I am finding a lot of useful help here today, and I really appreciate it. This should be the last one for the day:
I have a list of the top 10 keywords per site, sorted by visits, by date. The records need to be sorted as follows (excuse the formatting):
2010-05 2010-04
site1.com keyword1 apples wine
keyword1 visits 100 12
keyword2 oranges water
keyword2 visits 99 10
site2.com keyword1 blueberry cornbread
keyword1 visits 90 100
keyword2 squares biscuits
keyword2 visits 80 99
Basically what I need to accomplish involves grouping, but I can't seem to figure it out. Am I heading down the right path, or is there another way to achieve this, or is it just impossible?
Edit:
The dataset is something like this (csv):
site_name,date,keyword,visits
site1.com,2010-04,apples,100
site1.com,2010-04,oranges,99
site1.com,2010-05,wine,12
site1.com,2010-05,water,10
site2.com,2010-04,cornbread,100
site2.com,2010-04,biscuits,99
site2.com,2010-05,blueberry,90
site2.com,2010-05,squares,80
Across the X-axis, we need to have the 'date' value
Across the Y-axis, we need to have the 'site_name' as the primary value, but grouped within that we need to have the 'keyword' followed by the respective 'visits'.
Ok, I think you are going down the right track. It's a little tricky getting the groups right, but this should be able to be solved with grouping.
What it looks like you need is a matrix (the table where you can have dynamic rows and columns) and put the dates in a group across the top. Then group the rows by site name and then (I think) by keyword.
If grouping by keyword doesn't work, try grouping by the row number instead (within the scope of the site name group)? If this doesn't work, try getting your database to produce an extra column with rank in it first. Then you can definitely group by that. What I mean is:
site_name,date,keyword,visits,rank
site1.com,2010-04,apples,100,1
site1.com,2010-04,oranges,99,2
site1.com,2010-05,wine,12,1
site1.com,2010-05,water,10,2
site2.com,2010-04,cornbread,100,1
site2.com,2010-04,biscuits,99,2
site2.com,2010-05,blueberry,90,1
site2.com,2010-05,squares,80,2
You should then be able to add two rows in that group to put the keyword and visits in. If you can't, you might have to resort to fancy rectangle work - in the detail cell, put a rectangle, then two textboxes, with the keyword in the top one and the number of visits in the bottom one.
Create a row grouping on "site" then a child/sub row grouping on "keyword"
You don't need to use a Matrix as you know how many columns you will have, so you can just do it in a table
So the grouping would be something like
=Fields!site_name
with the same value appearing in the text box
then for the next grouping down
=Fields!keyword
ditto for the textbox
you can just use SUM to figure out how many vists =SUM(Fields!vists)
in the group total
Related
So I'm in Teradata trying to pull any products that have more than 1 color-related name, as seen in the code snippet here:
SELECT
pt.product_number,
COUNT (CASE WHEN ot.option_name like any ('%green%', '%red%', '%blue%') THEN 1 ELSE NULL END) as differentColorCount
FROM product_table pt
JOIN option_table ot on ot.product_num = pt.product_num
HAVING differentColorCount > 1
GROUP BY 1
This is running fine, but the problem that I'm realizing is that a product might have a hundred different "Red" options for instance. (Red-1, Red-2, Red-3, etc). But I only want a count of when two of the different color strings are present for a single product.
So instead of LIKE ANY what I really need is LIKE ANY TWO. If both Red AND Green are present, count 1. If both Blue AND Purple are present, count 1.
I realize I could do a really long list where I do dozens of LIKE ALLs in every possible combination, but that doesn't seem like it will scale well if I need to check for, say 100 different colors instead of 6?
If anyone has any insight on this I would be incredibly grateful. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer! :)
You can utilize a regular expression to extract the color and then apply a distinct count:
Count (DISTINCT RegExp_Substr(option_name, '(green|red|blue)')) AS differentColorCount
This is similar to your like any ('%green%', '%red%', '%blue%'), but returns the actual matching color instead of TRUE/FALSE.
The'(green|red|blue)' search pattern seperates defines three alternative search strings and returns the first match.
I am trying to count the amount of urls we have in field in sql I have googled but cannot find anything !
So for example this could be in field "url" row 1 / id 1
url/32432
url/32434
So for example this could be field "url" in row 2 / id 2
url/32432
url/32488
url/32477
So if you were to run the query the count would be 5. There is no comma in between them, only space.
