I am trying to create a queue system for pre-orders for our webshop. Sometimes we have more orders than stock for a few deliveries to our warehouse and I'm trying to organize so that the people that made the orders first gets their products first.
The problem comes when a customer wants to make a change to an order, by for example adding something to it. For booking purposes we then make a return of the first order to our system which creates another order, and then finally create a new order with everything on it. This causes this customer to be last in the queue list in our current system where we go by date created.
What I would like to do is to have the original queue spot be copied over to the new order without messing up the autoincrementing. This also means that there will be three orders (Original, plus return, plus new) with the same number.
id | order | queue | ordercomment
1 | 1001 | 1 | new order
2 | 1002 | 2 | new order
3 | 1003 | 3 | new order
4 | 1004 | 1 | return order 1001
5 | 1005 | 1 | corrected order 1001
6 | 1006 | 4 | new order
Is there any way to handle this without making a manual incrementing solution that checks for the current highest number whenever an order is made?
where we go by date created
But your data has no such date. You're relying on incrementing integers to determine the sort order, and that's where you're running into trouble.
If you want to sort by the date created, store the date the order was created. Any time you modify, append, or otherwise recreate an order you can still preserve the original order date. Perhaps with two columns, the date of the current order and the date of the original order. (For most orders these two values would be the same, but there's nothing wrong with that.)
Then your order of priority would simply be the date of the original order.
Basically, don't try to use an integer as a timestamp. Use a timestamp.
Related
I have a Dataverse table that has a few columns. One of those columns is an Order Number column. There should only be one row per order number. If there is more than 1, only the first one should be kept. How can I do this in Power Automate?
What I have tried so far: First, I created an array of all the order numbers. From there, I feel stuck. I started to add an Apply to Each action, loop through the table, count how many of each order number there are, but then I confused myself and didn't think that was the right way to go.
Or...is there a way to keep the "duplicate" rows from getting added to the Dataverse table in the first place? The data is getting loaded into the table via a JSON load. Is there a way to delete the "duplicate" items from the JSON?
Here's an example of the situation:
| OrderNumber | OrderDate | CustomerName |
| 450123| 2-24-22 | Business A |
| 450123| 2-25-22 | Business A |
| 383238| 2-24-22 | Business B |
I am by no means an MySQL expert, so I am looking for any help on this matter.
I need to perform a simple test (in principle), I have this (simplified) table:
tableid | userid | car | From | To
--------------------------------------------------------
1 | 1 | Fiesta | 2015-01-01 | 2015-01-31
2 | 1 | MX5 | 2015-02-01 | 2015-02-28
3 | 1 | Navara | 2015-03-01 | 2015-03-31
4 | 1 | GTR | 2015-03-28 | 2015-04-30
5 | 2 | Focus | 2015-01-01 | 2015-01-31
6 | 2 | i5 | 2015-02-01 | 2015-02-28
7 | 2 | Aygo | 2015-03-01 | 2015-03-31
8 | 2 | 206 | 2015-03-29 | 2015-04-30
9 | 1 | Skyline | 2015-04-29 | 2015-05-31
10 | 2 | Skyline | 2015-04-29 | 2015-05-31
I need to find two things here:
If any user has date overlaps in his car assignments of more than one day (end of the assignment can be on the same day as the new assignment start).
Did any two users tried to get the same car assigned on the same date, or the date ranges overlap for them on the same car.
So the query (or queries) I am looking for should return those rows:
tableid | userid | car | From | To
--------------------------------------------------------
3 | 1 | Navara | 2015-03-01 | 2015-03-31
4 | 1 | GTR | 2015-03-28 | 2015-04-30
7 | 2 | Aygo | 2015-03-01 | 2015-03-31
8 | 2 | 206 | 2015-03-29 | 2015-04-30
9 | 1 | Skyline | 2015-04-29 | 2015-05-31
10 | 2 | Skyline | 2015-04-29 | 2015-05-31
I feel like I am bashing my head against the wall here, I would be happy with being able to do these comparisons in separate queries. I need to display them in one table but I could always then join the results.
I've done research and few hours of testing but I cant get nowhere near the result I want.
SQLFiddle with the above test data
I've tried these posts btw (they were not exactly what I needed but were close enough, or so I thought):
Comparing two date ranges within the same table
How to compare values of text columns from the same table
This was the closest solution I could find but when I tried it on a single table (joining table to itself) I was getting crazy results: Checking a table for time overlap?
