Using SQL Server 2000
Table1
Column1
20
30
40
20
40
30
30
I want take a count like this
20 - 2
30 - 3
40 - 2
In case if the column value 20 or 30 or 40 is not available, it should display 20 - 0 or 30 - 0 or 40 - 0.
For example
Column1
20
30
20
30
30
Expected output
20 - 2
30 - 3
40 - 0
I will get only 20, 30. 40. No more value will come.
How to make a query
Need help
select item,count (item) from table group by item
EDIT : ( after your edit)
CREATE TABLE #table1 ( numbers int )
insert into #table1 (numbers) select 20
insert into #table1 (numbers) select 30
insert into #table1 (numbers) select 40
SELECT [num]
FROM [DavidCard].[dbo].[sssssss]
select numbers,count (num) from #table1 LEFT JOIN [sssssss] ON #table1.numbers = [sssssss].num group by numbers
SQL Query 101:
SELECT Column1, COUNT(*)
FROM dbo.YourTable
GROUP BY Column1
ORDER BY Column1
Update: if you want to get a list of possible values, and their potential count (or 0) in another table, you need two tables, basically - one with all the possible values, one with the actual values - and a LEFT OUTER JOIN to put them together - something like:
SELECT
p.Column1, ISNULL(COUNT(t.Column1), 0)
FROM
(SELECT 20 AS 'Column1'
UNION
SELECT 30
UNION
SELECT 40) AS p
LEFT OUTER JOIN
dbo.YourTable t ON t.Column1 = p.Column1
GROUP BY
p.Column1
ORDER BY
p.Column1
Related
How can I use countif statement in PostgreSQL?
max(COUNTIF(t1.A1:C10,t2.a1),COUNTIF(t1.A1:C10,t2.b1),COUNTIF(t1.A1:C10,t2.c1))
I have table1 which is more then a million rows
a
b
c
M5
16
27
31
3
7
27
and table2 more then 100 rows including different dates after column c
a
b
c
10
15
16
30
40
50
60
70
80
16
18
37
5
12
16
8
31
28
11
12
13
7
9
31
2
7
21
20
16
27
8
12
17
2
8
14
3
14
15
The outcome should be something like this
a
b
c
M5
16
27
31
3
3
7
27
2
Tried the below query but the outcome is not correct
UPDATE table1 SET m5 = greatest(
case When a in(select unnest(array[a,b,c]) from (select * from table2 order by date DESC limit 10) foo) then 1 else 0 END,
case When b in(select unnest(array[a,b,c]) from (select * from table2 order by date DESC limit 10) foo) then 1 else 0 END,
case When c in(select unnest(array[a,b,c]) from (select * from table2 order by date DESC limit 10) foo) then 1 else 0 END)
Assuming your columns are fixed and predictable, I think you could put all possible table values into a single column and then do counts for each occurrence:
with exploded as (
select a from table2
union all
select b from table2
union all
select c from table2
)
select a, count (*) as count
from exploded e
group by a
So for example, the value 7 occurs twice (which would be reflected in this output).
From there, you can just do the updates from the CTE:
with exploded as (
select a from table2
union all
select b from table2
union all
select c from table2
),
counted as (
select a, count (*) as count
from exploded e
group by a
)
update table1 t
set m5 = greatest (ca.count, cb.count, cc.count)
from
counted ca,
counted cb,
counted cc
where
t.a = ca.a and
t.b = cb.a and
t.c = cc.a
The only issue I see is if one of the values does not come up (the inner join fails), but in your example that doesn't seem to happen.
If it is possible, I would think that could be resolved with one more CTE to fill in missing values from table1 in the set of possible occurrences.
I have the following dataset:
ID Amount
1 50
2 6
3 7
3 50
4 60
4 30
5 40
5 20
I only want to keep IDs with multiple entries that have at least one amount greater than, or equal to, 50. The final result would look like this:
ID Amount
3 7
3 50
4 60
4 30
How would I go about doing this?
