I have two tables in my setup. One with sales persons and there income. Each sales person only know their total income. For this particular income period, they are asked to give an estimate of their income on either private, small business or large business customers. This information is entered in the second table.
Income
=================
SalesPerson
Income
Distribution
=============================
SalesPerson
CustomerType
Weight
Now, my query would look something like this:
SELECT
Income.SalesPerson,
Distribution.CustomerType,
Income.Income * Distribution.Weight as DistributedIncome
FROM
Income INNER JOIN Distribution ON
Income.SalesPerson = Distribution.SalesPerson
How would I enforce, that the SUM(Weight) = 1 for each SalesPerson in Distribution?
Normalize by the sum, according to the same criteria.
SELECT
Income.SalesPerson,
Distribution.CustomerType,
Income.Income * Distribution.Weight/(
select sum(d.weight)
from distribution d
inner join income i on i.salesperson = d.salesperson
)
as DistributedIncome
FROM
Income INNER JOIN Distribution ON
Income.SalesPerson = Distribution.SalesPerson
If somehow want to select unmodified weights that sum to 1 then I believe you've got a case of the subset sum problem and you are probably not going to be able to solve this with an SQL query.
Related
I am trying to find the number of sales per petrol company. However I also want to include petrol companies that have made no sales but I cannot figure out how to do it. The stations table includes all the stations however sales only includes stations which actually had any sales.
This is how I am finding the number of sales per petrol station, but this doesnt include companies with 0 sales:
select stations.company,count(sales.sale)
from stations
join sales on stations.id=sales.stationid
group by stations.company;
My idea is to create a union with another query which just finds the companies with 0 sales but I don't know how to get a column with a 0 value in it. I tried to add having count(sales.sale) = 0 but since the stations with no sales just don't appear in the sales table that doesn't work.
I have looked at similar stack overflow questions but they all seem to reference using a different type of join however I have tried using left/right outer/inner joins with no luck.
You haven't provided a minimum reproducible example so I can't be entirely certain, but seems like a case of needing a LEFT JOIN. Try the query below :
SELECT stations.company, count(sales.sale) AS TotalSales
FROM stations
LEFT JOIN sales ON stations.id=sales.stationid
GROUP BY stations.company
So I have two tables of sales, budget and actual.
"budget" has two columns: location and sales. For example,
location sales
24 $20000
36 $100300
40 $24700
Total $145000
"actual" has three columns: invoice_number, location, and sales. For example,
invoice location sales
10000 36 $5000
10001 40 $6000
10002 99 $7000
and so forth
Total $110000
In summary, "actual" records transactions at the invoice level, whereas "budget" is done at the location level only (no individual invoices).
I'm trying to create a summary table that lists actual and budget sales side by side, grouped by location. The total of the actual column should be $110000, and $145000 for budget. This is my attempt at it (on pgAdmin/ postgresql):
SELECT actual.location, SUM(actual.sales) AS actual_sales, SUM(budget.sales) AS budget_sales
FROM actual LEFT JOIN budget
ON actual.location = budget.location
GROUP BY actual.location;
I used LEFT JOIN because "actual" has locations that "budget" doesn't have (e.g. location 99).
I ended up with some gigantic numbers ($millions) on both the actual_sales and budget_sales columns, far exceeding the total actual ($110000) or budget sales ($145,000).
Is this because the way I wrote my query is basically asking SQL to join each invoice in "actual" to each line in "budget," therefore duplicating things many times over? If so how should I have written this?
Thanks in advance!
Based on your description, you seem to have duplicates in both tables. There are various ways to solve this problem. Here is one using union all and group by:
select Location,
sum(actual_sales) as actual_sales,
sum(budget_sales) as budget_sales
from ((select a.location, a.sales as actual_sales, null as budget_sales
from actual a
) union all
(select b.location, null, b.sales
from budget b
)
) ab
group by location;
This structure guarantees that each value is counted only once, regardless of the table.
The query looks fine to me. However, it is difficult to find out why the figures are wrong. My suggestion is that you do the sum by location separately for budget and actual into 2 temporary tables, and later put them together using LEFT JOIN.
Yes, you're joining the budget in once for each actual sales row. However, your Actual Sales sum shouldn't have been larger unless there were multiple budget rows for the same location. You should check for that, because it doesn't sound like there should be.
What you need to do in a case like this is sum the actual sales first in a CTE or subquery, then later join the result to the budget. That way you only have one row for each location. This does it for the actual sales. If you really do have more than one row for a location for budget as well, you might need to subquery the budget as well the same way.
Select Act.Location, Act.actual_sales, budget.sales as budget_sales
From
(
SELECT actual.location, SUM(actual.sales) AS actual_sales
FROM actual
GROUP BY actual.location
) Act
left join budget on Act.location = budget.location
Gordon's suggestion is good, an alternative using WITH statements is:
WITH aloc AS (
SELECT location, SUM(sales) FROM actual GROUP BY 1
), bloc AS (
SELECT location, SUM(sales) FROM budget GROUP BY 1
)
SELECT location, a.sum AS actual_sales, b.sum AS budget_sales
FROM aloc a LEFT JOIN bloc b USING (location)
This is equivalent to:
SELECT location, a.sum AS actual_sales, b.sum AS budget_sales
FROM (SELECT location, SUM(sales) FROM actual GROUP BY 1) a LEFT JOIN
(SELECT location, SUM(sales) FROM budget GROUP BY 1) b USING (location)
but I find WITH statements more readable.
The purpose of the subqueries is to get tables into a state where a row means something relevant, i.e. aloc contains a row per location, and hence cause the join to evaluate to what you want.