EDIT
As a temporary solution I have adapted a different approach, similar to the posts I have found during my research (above). I will now check if the new car rental / assignment date overlaps with any date range within the table. If so I will save the id(s) of the rows that the date overlaps with. This way at least I will be able to flag overlaps and allow a user to look at the flagged rows and to resolve any overlaps manually.
Thanks to everyone who offered their help with this, I will flag philipxy answer as the chosen one (in next 24h) unless someone has better way of achieving this. I have no doubt that following his answer I will be able to eventually reach the results I need. At the moment though I need to adopt any solution that works as I need to finish my project in next few days, hence the change of approach.
Edit #2
The both answers are brilliant and to anyone who finds this post having the same issue as I did, read them both and look at the fiddles! :) A lot of amazing brain-work went into them! Temporarily I had to go with the solution I mention in #1 Edit of mine but I will be adapting my queries to go with #Ryan Vincent approach + #philipxy edits/comments about ignoring the initial one day overlap.
Here is the first part: Overlapping cars per user...
SQLFiddle - correlated Query and Join Query
Second part - more than one user in one car at the same time: SQLFiddle - correlated Query and Join Query. Query below...
I use the correlated queries:
You will likely need indexes on userid and 'car'. However - please check the 'explain plan' to see how it mysql is accessing the data. And just try it :)
Overlapping cars per user
The query:
SELECT `allCars`.`userid` AS `allCars_userid`,
`allCars`.`car` AS `allCars_car`,
`allCars`.`From` AS `allCars_From`,
`allCars`.`To` AS `allCars_To`,
`allCars`.`tableid` AS `allCars_id`
FROM
`cars` AS `allCars`
WHERE
EXISTS
(SELECT 1
FROM `cars` AS `overlapCar`
WHERE
`allCars`.`userid` = `overlapCar`.`userid`
AND `allCars`.`tableid` <> `overlapCar`.`tableid`
AND NOT ( `allCars`.`From` >= `overlapCar`.`To` /* starts after outer ends */
OR `allCars`.`To` <= `overlapCar`.`From`)) /* ends before outer starts */
ORDER BY
`allCars`.`userid`,
`allCars`.`From`,
`allCars`.`car`;
The results:
allCars_userid allCars_car allCars_From allCars_To allCars_id
-------------- ----------- ------------ ---------- ------------
1 Navara 2015-03-01 2015-03-31 3
1 GTR 2015-03-28 2015-04-30 4
1 Skyline 2015-04-29 2015-05-31 9
2 Aygo 2015-03-01 2015-03-31 7
2 206 2015-03-29 2015-04-30 8
2 Skyline 2015-04-29 2015-05-31 10
Why it works? or How I think about it:
I use the correlated query so I don't have duplicates to deal with and it is probably the easiest to understand for me. There are other ways of expressing the query. Each has advantages and drawbacks. I want something I can easily understand.
Requirement: For each user ensure that they don't have two or more cars at the same time.
So, for each user record (AllCars) check the complete table (overlapCar) to see if you can find a different record that overlaps for the time of the current record. If we find one then select the current record we are checking (in allCars).
Therefore the overlap check is:
the allCars userid and the overLap userid must be the same
the allCars car record and the overlap car record must be different
the allCars time range and the overLap time range must overlap.
The time range check:
Instead of checking for overlapping times use positive tests. The easiest approach, is to check it doesn't overlap, and apply a NOT to it.
One car with More than One User at the same time...
The query:
SELECT `allCars`.`car` AS `allCars_car`,
`allCars`.`userid` AS `allCars_userid`,
`allCars`.`From` AS `allCars_From`,
`allCars`.`To` AS `allCars_To`,
`allCars`.`tableid` AS `allCars_id`
FROM
`cars` AS `allCars`
WHERE
EXISTS
(SELECT 1
FROM `cars` AS `overlapUser`
WHERE
`allCars`.`car` = `overlapUser`.`car`
AND `allCars`.`tableid` <> `overlapUser`.`tableid`
AND NOT ( `allCars`.`From` >= `overlapUser`.`To` /* starts after outer ends */
OR `allCars`.`To` <= `overlapUser`.`From`)) /* ends before outer starts */
ORDER BY
`allCars`.`car`,
`allCars`.`userid`,
`allCars`.`From`;
The results:
allCars_car allCars_userid allCars_From allCars_To allCars_id
----------- -------------- ------------ ---------- ------------
Skyline 1 2015-04-29 2015-05-31 9
Skyline 2 2015-04-29 2015-05-31 10
Edit:
In view of the comments, by #philipxy , about time ranges needing 'greater than or equal to' checks I have updated the code here. I havn't changed the SQLFiddles.
