I have next sql
select site_id,count from tags where match (tag) against ('statistici' in boolean mode) ORDER BY count DESC;
+---------+-------+
| site_id | count |
+---------+-------+
| 9 | 1300 |
| 13 | 1200 |
| 9 | 1100 |
| 13 | 1000 |
| 9 | 900 |
| 13 | 800 |
| 13 | 800 |
+---------+-------+
What i need is to get distinct site_id.
But when i use a group by statement the order by count is not kept
select site_id,count from tags where match (tag) against ('statistici' in boolean mode) GROUP by site_id ORDER BY count DESC;
+---------+-------+
| site_id | count |
+---------+-------+
| 13 | 1000 |
| 9 | 900 |
+---------+-------+
What should i do ?
You're ordering by ORDER BY count DESC, and the result is ordered with the highest count first.
Change to ORDER BY count ACS if you prefer the lowest count first.
EDIT: Based on your comment, perhaps this is more like what you're trying to achieve:
select site_id
, max(count) as TopCount
from tags
where match (tag) against ('statistici' in boolean mode)
group by
site_id
order by
TopCount DESC
This selects the highest count per site, and places the highest count first.
Group by site_Id order by count(*);
Related
I have a (mssql) table like this:
+----+----------+---------+--------+--------+
| id | username | date | scoreA | scoreB |
+----+----------+---------+--------+--------+
| 1 | jim | 01/2020 | 100 | 0 |
| 2 | max | 01/2020 | 0 | 200 |
| 3 | jim | 01/2020 | 0 | 150 |
| 4 | max | 02/2020 | 150 | 0 |
| 5 | jim | 02/2020 | 0 | 300 |
| 6 | lee | 02/2020 | 100 | 0 |
| 7 | max | 02/2020 | 0 | 200 |
+----+----------+---------+--------+--------+
What I need is to get the best "combined" score per date. (With "combined" score I mean the best scores per user and per date summarized)
The result should look like this:
+----------+---------+--------------------------------------------+
| username | date | combined_score (max(scoreA) + max(scoreB)) |
+----------+---------+--------------------------------------------+
| jim | 01/2020 | 250 |
| max | 02/2020 | 350 |
+----------+---------+--------------------------------------------+
I came this far:
I can group the scores by user like this:
SELECT
username, (max(scoreA) + max(scoreB)) AS combined_score,
FROM score_table
GROUP BY username
ORDER BY combined_score DESC
And I can get the best score per date with PARTITION BY like this:
SELECT *
FROM
(SELECT t.*, row_number() OVER (PARTITION BY date ORDER BY scoreA DESC) rn
FROM score_table t) as tmp
WHERE tmp.rn = 1
ORDER BY date
Is there a proper way to combine these statements and get the result I need? Thank you!
Btw. Don't care about possible ties!
You can combine window functions and aggregation functions like this:
SELECT s.*
FROM (SELECT username, date, (max(scoreA) + max(scoreB)) AS combined_score,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY date ORDER BY max(scoreA) + max(scoreB) DESC) as seqnum
FROM score_table
GROUP BY username, date
) s
ORDER BY combined_score DESC;
Note that date needs to be part of the aggregation.
I understand that the order or execution is as follows
FROM
ON
JOIN
WHERE
GROUP BY
WITH CUBE or WITH ROLLUP
HAVING
SELECT
DISTINCT
ORDER BY
TOP
from this SO Answer as well as Microsoft Documentation
However, in my query below, the column total is built on the fly which is later used in having clause. This would mean that having executes AFTER select and not before because the column 'total' does not exist in orders table.
Am I interpreting it wrong or simply missing something?
Query
select customer_id,
sum(CASE
WHEN product_name = 'A' THEN 1
WHEN product_name = 'B' THEN 1
WHEN product_name = 'C' THEN -1
ELSE 0 END
) as total
from Orders
group by customer_id
having total > 1;
Orders table
+------------+-------------+--------------+
| order_id | customer_id | product_name |
+------------+-------------+--------------+
| 10 | 1 | A |
| 20 | 1 | B |
| 30 | 1 | D |
| 40 | 1 | C |
| 50 | 2 | A |
| 60 | 3 | A |
| 70 | 3 | B |
| 80 | 3 | D |
| 90 | 4 | C |
+------------+-------------+--------------+
Result
+-------------+-------+
| customer_id | total |
+-------------+-------+
| 3 | 2 |
+-------------+-------+
What you have described is NOT the "order of execution". It is the order of scoping for identifiers defined in the query.
It is saying that an identifier defined in from is known in the clauses beneath it. Similarly, an identifier defined in the select is not recognized in the having. I should note that many databases do allow the having clause to use aliases in the having clause. SQL Server is not one of them.
