Before I ask my question will layout what I'm trying to do.
I have this table such as below
Columns - PID, Choice1, Choice2,......Choice10
Rows - 1,X, O, X, O.........
Ive been searching on the net for quite some time and need a little push in the right direction if what I'm trying to do is possible. While getting the coding will help me with the small project I'm doing, it doesn't really help me learn more about SQl.
Is it possible to do a search on the table and return only the columns that have a value of X where PID = some value??
My gut instinct is saying no and I might have to restructure my database to accomplish what I'm doing. As i said a point in the right direction where I can read up on what I'm trying to do is great, getting the coding for it.. really doesn't help me learn it for future reference.
It does sound like you should restructure your database, but you can use PIVOT and UNPIVOT to transpose and restructure the output table. Columns are normally fixed with a variable number of rows depending on the WHERE clause. Using PIVOT can swap columns for rows, giving you what you need.
Related
Just inherited an Access database and trying to figure some things out. For the life of me, I have no idea what this query means.
SELECT [col1]/[col2].[col3]...
Its like the [col1]/[col2] is the table name and [col3] is the column. But instead of a table, it is math function (dividing two columns) followed by the column name. SELECT table.column....
I thought this might be inherent to someone with Access experience (or maybe this is some SQL that I am not familiar with). If it is not just comment and I will post all of the info.
SELECT [coly]/[table].[colx]...
I'm a new-ish programmer in R and I'm having a bit of an issue with some SQL code.
What I want to do is to convert this operation to base R code. I know it's quite complicated and I tried using merge but I didn't really manage to get anywhere.
Censored <- sqldf("SELECT Censored1.ModelYearID, Censored1.InServiceDate, Censored1.Censored, Censored1.VIN
FROM Censored1 LEFT JOIN Claims ON Censored1.VIN = Claims.VIN
GROUP BY Censored1.ModelYearID, Censored1.InServiceDate, Censored1.Censored, Censored1.VIN, Claims.VIN
HAVING (((Claims.VIN) Is Null))")
The reason I want to do this is because I have ~1600 different Claims tables in a data frame list (df_listl) which are named like this:
LabourOperation.ModelYearID e.g. Q123456.1997, Q234567.1998
and I need to run this query for every one of these tables, putting each of the comparable censored tables in the same kind of list.
If anyone could help me with this, that would be great. It's a bit complicated and I'm really struggling as I've only just learnt that you can put data frames in lists!
I was thinking that lapply might be a good way to go but I'm not very good with functions yet.
Thank you in advance :D
I have joined a new job where I am required to use FileMaker (and gradually transition systems to other databases). I have been a DB Admin of a MS SQL Server database for ~2 years, and I am very well versed in PL/SQL and T-SQL. I am trying to pan my SQL knowledge to FMP using the ExecuteSQL functionaloty, and I'm kinda running into a lot of small pains :)
I have 2 tables: Movies and Genres. The relevant columns are:
Movies(MovieId, MovieName, GenreId, Rating)
Genres(GenreId, GenreName)
I'm trying to find the movie with the highest rating in each genre. The SQL query for this would be:
SELECT M.MovieName
FROM Movies M INNER JOIN Genres G ON M.GenreId=G.GenreId
WHERE M.Rating=
(
SELECT MAX(Rating) FROM Movies WHERE GenreId = M.GenreId
)
I translated this as best as I could to an ExecuteSQL query:
ExecuteSQL ("
SELECT M::MovieName FROM Movies M INNER JOIN Genres G ON M::GenreId=G::GenreId
WHERE M::Rating =
(SELECT MAX(M2::Rating) FROM Movies M2 WHERE M2::GenreId = M::GenreId)
"; "" ; "")
I set the field type to Text and also ensured values are not stored. But all I see are '?' marks.
What am I doing incorrectly here? I'm sorry if it's something really stupid, but I'm new to FMP and any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thank you!
--
Ram
UPDATE: Solution and the thought process it took to get there:
Thanks to everyone that helped me solve the problem. You guys made me realize that traditional SQL thought process does not exactly pan to FMP, and when I probed around, what I realized is that to best use SQL knowledge in FMP, I should be considering each column independently and not think of the entire result set when I write a query. This would mean that for my current functionality, the JOIN is no longer necessary. The JOIN was to bring in the GenreName, which is a different column that FMP automatically maps. I just needed to remove the JOIN, and it works perfectly.
TL;DR: The thought process context should be the current column, not the entire expected result set.
Once again, thank you #MissJack, #Chuck (how did you even get that username?), #pft221 and #michael.hor257k
I've found that FileMaker is very particular in its formatting of queries using the ExecuteSQL function. In many cases, standard SQL syntax will work fine, but in some cases you have to make some slight (but important) tweaks.
I can see two things here that might be causing the problem...
ExecuteSQL ("
SELECT M::MovieName FROM Movies M INNER JOIN Genres G ON
M::GenreId=G::GenreId
WHERE M::Rating =
(SELECT MAX(M2::Rating) FROM Movies M2 WHERE M2::GenreId = M::GenreId)
"; "" ; "")
You can't use the standard FMP table::field format inside the query.