For each input and output table find its meaning. Ie a statement template parameterized by column names, aka predicate, that a row makes into a true or false statement, aka proposition. A table holds the rows that make its predicate into a true proposition. Ie rows that make a true proposition go in a table and rows that make a false proposition stay out. Eg for your input table:
rental [tableid] was user [userid] renting car [car] from [from] to [to]
Then phrase the output table predicate in terms of the input table predicate. Don't use descriptions like your 1 & 2:
If any user has date overlaps in his car assignments of more than one day (end of the assignment can be on the same day as the new assignment start).
Instead find the predicate that an arbitrary row states when in the table:
rental [tableid] was user [user] renting car [car] from [from] to [to]
in self-conflict with some other rental
For the DBMS to calculate the rows making this true we must express this in terms of our given predicate(s) plus literals & conditions:
-- query result holds the rows where
FOR SOME t2.tableid, t2.userid, ...:
rental [t1.tableid] was user [t1.userid] renting car [t1.car] from [t1.from] to [t1.to]
AND rental [t2.tableid] was user [t2.userid] renting car [t2.car] from [t2.from] to [t2.to]
AND [t1.userid] = [t2.userid] -- userids id the same users
AND [t1.to] > [t2.from] AND ... -- tos/froms id intervals with overlap more than one day
...
(Inside an SQL SELECT statement the cross product of JOINed tables has column names of the form alias.column. Think of . as another character allowed in column names. Finally the SELECT clause drops the alias.s.)
We convert a query predicate to an SQL query that calculates the rows that make it true:
A table's predicate gets replaced by the table alias.
To use the same predicate/table multiple times make aliases.
Changing column old to new in a predicate adds ANDold=new.
AND of predicates gets replaced by JOIN.
OR of predicates gets replaced by UNION.
AND NOT of predicates gets replaced by EXCEPT, MINUS or appropriate LEFT JOIN.
ANDcondition gets replaced by WHERE or ON condition.
For a predicate true FOR SOMEcolumns to drop or when THERE EXISTScolumns to drop, SELECT DISTINCTcolumns to keep.
Etc. (See this.)
Hence (completing the ellipses):
SELECT DISTINCT t1.*
FROM t t1 JOIN t t2
ON t1.userid = t1.userid -- userids id the same users
WHERE t1.to > t2.from AND t2.to > t1.from -- tos/froms id intervals with overlap more than one day
AND t1.tableid <> t2.tableid -- tableids id different rentals
Did any two users tried to get the same car assigned on the same date, or the date ranges overlap for them on the same car.
Finding the predicate that an arbitrary row states when in the table:
rental [tableid] was user [user] renting car [car] from [from] to [to]
in conflict with some other user's rental
In terms of our given predicate(s) plus literals & conditions:
-- query result holds the rows where
FOR SOME t2.*
rental [t1.tableid] was user [t1.userid] renting car [t1.car] from [t1.from] to [t1.to]
AND rental [t2.tableid] was user [t2.userid] renting car [t2.car] from [t2.from] to [t2.to]
AND [t1.userid] <> [t2.userid] -- userids id different users
AND [t1.car] = [t2.car] -- .cars id the same car
AND [t1.to] >= [t2.from] AND [t2.to] >= [t1.from] -- tos/froms id intervals with any overlap
AND [t1.tableid] <> [t2.tableid] -- tableids id different rentals
The UNION of queries for predicates 1 & 2 returns the rows for which predicate 1ORpredicate 2.
Try to learn to express predicates--what rows state when in tables--if only as the goal for intuitive (sub)querying.
PS It is good to always have data checking edge & non-edge cases for a condition being true & being false. Eg try query 1 with GTR starting on the 31st, an overlap of only one day, which should not be a self-conflict.
