I have data in multiple rows, and I need to combine data in similar columns and separate with a semi colon, to end up with one row with grouped by ID.
I have
ID Type
1 A
1 B
1 C
2 D
3 A
3 F
I want results to be
1 A;B;C
2 D
3 A;F
I have limited knowledge of access, but know this should be basic and easy. I appreciate assistance.
Related
Sorry for the beginner question.
I have an Outputs table:
ID
value
0
x
1
y
2
z
And an Inputs table that is linked to the Outputs through the outputsID:
ID
outputsID
name
0
0
A
1
1
B
2
1
C
3
2
B
4
2
C
Assuming that multiple outputs have at least one shared input (in this example outputID 1,3 and 2,4 are the same), is there a way to avoid the duplication of entries in my Inputs table (inputID 3 and 4)?
The 'normal' answer to your question is no. Rows 1 and 2 address output 1, and Rows 3 and 4 address output 2. They aren't duplicates and each reflect something distinct.
So if you are a beginner, I would say you shouldn't want to get rid of these rows.
That said, there are some more advanced techniques. For example, you could have the OutputsID column be an array with multiple values. This is harder, more complex, and non-standard.
usually I use [R] for my data analysis, but these days I have to use SPSS. I was expecting that data manipulation might get a little bit more difficult this way, but after my first day I kind of surrender :D and I really would appreciate some help ...
My problem is the following:
I have two data sets, which have an ID number. Neither data sets have a unique ID (in one data set, which should have unique IDs, there is kind of a duplicated row)
In a perfect world I would like to keep this duplicated row and simply perform a many-to-many-join. But I accepted, that I might have to delete this "bad" row (in dataset A) and perform a 1:many-join (join dataset B to dataset A, which contains the unique IDs).
If I run the join (and accept that it seems not to be possible to run a 1:many, but only a many:1-join), I have the problem, that I lose IDs. If I join dataset A to dataset B I lose all cases, that are not part of dataset B. But I really would like to have both IDs like in a full join or something.
Do you know if there is (kind of) a simple solution to my problem?
Example:
dataset A:
ID
VAL1
1
A
1
B
2
D
3
K
4
A
dataset B:
ID
VAL2
1
g
2
k
4
a
5
c
5
d
5
a
2
x
expected result (best solution):
ID
VAL1
VAL2
1
A
g
1
B
g
2
D
k
3
K
NA
4
A
a
2
D
x
expected result (second best solution):
ID
VAL1
VAL2
1
A
g
2
D
k
3
K
NA
4
A
a
5
NA
c
5
NA
d
5
NA
a
2
D
x
what I get (worst solution):
ID
VAL1
VAL2
1
A
g
2
D
k
4
A
a
5
NA
c
5
NA
d
5
NA
a
2
D
x
From your example It looks like what you need is a full many to many join, based on the ID's existing in dataset A. You can get this by creating a full Cartesian-Product of the two dataset, using dataset A as the first\left dataset.
The following syntax assumes you have the STATS CARTPROD extention command installed. If you don't you can see here about installing it.
First I'll recreate your example to demonstrate on:
dataset close all.
data list list/id1 vl1 (2F3) .
begin data
1 232
1 433
2 456
3 246
4 468
end data.
dataset name aaa.
data list list/id2 vl2 (2F3) .
begin data
1 111
2 222
4 333
5 444
5 555
5 666
2 777
3 888
end data.
dataset name bbb.
Now the actual work is fairly simple:
DATASET ACTIVATE aaa.
STATS CARTPROD VAR1=id1 vl1 INPUT2=bbb VAR2=id2 vl2
/SAVE OUTFILE="C:\somepath\yourcartesianproduct.sav".
* The new dataset now contains all possible combinations of rows in the two datasets.
* we will select only the relevant combinations, where the two ID's match.
select if id1=id2.
exe.
I'm trying to join a few tables in MySQL. Our setup is a little unique so I try to explain as good as I can.
I have a table 'INVENTORY' that represents the current items on stock.
These items are stored in a table 'COMPONENT'
Components are being used in installations.
Every user can have multiple installations and the same component can be used in multiple installation as well.
To uniquely map a component to an installation, it can be assigned to a PRODUCT. a product as has a 1-1 relationship with an installation. A component is not directly related to an installation
To finally assign a product to a specific installation a mapping table COMPOMENT_PRODUCT is used.
Example:
A component is like a part, lets say a screw. This screw is used in a computer. The very same screw can be used on multiple computers. But each computer can only be used on one specific installation.
TABLE COMPOMENT_PRODUCT
COMPOMENT_ID PRODUCT_ID
1 1
1 2
2 1
2 2
So we have the components C1 and C2 relevant for two installations.
