Microsoft Access - Create a numerical sequence based on field value changes? - ms-access-2007

For query data like this:
+-------+---------+
| Name | Details |
| JEFF | TEST1 |
| JEFF | TEST2 |
| JEFF | TEST3 |
| BOB | TEST1 |
| BOB | TEST2 |
+-------+---------+
How do I query so that a numerical sequence (1,2,3...) can be added that resets back to 1 each time the name changes (ie from JEFF to BOB)?
Is it possible to use the DCOUNT function?
What I have so far is (it doesn't sequence correctly):
Number: (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM [dQuery]
WHERE [dQuery].[Name] = [dQuery].[Name]
AND [dQuery].[sequence] >= [dQuery].[sequence])
UPDATE1:
The correct query is:
SELECT [dQuery].Name, [dQuery].[sequence], (select count([dQuery].Name) + 1
from [dQuery] as dupe where
dupe.[sequence]< [dQuery].[sequence] and dupe.name = [dQuery].name
) AS [Corrected Sequence]
FROM [dQuery]
WHERE ((([dQuery].Name)="jeff"))
ORDER BY [dQuery].Name, [dQuery].[sequence];

Take a look here. I think the author has solved some very similar issues.

If you like to add a serial number in your report dynamically than, create a report for the specific table and open the report in design view. Then, add a text box in the left side of the the data row and give "=1" (with out colon) to its Control Source property # "Data" tab. And change "No" to "Over Group" of its "running sum" property # "Data" tab. At the run time that text field will show data in sequence like 1, 2, 3 in every row.
Thanks

Related

Logic behind show/hide rows in charts

I am confused about the logic that exists behind the showing and hiding of rows in charts of QlikView/QLik Sense. Here is what I thought was the case:
If, for some row, the value of a dimension is NULL, and for that dimension "Supress NULL" is on (QV) or "Include NULLs" is off(QS), then the row is not shown.
If, for some row, all its expressions/measures are zero or NULL, and the object-level setting "Supress Zero Values" is on (QV), or "Include Zero Values" is off (QS), then the row is not shown.
The rest of the rows are shown.
However, I get a confusing example of a measure which causes rows to disappear even though I have suppress zero values off/ inlude zero values on. Here is a small script of some sample customers and their consultation:
customer:
LOAD * INLINE [
custcode,descr
C1,pan1
C2,pan2
C3,pan3
];
consultation:
LOAD * INLINE [
custcode,grp,val,x
C2,eye,sth1,1
C2,age,20,1
C3,legs,sth2,1
C3,skin,sth5,1
C3,age,20,1
C3,age,30,1
];
As you can see, custcode C1 has no consultation lines. I proceed to create a straight table with custcode as dimension and sum(x) as measure. Here is what I get:
+----------+--------+
| custcode | sum(x) |
+----------+--------+
| C1 | 0 |
| C2 | 2 |
| C3 | 4 |
+----------+--------+
Everything fine until now. Sure enough I haven't supressed zero values: If I did, the C1 row would get removed. Also, let's note that no aggr is needed for whatever reason.
Now, let's add a set analysis to that measure to only sum x for grp='age':
sum({<grp={'age'}>}x)
This hides row C1 from sight:
+----------+-----------------------+
| custcode | sum({<grp={'age'}>}x) |
+----------+-----------------------+
| C2 | 1 |
| C3 | 2 |
+----------+-----------------------+
Question 1: Why does set analysis hide the row in this case?
Adding an additional measure with a value of 1 changes nothing. We can be sure this has nothing to do with zero values settings.
Now, let us add this measure:
aggr(min(0),[custcode])
The row got back, even though the new measure is NULL :
+----------+-----------------------+-------------------------+
| custcode | sum({<grp={'age'}>}x) | aggr(min(0),[custcode]) |
+----------+-----------------------+-------------------------+
| C1 | 0 | - |
| C2 | 1 | - |
| C3 | 2 | - |
+----------+-----------------------+-------------------------+
Now, about aggr, here are two strong reasons why I think it should not be neccessary:
If the set analysis measure was wrong and needed to include aggr in some way, this would still be no reason for the engine to hide the rows - it would just return a NULL for having an invalid formula. Also, this measure actually works correct, as we can see
custcode is the field which creates the association between the two tables. But this doesn't seem to be the cause for it to unhide rows; actually, I get the same even with aggr(min(0),[]):
+----------+-----------------------+-----------------+
| custcode | sum({<grp={'age'}>}x) | aggr(min(0),[]) |
+----------+-----------------------+-----------------+
| C1 | 0 | - |
| C2 | 1 | - |
| C3 | 2 | - |
+----------+-----------------------+-----------------+
Question 2: Why does this strange aggr measure unhide the row?
Question 1:
When you only have the one expression and add the set analysis it is like telling Qlik to select the set value.
So picture 1 no selections
picture 2 with the selection
So it's not that the answer is a null, it is that the associative engine has reduced that data out of the data set based on the selection / set rule.
The aggr() should definitely not be necessary there. The dimentionality of the chart will take care of the aggregation across the dimension. aggr() is only needed when you want to use an aggregation that is not controlled by the dimensions.
I do not understand what your aggr(min(0),[]) is trying to achieve and I don;'t get the same result as your table. The expression is just creating nulls because it is can't evaluate
If you want to see all members of the dimension you should tick "Show all values" on the dimensions tab rather than trying to change the expressions