Within the quotes inside the ExecuteSQL function, you should follow the SQL format of table.column. So M::MovieName should be M.MovieName.
I don't see an AS anywhere in your code.
In order to create an alias, you must state it explicitly. For example, in your FROM, it should be Movies AS M.
I think if you fix those two things, it should probably work. However, I've had some trouble with JOINs myself, as my primary experience is with FMP, and I'm only just now becoming more familiar with SQL syntax.
Because it's incredibly hard to debug SQL in FMP, the best advice I can give you here is to start small. Begin with a very basic query, and once you're sure that's working, gradually add more complicated elements one at a time until you encounter the dreaded ?.
There's a number of great posts on FileMaker Hacks all about ExecuteSQL:
Since you're already familiar with SQL, I'd start with this one: The Missing FM 12 ExecuteSQL Reference. There's a link to a PDF of the entire article if you scroll down to the bottom of the post.
I was going to recommend a few more specific articles (like the series on Robust Coding, or Dynamic Parameters), but since I'm new here and I can't include more than 2 links, just go to FileMaker Hacks and search for "ExecuteSQL". You'll find a number of useful posts.
NB If you're using FMP Advanced, the Data Viewer is a great tool for testing SQL. But beware: complex queries on large databases can sometimes send it into fits and freeze the program.
The first thing to keep in mind when working with FileMaker and ExecuteSQL() is the difference between tables and table occurrences. This is a concept that's somewhat unique to FileMaker. Succinctly, tables store the data, but table occurrences define the context of that data. Table occurrences are what you're seeing in FileMaker's relationship graph, and the ExecuteSQL() function needs to reference the table occurrences in its query.
I agree with MissJack regarding the need to start small in building the SQL statement and use the Data Viewer in FileMaker Pro Advanced, but there's one more recommendation I can offer, which is to use SeedCode's SQL Explorer. It does require the adding of table occurrences and fields to duplicate the naming in your existing solution, but this is pretty easy to do and the file they offer includes a wizard for building the SQL query.
I have a table containing a series of survey responses, structured like this:
Question Category | Question Number | Respondent ID | Answer
This seemed the most logical storage for the data. The combination of Question Category, Question Number, and Respondent ID is unique.
Problem is, I've been asked for a report with the Respondent ID as the columns, with Answer as the rows. Since Answer is free-text, the numeric-expecting PIVOT command doesn't help. It would be great if each row was a specific Question Category / Question Number pairing so that all of the information is displayed in a single table.
Is this possible? I'm guessing a certain amount of dynamic SQL will be required, especially with the expected 50-odd surveys to display.
I think this task should be done by your client code - trying to do this transposing on SQL side is not very good idea. Such SQL (even if it can be constructed) will likely be extremely complicated and fragile.
First of all, you should count how many distinct answers are there - you probably don't want to create report 1000 columns wide if all answers are different. Also, you probably want to make sure that answers are narrow - what if someone gave really bad 1KB wide answer?
Then, you should construct your report (would that be HTML or something else) dynamically based on results of your standard, non-transposed SQL.
For example, in HTML you can create as many columns as you want using <th>column</th> for table header and <td>value</td> for data cell - as long as you know already how many columns are going to be in your output result.
To me, it seems that the problem is the number of columns. You don't know how many respondents there are.
One idea would be to concatenate the respondent ids. You can do this in SQL Server as:
select distinct Answer,
(select cast(RespondentId as varchar(255))+'; '
from Responses r2
where r2.Answer = r.Answer
for xml path ('')
) AllResponders
from Responses r
(This is untested so may have syntax errors.)
If reporting services or excel power pivot are possibilities for the report then they could both probably accomplish what you want easier than a straight sql query. In RS you can use a tablix, and in power pivot a pivot table. Both avoid having to define your pivot columns in an sql pivot statement, and both can dynamically determine the column names from a tabular result set.
I need to get data in multiple row of one column.
For example data from that format
ID Interest
Sports
Cooking
Movie
Reading
to that format
ID Interest
Sports,Cooking
Movie,Reading
I wonder that we can do that in MS Access sql. If anybody knows that, please help me on that.
Take a look at Allen Browne's approach: Concatenate values from related records
As for the normalization argument, I'm not suggesting you store concatenated values. But if you want to join them together for display purposes (like a report or form), I don't think you're violating the rules of normalization.
This is called de-normalizing data. It may be acceptable for final reporting. Apparently some experts believe it's good for something, as seen here.
(Mind you, kevchadder's question is right on.)
Have you looked into the SQL Pivot operation?
Take a look at this link:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms177410.aspx
Just noticed you're using access. Take a look at this article:
http://www.blueclaw-db.com/accessquerysql/pivot_query.htm
This is nothing you should do in SQL and it's most likely not possible at all.
Merging the rows in your application code shouldn't be too hard.