I have the following table in my database:
user_id | p1 | p2 | p3
1 | x | y | z
2 | x | x | x
3 | y | y | z
I need to find the row(s) that contains the most common value between that same row.
i.e., the first row has no common value, the second contain three common values and the third one contains two common values.
Then, the output in this case should be
user_id | p1 | p2 | p3
2 | x | x | x
Any ideas?
(It would be nice if the solution did not require a vendor-specific feature, but anything will help).
For a non vendor specific solution You could do
SELECT *
FROM YourTable
ORDER BY
CASE WHEN p1=p2 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END +
CASE WHEN p1=p3 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END +
CASE WHEN p2=p3 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END DESC
And then LIMIT, TOP, ROW_NUMBER or whatever dependant upon RDBMS to just get the top row.
But if you have a specific RDBMS in mind there may be other ways that are more maintainable for larger number of columns (e.g. for SQL Server 2008)
SELECT TOP 1 *
FROM YourTable
ORDER BY
(SELECT COUNT (DISTINCT p) FROM (VALUES(p1),(p2),(p3)) T(p))
Also how do you want ties handled?
Related
I have a self-referencing/recursive calculation in Excel that needs to be moved to Hive SQL. Basically the column needs to SUM the two values only if the total of the concrete column plus the result from the previous calculation is greater than 0.
The data is as follows, A is the value and B is the expected output:
| A | B |
|-----|-----|
| -1 | 0 |
| 2 | 2 |
| -2 | 0 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 2 | 4 |
| -1 | 3 |
| 2 | 5 |
In Excel it would be written in column B as:
=MAX(0,B1+A2)
The problem in SQL is you need to have the output of the current calculation. I think I've got it sorted in SQL as the following:
DECLARE #Numbers TABLE(A INT, Rn INT)
INSERT INTO #Numbers VALUES (-1,1),(2,2),(-2,3),(2,4),(2,5),(-1,6),(2,7);
WITH lagged AS
(
SELECT A, 0 AS B, Rn
FROM #Numbers
WHERE Rn = 1
UNION ALL
SELECT i.A,
CASE WHEN ((i.A + l.B) >= 0) THEN (i.A + l.B)
ELSE l.B
END,
i.Rn
FROM #Numbers i INNER JOIN lagged l
ON i.Rn = l.Rn + 1
)
SELECT *
FROM lagged;
But this being Hive, it doesn't support CTEs so I need to dumb the SQL down a touch. Is that possible using LAG/LEAD? My brain is hurting having got this far!
I initially thought that it would help to first compute the Sum of all elements until each rank and then fix the values somehow using negative elements.
However, one big negative that would zero the B column will carry forward in the sum and will make all following elements negative.
It's as Gordon commented - 0 is max in the calculation =MAX(0,B1+A2) depends on the previous location where it happened and it seems to be impossible to compute them in advance analytically.
Related to / copied from this PostgreSQL topic: so-link
Let's say I have a table with two rows
id | value |
----+-------+
1 | 2 |
2 | 3 |
I want to write a query that will duplicate (repeat) each row based on
the value. I want this result (5 rows total):
id | value |
----+-------+
1 | 2 |
1 | 2 |
2 | 3 |
2 | 3 |
2 | 3 |
How is this possible in SQL Anywhere (Sybase SQL)?
The easiest way to do this is to have a numbers table . . . one that generates integers. Perhaps you have one handy. There are other ways. For instance, using a recursive CTE:
with numbers as (
select 1 as n
union all
select n + 1
from numbers
where n < 100
)
select t.*
from yourtable t join
numbers n
on n.n <= value;
Not all versions of Sybase necessarily support recursive CTEs There are other ways to generate such a table or you might already have one handy.
I have the following table in my database.
