, seat #). Each ticket belongs to an attendee. Multiple tickets can belong to the same attendee. Each attendee has a worth (ex: Attendee #1 is worth $10,000). That said, here's what I want to do:
1. Group the tickets by their section
2. Get number of tickets (count)
3. Get total worth of the attendees in that section
Here's where I'm having problems: If Attendee #1 is worth $10,000 and is using 4 tickets, sum(attendees.worth) is returning $40,000. Which is not accurate. The worth should be $10,000. Yet when I make the result distinct on the attendee, the count is not accurate. In an ideal world it'd be nice to do something like
select
tickets.section,
count(tickets.*) as count,
sum(DISTINCT ON (attendees.id) attendees.worth) as total_worth
from
tickets
INNER JOIN
attendees ON attendees.id = tickets.attendee_id
GROUP BY tickets.section
Obviously this query doesn't work. How can I accomplish this same thing in a single query? OR is it even possible? I'd prefer to stay away from sub queries too because this is part of a much larger solution where I would need to do this across multiple tables.
Also, the worth should follow the ticket divided evenly. Ex: $10,000 / 4. Each ticket has an attendee worth of $5,000. So if the tickets are in different sections, they take their prorated worth with them.
Thanks for your help.
You need to aggregate the tickets before the attendees:
select ta.section, sum(ta.numtickets) as count, sum(a.worth) as total_worth
from (select attendee_id, section, count(*) as numtickets
from tickets
group by attendee_id, section
) ta INNER JOIN
attendees a
ON a.id = ta.attendee_id
GROUP BY ta.section
You still have a problem of a single attendee having seats in multiple sections. However, you do not specify how to solve that (apportion the worth? randomly choose one section? attribute it to all sections? canonically choose a section?)
Using jsonb_object_agg:
select
tickets.section,
count(tickets.*) as count,
(
SELECT SUM(value::int4)
FROM jsonb_each_text(jsonb_object_agg(attendees.id, attendees.worth))
) as total_worth
from
tickets
INNER JOIN
attendees ON attendees.id = tickets.attendee_id
GROUP BY tickets.section