PPS Querying involving duplicate rows, as with NULLs, has quite complex query meanings. It's hard to say when a tuple goes in or stays out of a table and how many times. For queries to have the simple intuitive meanings per my correspondences they can't have duplicates. Here SQL unfortunately differs from the relational model. In practice people rely on idioms when allowing non-distinct rows & they rely on rows being distinct because of constraints. Eg joining on UNIQUE columns per UNIQUEs, PKs & FKs. Eg: A final DISTINCT step is only doing work at a different time than a version that doesn't need it; time might or might not be be an important implementation issue affecting the phrasing chosen for a given predicate/result.
Update: Question refined, I still need help!
I have the following table structure:
table reports:
ID | time | title | (extra columns)
1 | 1364762762 | xxx | ...
Multiple object tables that have the following structure
ID | objectID | time | title | (extra columns)
1 | 1 | 1222222222 | ... | ...
2 | 2 | 1333333333 | ... | ...
3 | 3 | 1444444444 | ... | ...
4 | 1 | 1555555555 | ... | ...
In the object tables, on an object update a new version with the same objectID is inserted, so that the old versions are still available. For example see the entries with objectID = 1
In the reports table, a report is inserted but never updated/edited.
What I want to be able to do is the following:
For each entry in my reports table, I want to be able to query the state of all objects, like they were, when the report was created.
For example lets look at the sample report above with ID 1. At the time it was created (see the time column), the current version of objectID 1 was the entry with ID 1 (entry ID 4 did not exist at that point).
ObjectID 2 also existed with it's current version with entry ID 2.
I am not sure how to achieve this.
I could use a query that selects the object versions by the time column:
SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT *
FROM objects
WHERE time < [reportTime]
ORDER BY time DESC
)
GROUP BY objectID
Lets not talk about the performance of this query, it is just to make clear what I want to do. My problem is the comparison of the time columns. I think this is no good way to make sure that I got the right object versions, because the system time may change "for any reason" and the time column would then have wrong data in it, which would lead to wrong results.
What would be another way to do so?
I thought about not using a time column for this, but instead a GLOBAL incremental value that I know the insertion order across the database tables.
If you are interting new versions of the object, and your problem is the time column(I assume you are using this column to sort which one is newer); I suggest you to use an auto-incremental ID column for the versions. Eventually, even if the time value is not reliable for you, the ID will be.Since it is always increasing. So higher ID, newer version.
Currently I have 3 values that I need to sort, in the following order: gameDate, some-column-that-guarantees-insertion-order, team score.
Obviously, with the second sort param as a unique key, the 3rd sort param will be ignored. So, rather than sorting by, say, game result PK id, in the production app I created a "sort" column that stores a non-unique incremented value (see query result below), which then allows a
SORT BY gameDate, sort, total DESC
where sorting by total gives me the winning (or tie-ing) team first, so I don't have to
if(teamA.total >= teamB.total) // show winner on left, loser on right
in the application layer to generate the weekly games report.
So, in order to have my sorting cake, and not maintain an intermediary sort column, it appears that a datetime or timestamp could do the trick; however, the catch is that I need the sort on the insertion date non-uniquely (date value must be the same for both participant team result rows), otherwise, it's the same as sorting on game result PK id, the 3rd sort column will be ignored.
Why do I need to do this? Requirements are that the most recent game results should be displayed last on any given game date (which sort by gameDate, PK id does), and my own requirement is that the 3rd column sort on total is reachable (which again, is NOT possible with a unique-key-column as the 2nd sort param).
Probably even now this is clear as mud ;-)
ORIGINAL
I have a list of game results that need to be displayed in a report, sorted by game date, followed by a fixed sort order (i.e. cannot sort on game ID as the most recently displayed games must display last for each date in the report) and finally by winning team score.