# select * FROM matches;
name | prop | rank
------+------+-------
carl | 1 | 4
carl | 2 | 3
carl | 3 | 9
alex | 1 | 8
alex | 2 | 5
alex | 3 | 6
alex | 3 | 8
alex | 2 | 11
anna | 3 | 8
anna | 3 | 13
anna | 2 | 14
(11 rows)
Each person is ranked at work by different properties/criterias called 'prop' and the performance is called 'rank'. The table contains multiple values of (name, prop) as the example shows. I want to get the best candidate following from some requirements. E.g. I need a candidate that have (prop=1 AND rank > 5) and (prop=3 AND rank >= 8). Then we must be able to sort the candidates by their rankings to get the best candidate.
EDIT: Each person must fulfill ALL requirements
How can I do this in SQL?
select x.name, max(x.rank)
from matches x
join (
select name from matches where prop = 1 AND rank > 5
intersect
select name from matches where prop = 3 AND rank >= 8
) y
on x.name = y.name
group by x.name
order by max(rank);
Filtering the data to match your criteria here is quite simple (as shown by both Amir and sternze):
SELECT *
FROM matches
WHERE prop=1 AND rank>5) OR (prop=3 AND rank>=8
The problem is how to aggregate this data so as to have just one row per candidate.
I suggest you do something like this:
SELECT m.name,
MAX(DeltaRank1) AS MaxDeltaRank1,
MAX(DeltaRank3) AS MaxDeltaRank3
FROM (
SELECT name,
(CASE WHEN prop=1 THEN rank-6 ELSE 0 END) AS DeltaRank1,
(CASE WHEN prop=3 THEN rank-8 ELSE 0 END) AS DeltaRank3,
FROM matches
) m
GROUP BY m.name
HAVING MaxDeltaRank1>0 AND MaxDeltaRank3>0
SORT BY MaxDeltaRank1+MaxDeltaRank3 DESC;
This will order the candidates by the sum of how much they exceeded the target rank in prop1 and prop3. You could use different logic to indicate which is best though.
In the case above, this should be the result:
name | MaxDeltaRank1 | MaxDeltaRank3
------+---------------+--------------
alex | 3 | 0
... because neither anna nor carl reach both the required ranks.
A typical case of relational division. We assembled a whole arsenal of techniques under this related question:
How to filter SQL results in a has-many-through relation
Assuming you want the minimum rank of a person, I might solve your particular case with LEAST():
SELECT m1.name, LEAST(m1.rank, m2.rank, ...) AS best_rank
FROM matches m1
JOIN matches m2 USING (name)
...
WHERE m1.prop = 1 AND m1.rank > 5
AND m2.prop = 3 AND m2.rank >= 8
...
ORDER BY best_rank;
Also assuming name to be unique per individual person. You'd probably use some kind of foreign key to a pk column of a person table in reality.
And if you have such a person table like you should, the best rank would be stored in a column there ...
If I understand you question, then you just need to execute the following operation:
SELECT * FROM matches where (prop = 1 AND rank > 5) OR (prop = 3 AND rank >= 8) ORDER BY rank
It gives you the canidates that either have prop=1 and rank > 5 or prop=3 and rank >= 8 sorted by their rankings.
My data looks like:
run | line | checksum | group
-----------------------------
1 | 3 | 123 | 1
1 | 7 | 123 | 1
1 | 4 | 123 | 2
1 | 5 | 124 | 2
2 | 3 | 123 | 1
2 | 7 | 123 | 1
2 | 4 | 124 | 2
2 | 4 | 124 | 2
and I need a query that returns me the new entries in run 2
run | line | checksum | group
-----------------------------
2 | 4 | 124 | 2
2 | 4 | 124 | 2
I tried several things, but I never got to a satisfying answer.
In this case I'm using H2, but of course I'm interested in a general explanation that would help me to wrap my head around the concept.
EDIT:
OK, it's my first post here so please forgive if I didn't state the question precisely enough.
Basically given two run values (r1, r2, with r2 > r1) I want to determine which rows having row = r2 have a different line, checksum or group from any row where row = r1.
select * from yourtable
where run = 2 and checksum = (select max(checksum)
from yourtable)
Assuming your last run will have the higher run value than others, below SQL will help
select * from table1 t1
where t1.run in
(select max(t2.run) table1 t2)
Update:
Above SQL may not give you the right rows because your requirement is not so clear. But the overall idea is to fetch the rows based on the latest run parameters.
