I'm sure this has been asked but I can't quite find the right search terms.
Given a schema like this:
| CarMakeID | CarMake
------------------------
| 1 | SuperCars
| 2 | MehCars
| CarMakeID | CarModelID | CarModel
-----------------------------------------
| 1 | 1 | Zoom
| 2 | 1 | Wow
| 3 | 1 | Awesome
| 4 | 2 | Mediocrity
| 5 | 2 | YoureSettling
I want to produce a dataset like this:
| CarMakeID | CarMake | CarModels
---------------------------------------------
| 1 | SuperCars | Zoom, Wow, Awesome
| 2 | MehCars | Mediocrity, YoureSettling
What do I do in place of 'AGG' for strings in SQL Server in the following style query?
SELECT *,
(SELECT AGG(CarModel)
FROM CarModels model
WHERE model.CarMakeID = make.CarMakeID
GROUP BY make.CarMakeID) as CarMakes
FROM CarMakes make
http://www.simple-talk.com/sql/t-sql-programming/concatenating-row-values-in-transact-sql/
It is an interesting problem in Transact SQL, for which there are a number of solutions and considerable debate. How do you go about producing a summary result in which a distinguishing column from each row in each particular category is listed in a 'aggregate' column? A simple, and intuitive way of displaying data is surprisingly difficult to achieve. Anith Sen gives a summary of different ways, and offers words of caution over the one you choose...
If it is SQL Server 2017 or SQL Server VNext, Azure SQL database you can use String_agg as below:
SELECT make.CarMakeId, make.CarMake,
CarModels = string_agg(model.CarModel, ', ')
FROM CarModels model
INNER JOIN CarMakes make
ON model.CarMakeId = make.CarMakeId
GROUP BY make.CarMakeId, make.CarMake
Output:
+-----------+-----------+---------------------------+
| CarMakeId | CarMake | CarModels |
+-----------+-----------+---------------------------+
| 1 | SuperCars | Zoom, Wow, Awesome |
| 2 | MehCars | Mediocrity, YoureSettling |
+-----------+-----------+---------------------------+
Related
I am trying to search for records columns that match a value within a delimited string.
I have two tables that look like this
Vehicles
| Id | Make | Model |
|----|------|-------|
| 1 | Ford | Focus |
| 2 | Ford | GT |
| 3 | Ford | Kuga |
| 4 | Audi | R8 |
Monitor
| Id | Makes | Models |
|----|-------|----------|
| 1 | Ford | GT,Focus |
| 2 | Audi | R8 |
What I'm trying to achieve is the following:
| Id | Makes | Models | Matched_Count |
|----|-------|----------|---------------|
| 2 | Audi | R8 | 1 |
| 1 | Ford | GT,Focus | 2 |
Using the following query I can get matches on singular strings, but I'm not sure how I can split the commas to search for individual models.
select Id, Makes, Models, (select count(id) from Vehicles va where UPPER(sa.Makes) = UPPER(va.Make) AND UPPER(sa.Models) = UPPER(va.Model)) as Matched_Count
from Monitor sa
(I am using a very SQL Server 2016 however I do not have access to create custom functions or variables)
If you are stuck with this data model, you can use string_split():
select m.*, v.matched_count
from monitor m outer apply
(select count(*) as matched_count
from string_split(m.models, ',') s join
vehicles v
on s.value = v.model and m.makes = v.makes
) v;
I would advise you to put your efforts into fixing the data model, though.
Here is a db<>fiddle.
There is a table where user_id is for each test taker, and choice is the answer for all the three questions. I would like to get all the different sequence of choices that test taker made and count the sequence. Is there a way to write sql query to achieve this? Thanks
----------------------------------
| user_id | Choice |
----------------------------------
| 1 | a |
----------------------------------
| 1 | b |
----------------------------------
| 1 | c |
----------------------------------
| 2 | b |
----------------------------------
| 2 | c |
----------------------------------
| 2 | a |
----------------------------------
Desire answer:
----------------------------------
| choice | count |
----------------------------------
| a,b,c | 1 |
----------------------------------
| b,c,a | 1 |
-----------------------------------
In BigQuery, you can use aggregation functions:
select choices, count(*)
from (select string_agg(choice order by ?) as choices, user_id
from t
group by user_id
) t
group by choices;
The ? is for the column that specifies the ordering of the table. Remember: tables represent unordered sets, so without such a column the choices can be in any order.
You can do something similar in SQL Server 2017+ using string_agg(). In earlier versions, you have to use an XML method, which is rather unpleasant.