I need to write query and calculate the total CostPrice’s and total Sellprice’s related to Material of ID=1. I want to calculate total costs so I have to include the QuantityColumn from the table Materials right?
SELECT SUM((CostPrice) * M.Quantity) AS 'TotalCostExclusive', SUM((SellPrice) * M.Quantity) AS 'SellPriceExclusive'
FROM Materials AS M INNER JOIN Warehouse AS W
ON M.Warehouse_id = W.Id
WHERE M.Material_Id = '1';
I tried this, but I'm not sure the result is equal to the required task.
Now I want to write new query to include the Discount on both cost and selling prices.
Since I’m a beginner and this data model is for student purpose, I would like to know why I must to have a table WarehouseIdentities. What exactly this table doing here and what role it has.
I have seen other questions like this one but feel mine is a bit different, or didn't quite understand the SQL in the other questions...so my apologies if this one is redundant or very easy..
Anyway, I have an accounting transaction DB that stores every transaction posting within our financial system on one line. What I am trying to do is net the sum of the debits and the credits for each GL account.
Here are the two basic queries I am executing to get the results that I would like to net.
Query 1 gives me the sum of all debit transactions posting to each gl account:
Select gl_debit, sum (amt) from FISC_YEAR2014 where fund = 'XXX'
group by gl_debit
Query 2 gives me the sum of all credit transactions posting to each gl account:
select gl_credit, sum (amt) from FISC_YEAR2014 where fund = 'XXX'
group by gl_credt
Now I would to subtract the credit amounts from the debit amounts to get net totals for each gl account. Make sense?
Thanks.
There are two ways to do this depending our your table definition. I think your situation is the first.
This is the normal way assuming credits and debits are in separate columns:
SELECT sum(gl_debit)-sum(gl_credit) as net_debit
FROM FISC_YEAR2014
WHERE fund = 'XXX'
This is the other way assuming direction is indicated by a separate column:
SELECT SUM(IF(is_debit=1,amount,-1*amount)) as net_debit
FROM FISC_YEAR2014
WHERE fund = 'XXX'
See also:
MySQL 'IF' in 'SELECT' statement
Can't calculate totals in general ledger report
What's a good way to store a financial ledger?
I believe this is what you need:
select
gl_account,
sum(amt)
from
(
select gl_debit gl_account,
sum(-amt) amt
from fisc_year2014
where fund = 'XXX'
group by gl_debit
union all
select gl_credit,
sum(amt)
from fisc_year2014
where fund = 'XXX'
group by gl_credit
)
group by
gl_account
There are two SELECTs: one to get the (negative) debits and another to get the credits. They are UNIONed to create a two-column result. The outer SELECT then aggregates the total sum by the gl_account code. If there is a mismatch (a gl_debit without a gl_credit, or vice-versa), then its amount would still be displayed.
SQLFiddle here (I added another row to show the effect of mismatched IDs)
To do this you should SUM the debits and credits separately in subqueries, then join those subqueries on gl_credit = gl_debit.
SELECT COALESCE(gl_credit, gl_debit) AS Id
,COALESCE(d.amt,0)-COALESCE(c.amt,0) AS Net
FROM (
SELECT gl_debit, SUM(amt) AS amt
FROM FISC_YEAR2014
GROUP BY gl_debit
) d
FULL OUTER JOIN (
SELECT gl_credit, SUM(amt) AS amt
FROM FISC_YEAR2014
GROUP BY gl_credit
) c ON d.gl_debit = c.gl_credit
ORDER BY COALESCE(gl_credit, gl_debit)
SQLFiddle
Outputs:
ID Net
-----------
101 -475
201 225
301 500
501 -250
If I were you rather than using a FULL OUTER JOIN, I'd select the ids from the accounts table or wherever you store them, then LEFT JOIN both of the subqueries to it, you haven't shown any other tables though so I can only speculate.
I am trying to write a query that will use the sum function to add up all values in 1 column then divide by the count of tuples in another table. For some reason when i run the sum query by itself i get the correct number back but when i use it in my query below the value is wrong.
this is what im trying to do but the numbers are coming out wrong.
select (sum(adonated) / count(p.pid)) as "Amount donated per Child"
from tsponsors s, player p;
I found out the issue is in the sum. below returns 650,000 when it should return 25000
select (sum(adonated)) as "Amount donated per Child"
from tsponsors s, player p;
if i remove the from player p it gets the correct amount. However i need the player table to get the number of players.
I have 3 tables that are related to this query.
player(pid, tid(fk))
team(tid)
tsponsors(tid(fk), adonated, sid(fk)) this is a joining table
what i want to get is the sum of all the amounts donated to each team sum(adonated) and divide this by the number of players in the database count(pid).
I guess your sponsors are giving amounts to teams. You then want to know the proportion of donations per child in the sponsored team.
You would then need something like this:
SELECT p.tid,(SUM(COALESCE(s.adonated,0)) / COUNT(p.pid)) AS "Amount donated per Child"
FROM player p
LEFT OUTER JOIN tsponsors s ON s.tid=p.tid
GROUP BY p.tid
I also used a LEFT OUTER JOIN in order to show 0$ if a team has no sponsors.
Try
select sum(s.adonated) / (SELECT count(p.pid) FROM player p)
as "Amount donated per Child"
from tsponsors s;
Your original query joins 2 tables without any condition, which results in cross join.
UPDATE
SELECT ts.tid, SUM(ts.adonated),num_plyr
FROM tsponsors ts
INNER JOIN
(
SELECT tid, COUNT(pid) as num_plyr
FROM player
GROUP BY tid
)a ON (a.tid = ts.tid)
GROUP BY ts.tid,num_plyr