SQL query to get latest user to update record

I have a postgres database that contains an audit log table which holds a historical log of updates to documents. It contains which document was updated, which field was updated, which user made the change, and when the change was made. Some sample data looks like this:
doc_id | user_id | created_date | field | old_value | new_value
--------+---------+------------------------+-------------+---------------+------------
A | 1 | 2018-07-30 15:43:44-05 | Title | | War and Piece
A | 2 | 2018-07-30 15:45:13-05 | Title | War and Piece | War and Peas
A | 1 | 2018-07-30 16:05:59-05 | Title | War and Peas | War and Peace
B | 1 | 2018-07-30 15:43:44-05 | Description | test 1 | test 2
B | 2 | 2018-07-30 17:45:44-05 | Description | test 2 | test 3
You can see that the Title of document A was changed three times, first by user 1 then by user 2, then again by user 1.
Basically I need to know which user was the last one to update a field on a particular document. So for example, I need to know that User 1 was the last user to update the Title field on document A. I don't really care what time it happened, just the document, field, and user.
So sample output would be something like this:
doc_id | field | user_id
--------+-------------+---------
A | Title | 1
B | Description | 2
Seems like it should be fairly straightforward query to write but I'm having some trouble with it. I would think that group by would be in order but the problem is that if I group by doc_id I lose the user data:
select doc_id, max(created_date)
from document_history
group by doc_id;
doc_id | max
--------+------------------------
B | 2018-07-30 15:00:00-05
A | 2018-07-30 16:00:00-05
I could join these results table back to the document_history table but I would need to do so based on the doc_id and timestamp which doesn't seem quite right. If two people editing a document at the exact same time I would get multiple rows back for that document and field. Maybe that's so unlikely I shouldn't worry about it, but still...
Any thoughts on a way to do this in a single query?
You want to filter the records, so think where, not group by:
select dh.*
from document_history
where dh.created_date = (select max(dh2.created_date) from document_history dh2 where dh2.doc_id = dh.doc_id);
In most databases, this will have better performance than a group by, if you have an index on document_history(doc_id, created_date).
If your DBMS supports window functions (e.g. PostgreSQL, SQL Server; aka analytic function in Oracle) you could do something like this (SQLFiddle with Postgres, other systems might differ slightly in the syntax):
http://sqlfiddle.com/#!17/981af/4
SELECT DISTINCT
doc_id, field,
first_value(user_id) OVER (PARTITION BY doc_id, field ORDER BY created_date DESC) as last_user
FROM get_last_updated
first_value() OVER (... ORDER BY x DESC) orders the window frames/partitions descending and then takes the first value which is your latest time stamp.
I added the DISTINCT to get your expected result. The window function just adds a new column to your SELECT result but within the same partition with the same value. If you do not need it, remove it and then you are able to work with the origin data plus the new won information.

Gather single rows from multiple tables in Microsoft Access

I have several tables in Microsoft Access 2013, all of which follow the same format of:
ID | Object | Person 1 | Person 2 | Person 3 |
ID | String | Yes/No | Yes/No | Yes/No |
What I would like to do is make a query where I put in a string value for each table and it prints out the entire row, with each string getting its own row, so it looks like:
ID Number | Object | Person 1...
Table 1 ID | Table 1 String | Table 1 Yes/No...
Table 2 ID | Table 2 String | Table 2 Yes/No...
Every time I try, though, it puts all the data into one extremely long row that's impossible to look at. All of my searching has only turned up people trying to do the exact opposite of what I'm doing, though, so I must be missing something obvious. Any tips?