You can use exists:
select t.*
from t
where exists (select 1
from t t2
where t2.id = t.id and t2.amount >= 50
);
You can use windows function max as follows:
select * from
(select t.*, max(amount) over (partition by id) as max_
from your_table t) t
where max_ >= 50
you can try like below
select t1.* from table_name t1
where 50 >=( select max(amount) from table_name t2
where t1.id=t2.id)
I am trying to determine how to group records together based the cumulative total of the Qty column so that the group size doesn't exceed 50. The desired group is given in the group column with sample data below.
Is there a way to accomplish this in SQL (specifically SQL Server 2012)?
Thank you for any assistance.
ID Qty Group
1 10 1
2 20 1
3 30 2 <- 60 greater than 50 so new group
4 40 3
5 2 3
6 3 3
7 10 4
8 25 4
9 15 4
10 5 5
You can use CTE to achieve the goal.
If one of the item exceeds Qty 50, a group still assign for it
DECLARE #Data TABLE (ID int identity(1,1) primary key, Qty int)
INSERT #Data VALUES (10), (20), (30), (40), (2), (3), (10), (25), (15), (5)
;WITH cte AS
(
SELECT ID, Qty, 1 AS [Group], Qty AS RunningTotal FROM #Data WHERE ID = 1
UNION ALL
SELECT data.ID, data.Qty,
-- The group limits to 50 Qty
CASE WHEN cte.RunningTotal + data.Qty > 50 THEN cte.[Group] + 1 ELSE cte.[Group] END,
-- Reset the running total for each new group
data.Qty + CASE WHEN cte.RunningTotal + data.Qty > 50 THEN 0 ELSE cte.RunningTotal END
FROM #Data data INNER JOIN cte ON data.ID = cte.ID + 1
)
SELECT ID, Qty, [Group] FROM cte
The following query gives you most of what you want. One more self-join of the result would compute the group sizes:
select a.ID, G, sum(b.Qty) as Total
from (
select max(ID) as ID, G
from (
select a.ID, sum(b.Qty) / 50 as G
from T as a join T as b
where a.ID >= b.ID
group by a.ID
) as A
group by G
) as a join T as b
where a.ID >= b.ID
group by a.ID
ID G Total
---------- ---------- ----------
2 0 30
3 1 60
8 2 140
10 3 160
The two important tricks:
Use a self-join with an inequality to get running totals
Use integer division to calculate group numbers.
I discuss this and other techniques on my canonical SQL page.
You need to create a stored procedure for this.
If you have Group column in your database then you have to take care about it while inserting a new record by fetching the max Group value and its sum of Qty column otherwise if you want Group column as computed in select statement then you have to code stored procedure accordingly.
given the following Table1:
RefID intVal SomeVal
----------------------
1 10 val01
1 20 val02
1 30 val03
1 40 val04
1 50 val05
2 10 val06
2 20 val07
2 30 val08
2 40 val09
2 50 val10
3 12 val11
3 14 val12
4 10 val13
5 100 val14
5 150 val15
5 1000 val16
and Table2 containing some RefIDs and intVals like
RefID intVal
-------------
1 11
1 28
2 9
2 50
2 51
4 11
5 1
5 150
5 151
need an SQL Statement to get the next greater intValue for each RefID and NULL if not found in Table1
following is the expected result
RefID intVal nextGt SomeVal
------------------------------
1 11 20 val01
1 28 30 val03
2 9 10 val06
2 50 50 val10
2 51 NULL NULL
4 11 NULL NULL
5 1 100 val14
5 150 150 val15
5 151 1000 val16
help would be appreciated !
Derived table a retrieves minimal values from table1 given refid and intVal from table2; outer query retrieves someValue only.
select a.refid, a.intVal, a.nextGt, table1.SomeVal
from
(
select table2.refid, table2.intval, min (table1.intVal) nextGt
from table2
left join table1
on table2.refid = table1.refid
and table2.intVal <= table1.intVal
group by table2.refid, table2.intval
) a
-- table1 is joined again to retrieve SomeVal
left join table1
on a.refid = table1.refid
and a.nextGt = table1.intVal
Here is Sql Fiddle with live test.