SELECT line, checksum, group
FROM TableX
WHERE run = 2
EXCEPT
SELECT line, checksum, group
FROM TableX
WHERE run = 1
or (with slightly different result):
SELECT *
FROM TableX x
WHERE run = 2
AND NOT EXISTS
( SELECT *
FROM TableX x2
WHERE run = 1
AND x2.line = x.line
AND x2.checksum = x.checksum
AND x2.group = x.group
)
A slightly different approach:
select min(run) run, line, checksum, group
from mytable
where run in (1,2)
group by line, checksum, group
having count(*)=1 and min(run)=2
Incidentally, I assume that the "group" column in your table isn't actually called group - this is a reserved word in SQL and would need to be enclosed in double quotes (or backticks or square brackets, depending on which RDBMS you are using).
SQL noob, please bear with me!!
I am storing a 3-tuple in a database (x,y, {signal1, signal2,..}).
I have a database with tables coordinates (x,y) and another table called signals (signal, coordinate_id, group) which stores the individual signal values. There can be several signals at the same coordinate.
The group is just an abitrary integer which marks the entries in the signal table as belonging to the same set (provided they belong to the same coordinate). So that any signals with the same 'coordinate_id' and 'group' together form a tuple as shown above.
For example,
Coordinates table Signals table
-------------------- -----------------------------
| id | x | y | | id | signal | coordinate_id | group |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | | 1 | 45 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 | 2 | 5 | | 2 | 95 | 1 | 1 |
| 3 | 33 | 1 | 1 |
| 4 | 65 | 1 | 2 |
| 5 | 57 | 1 | 2 |
| 6 | 63 | 2 | 1 |
This would produce the tuples (1,2 {45,95,33}), (1,2,{65,57}), (2,5, {63}) and so on.
I would like to retrieve the sets of {signal1, signal2,...} for each coordinate. The signals belonging to a set have the same coordinate_id and group, but I do not necessarily know the group value. I only know that if the group value is the same for a particular coordinate_id, then all those with that group form one set.
I tried looking into SQL GROUP BY, but I realized that it is for use with aggregate functions.
Can someone point out how to do this properly in SQL or give tips for improving my database structure.
SQLite supports the GROUP_CONCAT() aggregate function similar to MySQL. It rolls up a set of values in the group and concatenates them together comma-separated.
SELECT c.x, c.y, GROUP_CONCAT(s.signal) AS signal_list
FROM Signals s
JOIN Coordinates ON s.coordinate_id = c.id
GROUP BY s.coordinate_id, s.group
SQLite also permits the mismatch between columns in the select-list and columns in the group-by clause, even though this isn't strictly permitted by ANSI SQL and most implementations.
personally I would write the database as 3 tables:
x_y(x, y, id) coords_groups(pos, group, id) signals(group, signal)
with signals.group->coords_groups.id and coords_groups.pos->x_y.id
as you are trying to represent a sort-of 4 dimensional array.
then, to get from a couple of coordinates (X, Y) an ArrayList of List of Signal you can use this
SELECT temp."group", signals.signal
FROM (
SELECT cg."group", cg.id
FROM x_y JOIN coords_groups AS cg ON x_y.id = cg.pos
WHERE x_y.x=X AND x_y.y=Y )
AS temp JOIN signals ON temp.id=signals."group"
ORDER BY temp."group" ASC
(X Y are in the innermost where)
inside this sort of pseudo-code:
getSignalsGroups(X, Y)
ArrayList<List<Signals>> a
List<Signals> temp
query=sqlLiteExecute(THE_SQL_SNIPPET, x, y)
row=query.fetch() //fetch the first row to set the groupCounter
actualGroup=row.group
temp.add(row.signal)
for(row : query) //foreach row add the signal to the list
if(row.group!=actualGroup) //or reset the list if is a new group
a.add(actualGroup, temp)
actualGroup=row.group; temp= new List
temp.add(row.signal)
return a