I want to create a geography dimension using ssis 2008.I have 3 table sources.
Here is the explanation
Table 1 = Country: country code and country name
Table 2 = Post code: post code and city name
Table 3 = Territory : Territory code and Territory name
Here is how data looks
[Table 1= Country]
code name
------------------
US | United states
CA | Canada
[Table 2= post code]
Code city
---------------
1000 | Paris
2000 | Niece
[Table 3= Territory]
Code name
----------------
N | North
S | south
As you can see there is no single common column, I want to group these 3 tables in the same geography dimension.
So, how can I do it ?
Also,The use of this geography dim will be when another dimension for example customer dimension.we want to know the revenue of client according to his geography or the the top salespersons in some city.
and in both customer and salesperson tables you can find the those 3 as foreign keys.
You don't need a "common column" shared by all three tables.
You do need a "column column" between each pair of tables. How else are you going to link them???
Q: Is there any column that links "Country" to "City"? You should have a "country code" column in "city".
Q: Is there any way to link "Territory" with either "post code" or "country"? If "Yes": problem solved. Please list the fields. If "No" ... then you need to change your schema.
Based on you comment to paulsm4 you then want to use those tables that hold the linking information to join to each of the above 3 tables.
On the other hand if you really want to join just those three tables
select * from Country
full outer join [Post code]
on 'a' = 'a'
full outer join Territory
on 'b' = 'b'
create table dim.geography (geoID int,citycode int, countrycode char(2),territorycode char(1))
insert into dim.geography (select city as citycode,country as countrycode, territory as territorycode from Customer union select city, country,territory from salesperson)
Assuming here that Customer and salesperson tables hold the codes and not the values for country,territory, and country.
The code above will build a dimension for the geography you want. Of course if you add any additional unique city,country,territory codes into the customer/salesperson tables you will need to add it to your dimension. This is just an initial load. You may also need to modify the code to account for nulls in any of the three qualifiers.
Related
I have problem with updating query in Access. I have 3 tables:
City
ID | CityName | CountryID|
Country
ID | CountryName
CityImport
City | Country
I'm not sure if it's the right design, but it's of a lesser importance now.
I want to update my db with Excel data. I decided to create CityImport table to make the process clearer. I put city information in this table and I want fill City table with it. When I run a query like UPDATE (CityImport INNER JOIN Country ON CityImport.Country = Country.CountryName) LEFT JOIN City ON City.CityName = CityImport.City AND City.CountryID = Country.ID SET City.CityName = CityImport.City, City.CountryID = Country.ID WHERE CityImport.City IS NOT NULL, I get JOIN expression not supported error.
I thought it was a problem with my syntax, but if I remove one condition from JOIN, and leave it as UPDATE (CityImport INNER JOIN Country ON CityImport.Country = Country.CountryName) LEFT JOIN City ON City.CityName = CityImport.City SET City.CityName = CityImport.City, City.CountryID = Country.ID WHERE CityImport.City IS NOT NULL, it works fine. The problem is that it ignores cities with the same name in different countries.
Is it possible to make such join work properly somehow? Or is it incorrect by definition? It requires to join one one table with another join results on two columns from different tables. I could probably work around it somehow in this case, but I want to use the same method for more, more complicated tables.
I played around with different takes on this query for few hours, googled hundred times, but still no success.
The first problem I can see is that you're using UPDATE to insert data into a table. You should be using INSERT INTO.
Starting with this table:
You'll need to insert the unique Country names into the country table first:
INSERT INTO Country (Country)
SELECT DISTINCT Country
FROM CityImport
This will give you this table:
Now you need to populate the City table with city names and the ID's from the Country table:
INSERT INTO City (CityName, CountryID)
SELECT City, Country.ID
FROM CityImport INNER JOIN Country ON CityImport.Country = Country.Country
This returns this table:
Edit:
Table Structure:
CityImport
City - Text
Country - Text
Country
ID - AutoNumber
Country - Text
Primary Key: ID
City
ID - AutoNumber
CityName - Text
CountryID - Number
Primary Key: ID
Foreign Key CountryID References Country
I have a user table that has among others the fields CityId, StateId, CountryId. I was wondering if it was a good idea to store them[City, State, Country] in separate tables and put their respective ids in the User table or put all the three entities in one table.