In the current version of the app I'm using an int sort column, which, on game result submission, is queried for and then incremented by 1 for the db insert operation. The end result is that I can run a query like:
SELECT id, gameID, gameDate, teamID, total, sort
FROM games
ORDER BY gameDate, sort, total desc
+----+--------+------------+--------+-------+------+
| id | gameID | gameDate | teamID | total | sort |
+----+--------+------------+--------+-------+------+
| 1 | 3 | 2011-12-01 | 798 | 6 | 161 |
| 2 | 3 | 2011-12-01 | 106 | 3 | 161 |
| 3 | 4 | 2011-12-01 | 78 | 8 | 162 |
| 4 | 4 | 2011-12-01 | 106 | 7 | 162 |
| 5 | 5 | 2011-12-04 | 106 | 4 | 163 |
| 6 | 5 | 2011-12-04 | 167 | 3 | 163 |
+----+--------+------------+--------+-------+------+
However, I'd prefer to not deal with maintaining a sort column. Yes, I can sort by gameDate and then by game result id PK in the query, and determine winning team sort in the application layer, doing an if(teamA.total >= teamB.total) ...., but that is ugly as well ;-)
I'm thinking maybe a DateTime, or Timestamp (if that allows non-unique) might do the trick. Bit risky given that MySQL does not, as I recall, handle microseconds, so the problem of 2 different game results being submitted at the same time is a possiblity (which could cause the game report to display incorrectly).
Anyway, bottomline is that I need to find a way to sort by game date and preserve insertion order so I can get the last sort clause on team's score for the game (i.e. sort by winning team).
Ideas appreciated
Thanks
Further discussion from my comment:
1) If you know that each game only has 2 teams, there's no need to normalize in this fashion. Something along the lines of:
gameID, team1ID, team1Total, team2ID, team2Total, tsPosted
would probably be better.
Well 1) is enough for now. Was going to mention that you can join a table on itself and find the winner that way without requiring any logic on the application layer.
storing insertion as a DateTime seems the easier and more maintainable approach (vs. hacked sort column currently in place); the sort clause then becomes:
SORT BY gameDate, createDate, gameID, total DESC
Where createDate is non-unique, which means that subsequent sort columns are reachable. In this scenario even if 2 separate game results are submitted at the same time, it won't matter as gameID sort provides the gateway to the desired final sort, the winning team ;-)
So basically I can do in the application layer:
games.map(x=> dao.insert(x))
where each participant team in the game result has the same DateTime value for createDate column.
Should do the trick...
I am thinking of returning a randomly ordered SQL response where the results are mixed up randomly, with a limit.
The thing is I need All the rows back, basically divided into groups (chunks of rows). I hope I am clear.
For example, from table A:
ID | NAME | PROFESSION
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 | Jack | Carpenter
2 | Rob | Manager
3 | Phil | Driver
4 | Mary | Cook
5 | Tim | Postman
6 | Bob | Programmer
The query would return something like this:
With a limit of 0,2:
6 | Bob | Programmer
4 | Mary | Cook
With a limit of 2,2:
1 | Jack | Carpenter
5 | Tim | Postman
With a limit of 4,2:
3 | Phil | Driver
2 | Rob | Manager
Note: all the table rows were returned. In my page I need to have a << >> buttons that will show the user the needed "group"s of data.
How do I go about writing such a query ?
A better name for your explained problem would be randomly shuffled records. That is true that the order is random but since the order needs to be remembered, you have no choice but to save it in a column. You can do this by saving a randomly populated field and ordering your records based on that. This way you have ordered your records in no specific order while the order is remembered for future select queries. And whenever you got tired of the order, you can update the mentioned field with new randomly generated values to shuffle them again. This is the technique used by players to shuffle a playlist without replaying a song twice.
[EDIT]
While the first given solution stands as the general answer, there's a hack you can use in MySQL to randomly order records. In this way, all you need to store for remembering an order is its seed.
SELECT * FROM tbl ORDER BY RAND(s);
For instance, if you want each user see the records in some different randomly ordered, you can use their user_id as the seed. This way the order each user will ever see the records in, will remain the same while it is random and different from other users.
I can think of two things here:
If the data in the table is huge, add a column that tells the group to which a row belongs. When the user clicks on >> or << buttons, get the rows for that particular group.
If you are dealing with small amount of data, you could do this in the code itself.
If you use ORDER BY RAND() then you will have to flag selected records somewhere which is no advisable.
You can use some intelligent algorithm with combination of total_pages and ID e.g.
SELECT *
FROM my_table
ORDER BY MOD(ID, total_pages);
Add a column to the table called something like random_col
Then each time you need to randomise the table you run
UPDATE table SET random_col = RAND()
And now each time you want to retrieve results you run a normal select
SELECT * FROM table ORDER BY random_col ASC LIMIT x,y
And the results will appear in the same order until you randomise them again by running the 'UPDATE'