I have the following data:
select * from art_skills_table;
+----+------+---------------------------+
| ID | Name | skills |
+----+------+---------------------------|
| 1 | Anna | ["painting","photography"]|
| 2 | Bob | ["drawing","sculpting"] |
| 3 | Cat | ["pastel"] |
+----+------+---------------------------+
select * from computer_table;
+------+------+-------------------------+
| ID | Name | skills |
+------+------+-------------------------+
| 1 | Anna | ["word","typing"] |
| 2 | Cat | ["code","editing"] |
| 3 | Bob | ["excel","code"] |
+------+------+-------------------------+
I would like to write an SQL statement which results in the following table.
+------+------+-----------------------------------------------+
| ID | Name | skills |
+------+------+-----------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Anna | ["painting","photography","word","typing"] |
| 2 | Bob | ["drawing","sculpting","excel","code"] |
| 3 | Cat | ["pastel","code","editing"] |
+------+------+-----------------------------------------------+
I've tried something like SELECT * from art_skills_table LEFT JOIN computer_table ON name. However it doesn't give what I need. I've read about array_cat but I'm having a bit of trouble implementing it.
if the skills column from both tables are arrays, then you should be able to get away with this:
SELECT a.ID, a.name, array_cat(a.skills, c.skills)
FROM art_skills_table a LEFT JOIN computer_table c
ON c.id = a.id
That said, While you used LEFT join in your sample, I think either an INNER or FULL (OUTER) join might serve you better.
First, i wondered why the data are stored in such a model.
Was of the opinion that NoSQL databases lack ability for joins and ...
... a semantic triple would be in the form of subject–predicate–object.
... a Key-value (KV) stores use associative arrays.
... a relational database would be normalized.
A few information about the use case would have helped.
Nevertheless, you can select the data with CONCAT and REPLACE for the desired form.
SELECT art_skills_table.ID, computer_table.name,
CONCAT(
REPLACE(art_skills_table.skills, '}',','),
REPLACE(computer_table.skills, '{','')
)
FROM art_skills_table JOIN computer_table ON art_skills_table.ID = computer_table.ID
The query returns the following result:
+----+------+--------------------------------------------+
| ID | Name | Skills |
+----+------+--------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Anna | {"painting","photography","word","typing"} |
| 2 | Cat | {"drawing","sculpting","code","editing"} |
| 3 | Bob | {"pastel","excel","code"} |
+----+------+--------------------------------------------+
I've used the ID for the JOIN, even though Bob has different values.
The JOIN should probably be done over the name.
JOIN computer_table ON art_skills_table.Name = computer_table.Name
BTW, you need to tell us what SQL engine you're running on.
I am trying to filter a set of tables that includes an M:N junction table in Android Room (SQLite).
An image can have many subjects. I'd like to allow filtering by a subject, so that I get a row with complete image information (including all subjects). So if an image had (National Park, Yosemite) filtering for either would result in one row with both keywords. Unless I messed something up, a typical join will result in multiple rows such that matching Yosemite would get the right image, but you'd be lacking National Park. I came up with this:
SELECT *,
(SELECT GROUP_CONCAT(name)
FROM meta_subject_junction
JOIN subject
ON subject.id = meta_subject_junction.subjectId
WHERE meta_subject_junction.metaId = meta.id) AS keywords,
(SELECT documentUri
FROM image_parent
WHERE meta.parentId = image_parent.id ) AS parentUri
FROM meta
Now this gets me the complete rows, but I think at this point I'd need to:
WHERE keywords LIKE(%YOSEMITE%)
and I think the LIKE is less than ideal, not to mention an imprecise match. Is there a better way to accomplish this? Thanks, this is bending my novice SQL brain.
Further details
meta
+----+----------+--+
| id | name | |
+----+----------+--+
| 1 | yosemite | |
| 2 | bryce | |
| 3 | flowers | |
+----+----------+--+
subject
+----+---------------+--+
| id | name | |
+----+---------------+--+
| 1 | National Park | |
| 2 | Yosemite | |
| 3 | Tulip | |
+----+---------------+--+
junction
+--------+-----------+
| metaId | subjectId |
+--------+-----------+
| 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 2 |
| 2 | 1 |
| 3 | 3 |
+--------+-----------+
Although I may have done something wrong, as far as I can tell Android Room doesn't like:
+----+-----------+---------------+
| id | name | subject |
+----+-----------+---------------+
| 1 | yosemite | National Park |
| 1 | yosemite | Yosemite |
+----+-----------+---------------+
so I'm trying to reduce the rows:
+----+-----------+-------------------------+
| id | name | subject |
+----+-----------+-------------------------+
| 1 | yosemite | National Park, Yosemite |
+----+-----------+-------------------------+
which the above query does. However, I also want to query for a subject. So that National Park filter will yield:
+----+-----------+-------------------------+
| id | name | subject |
+----+-----------+-------------------------+
| 1 | yosemite | National Park, Yosemite |
| 2 | bryce | National Park |
+----+-----------+-------------------------+
I'd like to be more precise/efficient than LIKE with the already 'concat' subject. Most of my attempts end up with no results in Room (multi-row) or reducing the subject to only the filter keyword.