TABLE INVENTORY
COMPOMENT_ID INSTALLATION_ID ON_STOCK
1 1 5
1 2 2
What I want to achieve
Now, I want to retrieve the inventory state for all components. But, not every component has an inventory record. In these cases, the ON_STOCK value from the inventory shall be NULL
That means, for this example I'd expect the following results
COMPOMENT_ID PRODUCT_ID ON_STOCK
1 1 5
1 2 2
2 1 NULL
2 2 NULL
But executing this query:
SELECT DISTINCT
COMPONENT_PRODUCT.COMPONENT_ID,
COMPONENT_PRODUCT.PRODUCT_ID,
INVENTORY.ON_STOCK
FROM INVENTORY
RIGHT JOIN COMPONENT_PRODUCT ON COMPONENT_PRODUCT.COMPONENT_ID =
INVENTORY.COMPONENT_ID
returns the following resultset:
COMPONENT_ID PRODUCT_ID ON_STOCK
1 1 5
1 2 5
1 1 2
1 2 2
2 1 (null)
2 2 (null)
Now, my next thought was, "of course, this is how joins behave, okay I need to group the results". But the way SQL works, the aggregation is not entirely predictable. SO when I
GROUP BY COMPONENT_PRODUCT.COMPONENT_ID,COMPONENT_PRODUCT.PRODUCT_ID
I get this result:
COMPONENT_ID PRODUCT_ID ON_STOCK
1 1 5
1 2 5
2 1 (null)
2 2 (null)
I have prepared a Fiddle here: http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/71ca87
What am I forgetting here? Thanks in advance for any pointers.
Try this query -
SELECT DISTINCT
COMPONENT_PRODUCT.COMPONENT_ID,
COMPONENT_PRODUCT.PRODUCT_ID,
INVENTORY.ON_STOCK
FROM INVENTORY
RIGHT JOIN COMPONENT_PRODUCT ON COMPONENT_PRODUCT.COMPONENT_ID =
INVENTORY.COMPONENT_ID
AND COMPONENT_PRODUCT.PRODUCT_ID = INVENTORY.INSTALLATION_ID
I have a table structure as follows - there are two columns A and B. For one value of column A, there can be many values of column B (Corresponding to multiple rows). I want to query SQL in a manner that I get all the values of column A for which corresponding to one particular value of column A, column B does not take a particular value. eg:
A B
1 1
1 2
2 1
2 3
2 4
3 2
3 4
3 5
If I don't want column B to have the value 3 for a particular value of column A, the query should return the following on above data
A
1
3
I cannot figure out how to write such a query and searching manually is too time consuming. Please help me write the query. Thanks in advance.
you question is not very clear. I understand that you want something like
SELECT DISTINCT A FROM table WHERE A NOT IN (SELECT A FROM table WHERE B = 3)
Supoose I have the following:
tbl_options
===========
id name
1 experience
2 languages
3 hourly_rate
tbl_option_attributes
=====================
id option_id name value
1 1 beginner 1
2 1 advanced 2
3 2 english 1
4 2 french 2
5 2 spanish 3
6 3 £10 p/h 10
7 3 £20 p/h 20
tbl_user_options
================
user_id option_id value
1 1 2
1 2 1
1 2 2
1 2 3
1 3 20
In the above example tbl_user_options stores option data for the user. We can store multiple entries for some options.
Now I wish to extend this, i.e. for "languages" I want the user to be able to specify their proficiency in a language (basic/intermediate/advanced). There will also be other fields that will have extended attributes.
So my question is, can these extended attributes be stored in the same table (tbl_user_options) or do I need to create more tables? Obviously if I put in a field "language_proficiency" it won't apply to the other fields. But this way I only have one user options table to manage. What do you think?
EDIT: This is what I propose
tbl_user_options
================
user_id option_id value lang_prof
1 1 2 null
1 2 1 2
1 2 2 3
1 2 3 3
1 3 20 null
My gut instinct would be to split the User/Language/Proficiency relationship out into its own tables. Even if you kept it in the same table with your other options, you'd need to write special code to handle the language case, so you might as well use a new table structure.
Unless your data model is in constant flux, I would rather have tbl_languages and tabl_user_languages tables to store those types of data:
tbl_languages
================
lang_id name
1 English
2 French
3 Spanish
tbl_user_languages
================
user_id lang_id proficiency hourly_rate
1 1 1 20
1 2 2 10
2 2 1 15
2 2 3 20
3 3 2 10
Designing a system that is "too generic" is a Turing tarpit trap for a relational SQL database. A document-based database is better suited to arbitrary key-value stores.
Excepting certain optimisations, your database model should match your domain model as closely as possible to minimise the object-relational impedance mismatch.
This design lets you display a sensible table of user language proficiencies and hourly rates with only two inner joins:
SELECT
ul.user_id,
u.name,
l.name,
ul.proficiency,
ul.hourly_rate
FROM tbl_user_languages ul
INNER JOIN tbl_languages l
ON l.lang_id = ul.lang_id
INNER JOIN tbl_users u
ON u.user_id = ul.user_id
ORDER BY
l.name, u.hour
Optionally you can split out a list of language proficiencies into a tbl_profiencies table, where 1 == Beginner, 2 == Advanced, 3 == Expert and join it onto tbl_user_languages.
i'm thinking it's a mistake to put "languages" as an option. while reading your text it seems to me that english is an option, and it might have an attribute from option_attributes.