SQL is a descriptive language, not a procedural language. That means that a query describes the result set. It does not state the steps used to generate the result. The compiler and optimizer produce the execution plan, which looks nothing like the original query.
Let's imagine a table with two columns ex:
| Value | ID |
+-------+----+
| 2 | 1 |
| 3 | 1 |
| 4 | 1 |
| 1 | 2 |
| 2 | 2 |
| 2 | 2 |
What I am trying to do is to calculate the sum of those with similar id and display them in different table like:
| Sum | ID |
+-----+----+
| 9 | 1 |
| 5 | 2 |
and so on.
I could find a sum of a known id by
SELECT SUM(VALUE) FROM MYTABLE WHERE ID = 1;
However not sure on how to find sum of different id's separately, could you give an idea on how to proceed?
Select SUM(VALUE),ID FROM MYTABLE GROUP BY ID
Use GROUP BY clause:
SELECT SUM(VALUE) Sum, ID FROM MYTABLE GROUP BY ID;
SELECT SUM(VALUE),ID FROM MYTABLE Group By ID
This is my table...
+----+--------+
| id | amount |
+----+--------+
| 1 | 100 |
| 1 | 50 |
| 1 | 0 |
| 2 | 500 |
| 2 | 100 |
| 3 | 300 |
| 3 | -2 |
| 4 | 400 |
| 4 | 200 |
+----+--------+
I would like to choose from it each value of id that does not have a nonpositive (i.e. negative or 0) value associated with it, and the smallest amount associated with that id.
If I use this code...
SELECT DISTINCT id, amount
FROM table t
WHERE amount = (SELECT MIN(amount) FROM table WHERE id= t.id)
... then these results show...
+----+--------+
| id | amount |
+----+--------+
| 1 | 0 |
| 2 | 100 |
| 3 | -2 |
| 4 | 200 |
+----+--------+
But what I want the statement to return is...
+----+--------+
| id | amount |
+----+--------+
| 2 | 100 |
| 4 | 200 |
+----+--------+
Just add amount>0 in your query. You missed out that condition in your query. That should do it.
SELECT DISTINCT id, amount FROM table t
WHERE amount = (SELECT MIN(amount) FROM table WHERE id= t.id)
and amount>0;
If you want to display id, where min(amount) > 0, the use this.
SELECT id, min(amount) as amount
FROM table t
group by id
having min(amount) > 0;
Please try the following...
SELECT id,
MIN( amount )
FROM table
WHERE amount > 0
GROUP BY id
ORDER BY id;
This statement starts by selecting all records WHERE amount is larger than 0.
The records from the resulting dataset are then grouped by each surviving value of id and the smallest value of amount is chosen for that GROUP / id.
The resulting pairs of values are then sorted by ORDER id and returned to the user.
If you have any questions or comments, then please feel free to post a Comment accordingly.
I have two tables from which I'm trying to run a query to return the maximum (or top) transaction for each person. I should note that I cannot change the table structure. Rather, I can only pull data.
People
+-----------+
| id | name |
+-----------+
| 42 | Bob |
| 65 | Ted |
| 99 | Stu |
+-----------+
Transactions (there is no primary key)
+---------------------------------+
| person | amount | date |
+---------------------------------+
| 42 | 3 | 9/14/2030 |
| 42 | 4 | 7/02/2015 |
| 42 | *NULL* | 2/04/2020 |
| 65 | 7 | 1/03/2010 |
| 65 | 7 | 5/20/2020 |
+---------------------------------+
Ultimately, for each person I want to return the highest amount. If that doesn't work then I'd like to look at the date and return the most recent date.
So, I'd like my query to return:
+----------------------------------------+
| person_id | name | amount | date |
+----------------------------------------+
| 42 | Bob | 4 | 7/02/2015 | (<- highest amount)
| 65 | Ted | 7 | 5/20/2020 | (<- most recent date)
| 99 | Stu | *NULL* | *NULL* | (<- no records in Transactions table)
+----------------------------------------+
SELECT People.id, name, amount, date
FROM People
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT TOP 1 person_id
FROM Transactions
WHERE person_id = People.id
ORDER BY amount DESC, date ASC
)
ON People.id = person_id
I can't figure out what I am doing wrong, but I know it's wrong. Any help would be much appreciated.
You are almost there but since there are duplicate Id in the Transaction table ,so you need to remove those by using Row_number() function
Try this :
With cte as
(Select People,amount,date ,row_number() over (partition by People
order by amount desc, date desc) as row_num
from Transac )
Select * from People as a
left join cte as b
on a.ID=b.People
and b.row_num=1
The result is in Sql Fiddle
Edit: Row_number() from MSDN
Returns the sequential number of a row within a partition of a result set,
starting at 1 for the first row in each partition.
Partition is used to group the result set and Over by clause is used
Determine the partitioning and ordering of the rowset before the
associated window function is applied.