How to get numbers arranged right to left in sql server SELECT statements

When performing SELECT statements including number columns (prices, for example), the result always is left to right ordered, which reduces the readability. Therefore I'm searching a method to format the output of number columns right to left.
I already tried to use something like
SELECT ... SPACE(15-LEN(A.Nummer))+A.Nummer ...
FROM Artikel AS A ...
which gives close results, but depending on font not really. An alternative would be to replace 'SPACE()' with 'REPLICATE('_',...)', but I don't really like the underscores in output.
Beside that this formula will crash on numbers with more digits than 15, therefore I searched for a way finding the maximum length of entries to make it more save like
SELECT ... SPACE(MAX(A.Nummer)-LEN(A.Nummer))+A.Nummer ...
FROM Artikel AS A ...
but this does not work due to the aggregate character of the MAX-function.
So, what's the best way to achieve the right-justified order for the number-columns?
Thanks,
Rainer
To get you problem with the list box solved have a look at this link: http://www.lebans.com/List_Combo.htm
I strongly believe that this type of adjustment should be made in the UI layer and not mixed in with data retrieval.
But to answer your original question i have created a SQL Fiddle:
MS SQL Server 2008 Schema Setup:
CREATE TABLE dbo.some_numbers(n INT);
Create some example data:
INSERT INTO dbo.some_numbers
SELECT CHECKSUM(NEWID())
FROM (VALUES (1),(1),(1),(1),(1),(1),(1),(1),(1),(1))X(x);
The following query is using the OVER() clause to specify that the MAX() is to be applied over all rows. The > and < that the result is wrapped in is just for illustration purposes and not required for the solution.
Query 1:
SELECT '>'+
SPACE(MAX(LEN(CAST(n AS VARCHAR(MAX))))OVER()-LEN(CAST(n AS VARCHAR(MAX))))+
CAST(n AS VARCHAR(MAX))+
'<'
FROM dbo.some_numbers SN;
Results:
| COLUMN_0 |
|---------------|
| >-1486993739< |
| > 1620287540< |
| >-1451542215< |
| >-1257364471< |
| > -819471559< |
| >-1364318127< |
| >-1190313739< |
| > 1682890896< |
| >-1050938840< |
| > 484064148< |
This query does a straight case to show the difference:
Query 2:
SELECT '>'+CAST(n AS VARCHAR(MAX))+'<'
FROM dbo.some_numbers SN;
Results:
| COLUMN_0 |
|---------------|
| >-1486993739< |
| >1620287540< |
| >-1451542215< |
| >-1257364471< |
| >-819471559< |
| >-1364318127< |
| >-1190313739< |
| >1682890896< |
| >-1050938840< |
| >484064148< |
With this query you still need to change the display font to a monospaced font like COURIER NEW. Otherwise, as you have noticed, the result is still misaligned.

SQLite, selecting values having same criteria (throughout all table)

I have an sqlite database table similar to the one given below
Name | Surname | AddrType | Age | Phone
John | Kruger | Home | 23 | 12345
Sarah | Kats | Home | 33 | 12345
Bill | Kruger | Work | 15 | 12345
Lars | Kats | Home | 54 | 12345
Javier | Roux | Work | 45 | 12345
Ryne | Hutt | Home | 36 | 12345
I would like to select Name values matching same "Surname" value for each of the rows in the table.
For example, for the first line the query would be "select Name from myTable where Surname='Kruger'" whereas for the second line the query would be "select Name from myTable where Surname='Kats' and so an....
Is it possible to traverse through the whole table and select all values like that?
PS : I will use these method in a C++ application, the alternative method is to use sqlite3_exec() and process each row one by one. I just want to know if there is any other possible way for the same approach.
I'd do:
sqlite> SELECT group_concat(Name, '|') Names FROM People GROUP BY Surname;
Names
----------
Ryne
Sarah|Lars
John|Bill
Javier
Then split each value of "Names" in C++ using the "|" separator (or any other you choose in group_concat function.
Basically you just want to exclude any records that don't have a buddy.
Something simple like joining the table against itself should work:
SELECT a.Name
FROM tab AS a
JOIN tab AS b
ON a.Surname = b.Surname;
Just returning the full sorted table and doing the duplicate check yourself may be faster if incidence is high (and will always be high for all sets of data). That would be a pretty strong assumption though.
SELECT Name
FROM tab
SORT BY Surname;