While the former is conventional, I am concerned about the extra tables to join and so would want to store all these three different location types in one table like so
RowId - unique row id
LocationType - 1 for City, 2 for state, etc
ActualLocation - Can be a city name if the locationType is 1 and so on..
RowId LocationType ActualLocation
1 1 Waltham
2 1 Yokohama
3 2 Delaware
4 2 Wyoming
5 3 US
6 3 Japan
the problem is I am only able to get the city name for all three fields using a join like this
select L.ActualLocation as CityName,
L.ActualLocation as StateName,
L.ActualLocation as CountryName
from UserTable U,
AllLocations L
WHERE
(L.ID = U.City and L.LocationType= 1)
AND
(L.ID = U.State and L.LocationType = 2)
What worked best for us was to have a country table (totally separate table, which can store other country related information, a state table (ditto), and then the city table with ID's to the other tables.
CREATE TABLE Country (CountryID int, Name varchar(50))
CERATE TABLE State (StateID int, CountryID int, Name varchar(50))
CREATE TABLE City (CityID int, StateID int, Name varchar(50))
This way you can enforce referential integrity using standard database functions and add additional information about each entity without having a bunch of blank columns or 'special' values.
You actually need to select from your location table three times - so you will still have the joins:
select L1.ActualLocation as CityName,
L2.ActualLocation as StateName,
L3.ActualLocation as CountryName
from UserTable U,
AllLocations L1,
AllLocations L2,
AllLocations L3
WHERE
(L1.ID = U.City and L1.LocationType= 1)
AND
(L2.ID = U.State and L2.LocationType = 2)
AND
(L3.ID = U.Country and L3.LocationType = 3)
HOWEVER
Depending what you want to do with this, you might want to think about the model... You probably want a separate table that would contain the location "Springfield Missouri" and "Springfield Illinois" - depending how "well" you want to manage this data, you would need to manage the states and countries as separate inter-related reference data (see, for example, ISO 3361 part 2). Most likely overkill for you though, and it might be easiest just to store the text of the location with the user - not "pure" modeling, but much simplified for simple needs... just pulling the "word" out into a separate table doesn't really give you much other than complex queries
I have a database on access and I want to add a value to a column at the end of each row based on which hospital they are in. This is a separate value. For example - the hospital called "St. James Hospital" has the id of "3" in a separate field. How do I do this using a query rather than manually going through a whole database?
example here
Not the best solution, but you can do something like this:
create table new_table as
select id, case when hospital="St. James Hospital" then 3 else null
from old_table
Or, the better option would be to create a table with the columns hospital_name and hospital_id. You can then create a foreign key relationship that will create the mapping for you, and enforce data integrity. A join across the two tables will produce what you want.
Read about this here:
http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/databases/sql-for-beginners-part-3-database-relationships/
The answer to your question is a JOIN+UPDATE. I am fairly sure if you looked up you would find the below link.
Access DB update one table with value from another
You could do this:
update yourTable
set yourFinalColumnWhateverItsNameIs = {your desired value}
where someColumn = 3
Every row in the table that has a 3 in the someColumn column will then have that final column set to your desired value.
If this isn't what you want, please make your question clearer. Are you trying to put the name of the hospital into this table? If so, that is not a good idea and there are better ways to accomplish that.
Furthermore, if every row with a certain value (3) gets this value, you could simply add it to the other (i.e. Hospitals) table. No need to repeat it everywhere in the table that points back to the Hospitals table.
P.S. Here's an example of what I meant:
Let's say you have two tables
HOSPITALS
id
name
city
state
BIRTHS
id
hospitalid
babysname
gender
mothersname
fathername
You could get a baby's city of birth without having to include the City column in the Births table, simply by joining the tables on hospitals.id = births.hospitalid.
After examining your ACCDB file, I suggest you consider setting up the tables differently.