You can solve this using the ROW_NUMBER() function:
SELECT
RefID,
intVal,
NextGt,
SomeVal,
FROM
(
SELECT
t2.RefID,
t2.intVal,
t1.intVal AS NextGt,
t1.SomeVal,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY t2.RefID, t2.intVal ORDER BY t1.intVal) AS rn
FROM
dbo.Table2 AS t2
LEFT JOIN dbo.Table1 AS t1 ON t1.RefID = t2.RefID AND t1.intVal >= t2.intVal
) s
WHERE
rn = 1
;
The derived table matches each Table2 row with all Table1 rows that have the same RefID and an intVal that is greater than or equal to Table2.intVal. Each subset of matches is ranked and the first row is returned by the main query.
The nested query uses an outer join, so that those Table2 rows that have no Table1 matches are still returned (with nulls substituted for the Table1 columns).
Alternatively you can use OUTER APPLY:
SELECT
t2.RefID,
t2.intVal,
t1.intVal AS NextGt,
t1.SomeVal
FROM
dbo.Table2 AS t2
OUTER APPLY
(
SELECT TOP (1)
t1.intVal
FROM
dbo.Table1 AS t1
WHERE
t1.RefID = t2.RefID
AND t1.intVal >= t2.intVal
ORDER BY
t1.intVal ASC
) AS t1
;
This method is arguably more straightforward: for each Table2 row, get all matches from Table1 based on the same set of conditions, sort the matches in the ascending order of Table1.intVal and take the topmost intVal.
This can be done with a join, group by, and a case statement, and a trick:
select t1.refid, t2.intval,
min(case when t1.intval > t2.intval then t1.intval end) as min_greater_than_ref,
substring(min(case when t1.intval > t2.intval
then right('00000000'+cast(t1.intval as varchar(255)), 8)+t1.SomeVal)
end)), 9, 1000)
from table1 t1 left join
table2 t2
on t1.refid = t2.refid
group by t1.refid, t2.intval
SO, the trick is to prepend the integer value to SomeValue, zero-padding the integer value (in this case to 8 characters). You get something like: "00000020val01". The minimum on this column is based on the minimum of the integer. The final step is to extract the value.
For this example, I used SQL Server syntax for the concatenation. In other databases you might use CONCAT() or ||.
Given following table:
rowId AccountId Organization1 Organization2
-----------------------------------------------
1 1 20 10
2 1 10 20
3 1 40 30
4 2 15 10
5 2 20 15
6 2 10 20
How do I identify the records where Organization2 doesn't exist in Organization1 for a particular account
for instance, in the given data above my results will be a single record which will be AccountId 1 because row3 organization2 value 30 doesn't exist in organization1 for that particular account.
SELECT rowId, AccountId, Organization1, Organization2
FROM yourTable yt
WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM yourTable yt2 WHERE yt.AccountId = yt2.AccountId AND yt.Organization1 = yt2.Organization2)
There are two possible interpretations of your question. The first (where the Organization1 and Organization2 columns are not equal) is trivial:
SELECT AccountID FROM Table WHERE Organization1 <> Organization2
But I suspect you're asking the slightly more difficult interpretation (where Organization2 does not appear in ANY Organization1 value for the same account):
SELECT AccountID From Table T1 WHERE Organization2 NOT IN
(SELECT Organization1 FROM Table T2 WHERE T2.AccountID = T1.AccountID)
Here is a how you could do it:
Test data:
CREATE TABLE #T(rowid int, acc int, org1 int, org2 int)
INSERT #T
SELECT 1,1,10,10 UNION
SELECT 2,1,20,20 UNION
SELECT 3,1,40,30 UNION
SELECT 4,2,10,10 UNION
SELECT 5,2,15,15 UNION
SELECT 6,2,20,20
Then perform a self-join to discover missing org2:
SELECT
*
FROM #T T1
LEFT JOIN
#T T2
ON t1.org1 = t2.org2
AND t1.acc = t2.acc
WHERE t2.org1 IS NULL
SELECT
*
FROM
[YorTable]
WHERE
[Organization1] <> [Organization2] -- The '<>' is read "Does Not Equal".
Use left join as Noel Abrahams presented.