Kind Regards
Scott
This is a very bad layout for data. If you have multiple urls per id, then they should be stored as separate rows in another table.
But, sometimes we are stuck with other people's bad design decisions. You can do something like this:
select (length(replace(urls, 'url', 'urlx')) - length(urls)) as num_urls
Note that the specific functions for length() and replace() might vary, depending on the database.
I have a requirement for a dynamic report where the user can select what columns they want to display. This is not a problem for me to do using render variable, however, the measures are not rolling up.
As an example, I have age, gender and sales. This generates say, age 20 and 25, and obviously 2 genders, resulting in 4 rows.
When you remove gender using the static choices in the prompt page, it keeps 4 rows, just without displaying the age. I understand this is the nature of 'rendering' (or not) the column.
What I need is for the measures to roll up to what columns are left, which would show 2 rows, and a total. Or even remove all columns, and have just an overall total sales left.
I cant really use conditional blocks to create every combination as there is going to be 20+ columns in the report.
Thanks in advance!!
Change you conditionally rendered field to something like
case when ?render_gender? then [Gender] else '' end
This should zip your four rows to two.
I have the following report that looks like this in design mode:
The field I'd like to sort on is the <<Expr>> field highlighted in yellow TOTAL row. That expression reads like this:
=ReportItems!Textbox12.Value+ReportItems!Price3.Value
When previewed, the report looks like this:
I'd like to be able to sort the TOTAL row for all of the report. My desired result would have the group with the $38.52 total first, $0.92 total second, and so on. Is this possible?
I would set the Sorting on the Row Group for Patient Name. Sort expressions cannot reference ReportItems so I would get the Expressions inside those Report Items references and copy them into the Sort Expression.
And that is seriously the worst color scheme I have ever seen in 30+ years in IT ... it literally makes my eyes water.
I'd like to consult one thing. I have table in DB. It has 2 columns and looks like this:
Name...bilance
Jane...+3
Jane...-5
Jane...0
Jane...-8
Jane...-2
Paul...-1
Paul...2
Paul....9
Paul...1
...
I have to walk through this table and if I find record with different "name" (than was on previous row) I process all rows with the previous "name". (If I step on the first Paul row I process all Jane rows)
The processing goes like this:
Now I work only with Jane records and walk through them one by one. On each record I stop and compare it with all previous Jane rows one by one.
The task is to sumarize "bilance" column (in the scope of actual person) if they have different signs
Summary:
I loop through this table in 3 levels paralelly (nested loops)
1st level = search for changes of "name" column
2nd level = if change was found, get all rows with previous "name" and walk through them
3rd level = on each row stop and walk through all previous rows with current "name"
Can this be solved only using CURSOR and FETCHING, or is there some smoother solution?
My real table has 30 000 rows and 1500 people and If I do the logic in PHP, it takes long minutes and than timeouts. So I would like to rewrite it to MS SQL 2000 (no other DB is allowed). Are cursors fast solution or is it better to use something else?
Thank you for your opinions.
UPDATE:
There are lots of questions about my "summarization". Problem is a little bit more difficult than I explained. I simplified it just to describe my algorithm.
Each row of my table contains much more columns. The most important is month. That's why there are more rows for each person. Each is for different month.
"Bilances" are "working overtimes" and "arrear hours" of workers. And I need to sumarize + and - bilances to neutralize them using values from previous months. I want to have as many zeroes as possible. All the table must stay as it is, just bilances must be changed to zeroes.
Example:
Row (Jane -5) will be summarized with row (Jane +3). Instead of 3 I will get 0 and instead of -5 I will get -2. Because I used this -5 to reduce +3.
Next row (Jane 0) won't be affected
Next row (Jane -8) can not be used, because all previous bilances are negative
etc.
You can sum all the values per name using a single SQL statement:
select
name,
sum(bilance) as bilance_sum
from
my_table
group by
name
order by
name
On the face of it, it sounds like this should do what you want:
select Name, sum(bilance)
from table
group by Name
order by Name
If not, you might need to elaborate on how the Names are sorted and what you mean by "summarize".
I'm not sure what you mean by this line... "The task is to sumarize "bilance" column (in the scope of actual person) if they have different signs".
But, it may be possible to use a group by query to get a lot of what you need.
select name, case when bilance < 0 then 'negative' when bilance >= 0 then 'positive', count(*)
from table
group by name, bilance
That might not be perfect syntax for the case statement, but it should get you really close.