Table Health_Professionals:
ID First Name Second Name Position hospital_id
1 John Doe PI 2
2 Joe Smith Co-PI 1
3 Sarah Johnson Nurse 3
Table Hospitals:
hospital_id Hospital
1 Beaumont
2 St James
3 Letterkenny Hosptial
A key point is to avoid storing both the hospital ID and name in the Health_Professionals table. Store only the ID. When you need to see the name, use the hospital ID to join with the Hospitals table and get the name from there.
A useful side effect of this design is that if anyone ever misspells a hospital name, eg "Hosptial", you need correct that error in only one place. Same holds true whenever a hospital is intentionally renamed.
Based on those tables, the query below returns this result set.
ID Second Name First Name Position hospital_id Hospital
1 Doe John PI 2 St James
3 Johnson Sarah Nurse 3 Letterkenny Hosptial
2 Smith Joe Co-PI 1 Beaumont
SELECT
hp.ID,
hp.[Second Name],
hp.[First Name],
hp.Position,
hp.hospital_id,
h.Hospital
FROM
Health_Professionals AS hp
INNER JOIN Hospitals AS h
ON hp.hospital_id = h.hospital_id
ORDER BY
hp.[Second Name],
hp.[First Name];
I have a table
custd
name email no
kuldeep kldthakur#gmail.com 99
and second table
pkd
list weight type address name
p1 100 formal delhi kuldeep
Now I want to search the detail by name from the database and the detail should be come from the both table like :-
name email no list weight type address
kuldeep kldthakur#gmail.com 99 p1 100 formal delhi
Please tell the how I can solve this prob. with which query I'm using sql server.
Well, you just need a join. It looks like you have a foreign key on name, so this should work:
select * from custd c
join pkd p on c.name = p.name
This should do:
select pkd.name
,custd.email
,custd.no
,pkd.list
,pkd.weight
,pkd.type
,pkd.address
from custd join pkd on pkd.name=custd.name
But we aware that if name is not a unique key, you can get lots of incorrect results.
Could someone give me an idea how to create this database structure.
Here is an example:
Table "countries":
id, countryname
1, "US"
2, "DE"
3, "FR"
4, "IT"
Now I have another table "products" and in there I would like to store all countries where this product is available:
Table "products":
id,productname,countries
1,"product1",(1,2,4) // available in countries US, DE, IT.
2,"product2",(2,3,4) // available in countries DE, FR, IT.
My question:
How do I design the table structure in "products" to be able to store multiple countries?
My best idea is to put a comma-separated string in there (i.e. "1,2,4"), then split that string to look up each entry. But I doubt that this the best way to do this?
EDIT: Thank you all for your help, amazing! It was difficult to choose the right answer,
I finally chose Gregs because he pointed me to a JOIN explanation and gave an example how to use it.
You need an intersection table for that many-to-many relationship.
Table Country
CountryID, CountryName
Table CountryProduct
CountryID, ProductID
Table Product
ProductID, ProductName
You then Inner Join all 3 tables to get your list of Countries & Products.
Select * From Country
Inner Join CountryProduct On Country.CountryID = CountryProduct.CountryID
Inner Join Product On CountryProduct.ProductID = Product.ProductID
Without denormalizing, you'll need to add an extra table
Table Product countries
ProductID CountryID
1 1
1 2
1 4...
What you're talking about is normalisation. You have a many-to-many structure, so you should create another table to link the two. You should never (ok, pretty much never) use delimited strings to store a list of values in a relational database.
Here's an example of the setup:
product_countries table
productid | countryid
----------+-----------
1 | 1
1 | 2
1 | 4
2 | 2
2 | 3
2 | 4
You can use a foreign key to each other table, then make them both into a composite primary key.
You can then get a list of supported products for a country ID like this:
SELECT * FROM products, product_countries
WHERE products.id = product_countries.productid
AND product_countries.countryid = $cid
You could also make a third table countries_products with fields country_id and product_id.
the best approach for relational databases is the following :
One table for coutries, let's say
country_id, country_desc (country_id is primary)
one table for products, let's say
product_id, product_desc and as many columns as you want (product_id is primary)
if you had only one country for sure, it'd be enough to have a foreign key pointing to country_id in each product row. Having a foreign key asserts that there is an actual country behing a country_id referring to country table.
In your case you have several countries for a product, so add a separate association table
product_id, country_id
both keys primary and both foreign as well.