Update
Here's a test I've been using to compare the actual SQL results from a query to what Android Room ends up with:
http://sqlfiddle.com/#!7/0ac11/10/0
That join query is interpreted as four objects in Android Room, so I'm trying to reduce the rows, but retain the full subject results while filtering for any image containing the subject keyword.
If you want multiple keywords, then where and group by and having can be used:
select image_id
from image_subject
where subject_id in ('a', 'b', 'c') -- whatever
group by image-id
having count(distinct subject_id) = 3; -- same count as in `where`
This gets the result I need, though I'd love to hear a better option if this is particularly inefficient.
SELECT meta.*,
(SELECT GROUP_CONCAT(name)
FROM junction
JOIN subject
ON subject.id = junction.subjectId
WHERE junction.metaId = meta.id) AS keywords,
junction.subjectId
FROM meta
LEFT JOIN junction ON junction.metaId = meta.id
WHERE subjectId IN (1,2)
GROUP BY meta.id
+----+----------+------------------------+-----------+
| id | name | keywords | subjectId |
+----+----------+------------------------+-----------+
| 1 | yosemite | National Park,Yosemite | 2 |
| 2 | bryce | National Park | 1 |
+----+----------+------------------------+-----------+
http://sqlfiddle.com/#!7/86a76/13
Basically, I have 3 tables, titles, providers, and provider_titles.
Let's say they look like this:
| title_id | title_name |
|------------|----------------|
| 1 | San Andres |
| 2 |Human Centipede |
| 3 | Zoolander 2 |
| 4 | Hot Pursuit |
| provider_id| provider_name |
|------------|----------------|
| 1 | Hulu |
| 2 | Netflix |
| 3 | Amazon_Prime |
| 4 | HBO_GO |
| provider_id| title_id |
|------------|----------------|
| 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 2 |
| 2 | 1 |
| 3 | 1 |
| 3 | 3 |
| 4 | 4 |
So, clearly there are titles with multiple providers, yeah? Typical many-to-many so far.
So what I'm doing to query it is with a JOIN like the following:
SELECT * FROM provider_title JOIN provider ON provider_title.provider_id = provider.provider_id JOIN title ON title.title_id = provider_title.title_id WHERE provider.name IN ('Netflix', 'HBO_GO', 'Hulu', 'Amazon_Prime')
Ok, now to the actual issue. I don't want repeated title names back, but I do want all of the providers associated with the title. Let me explain with another table. Here is what I am getting back with the current query, as is:
| provider_id| provider_name | title_id | title_name |
|------------|---------------|----------|---------------|
| 1 | Hulu | 1|San Andreas |
| 1 | Hulu | 2|Human Centipede|
| 2 | Netflix | 1|San Andreas |
| 3 | Amazon_Prime | 1|San Andreas |
| 3 | Amazon_prime | 3|Zoolander 2 |
| 4 | HBO_GO | 4|Hot Pursuit |
But what I really want would be something more like
| provider_id| provider_name |title_id| title_name|
|------------|-----------------------------|--------|-----------|
| [1, 2, 3] |[Hulu, Netflix, Amazon_Prime]| 1|San Andreas|
Meaning I only want distinct titles back, but I still want each title's associated providers. Is this only possible to do post-sql query with logic iterating through the returned rows?
Depending on your database engine, there may be an aggregation function to help achieve this.
For example, this SQLfiddle demonstrates the postgres array_agg function:
SELECT t.title_id,
t.title_name,
array_agg( p.provider_id ),
array_agg( p.provider_name )
FROM provider_title as pt
JOIN
provider as p
ON pt.provider_id = p.provider_id
JOIN title as t
ON t.title_id = pt.title_id
GROUP BY t.title_id,
t.title_name
Other database engines have equivalents. For example:
mySQL has group_concat
Oracle has listagg
sqlite has group_concat (as well!)
If your database isn't covered by the above, you can google '[Your database engine] aggregate comma delimited string'