What I'm trying to is create a table that will keep track of users who report a comment on a website. Right now, I have a table that would look something like this:
id | num_reports | users
-----------------------------------
12345 1
12489 4
For this table, I'd like id to be unique and number_reports to keep incrementing starting at 1. But for users, I'm getting confused because I'd like to keep a record of user_ids who created a report and I'm unsure of how to make it so I can store multiple user_ids.
I thought of doing something like
id | user_id
---------------
123 567
123 689
and in this case, you would just count the number of rows with id being duplicated and user_id being unique, but this just seemed inefficient.
I've been looking around, and it looks like the correct way would be creating another table, but how does that allow me to store multiple user_ids?
That's the right way to do it. Here is what you should have:
USERS COMMENTS
+---------+------+ +------------+---------+------------+---------------------+
| id_user | name | | id_comment | id_user | id_article | date |
+---------+------+ +------------+---------+------------+---------------------+
| 171 | Joe | | 245 | 245 | 24 | 2015-03-22 10:12:00 |
| 180 | Jack | | 1245 | 180 | 68 | 2015-03-23 23:01:19 |
| ... | ... | | ... | ... | ... | ... |
+---------+------+ +------------+---------+------------+---------------------+
COMMENT_REPORTS
+-----------+------------+---------+---------------------+
| id_report | id_comment | id_user | date |
+-----------+------------+---------+---------------------+
| 1 | 245 | 171 | 2015-03-24 16:11:15 |
| 2 | 654 | 180 | 2015-03-24 18:13:42 |
| 3 | 1245 | 180 | 2015-03-24 18:34:01 |
| 4 | 1245 | 456 | 2015-03-25 09:58:10 |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
+-----------+------------+---------+---------------------+
You then will be able to get:
# Every reports made by an user
SELECT *
FROM comment_reports
WHERE user_id = 180
# Every reports related to a comment
SELECT *
FROM comment_reports
WHERE comment_id = 1245
# Every reports made today
SELECT *
FROM comment_reports
WHERE date >= CURDATE()
# The amount of reports related to an user's comments
SELECT c.id_user AS User, COUNT(cr.id_report) AS Reported
FROM comment_reports cr
JOIN comments c ON (cr.id_comment = c.id_comment)
WHERE c.id_user = 180
GROUP BY c.id_user
Are you making datawarehouse? Normally quantity of reports for the websites are not saved. They are calculated on the fly by taking COUNT(*) by the website_id from the table where reports are saved. There you can save user who made this report. And then you can play by taking total of reports, or total of reports by user etc.
However if you have solution like that then you have no other option than to create separate link table for storing report<-->user links.
You can find users by there unique id, due to increment, user always unique, and never be overwrite.
Related
I am working on a simple social app and have a user_friend table which has both the user_id and friend_id as its composite keys. In the front end, the current user can look at other people's profiles and then click on add friend button which updates the user_friend table. For example, user with id 100 can view user with id 9's and 15's profiles and click on add button and then the user_friend table gets updated as
user_id: 100, friend_id 9
and
user_id: 100, friend_id 15
What is the best approach to handling such request? I was thinking creating a new table called request_table which has requester column which has the id for the user, accepter column which has the id for the friend and status column with accepted and pending. So, when requester clicks add friend button, the status gets updated to accepted which then updates the user_friend table to to reflect the change (by adding a new row user_id: 9, friend_id 100 in the above example).
Please advice if there are cleaner or better ways to do this.
I would make it much simpler than you are thinking .. Your current table looks like:
+--------------------------------+
| user_id | friend_id |
+--------------+-=---------------+
| 100 | 15 |
+--------------+-----------------+
| 100 | 9 |
+--------------+-----------------+
Add two columns .. requested and accepted:
+--------------------------------+-----------------+----------------+
| user_id | friend_id | requested | accepted |
+--------------+-=---------------+-----------------+----------------+
| 100 | 15 | 1 | 0 |
+--------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+
| 100 | 9 | 1 | 1 |
+--------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+
Although one could ASSUME that if the entry is in the table requested will always be 1 -- So really you only need to add the accepted column .. But you get the basic idea/principle.
NOTE if you need more statuses than just "accepted" like -- Say "blocked" or "suspended" etc etc you can create a third table and use the in a relational way.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| user_firends (uf_id for indexing FASTER) |
+--------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+
| uf_id | user_id | friend_id | status |
+--------------+-=---------------+-----------------+--------------+
| 1 | 100 | 9 | 1 |
+--------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
| 2 | 100 | 15 | 2 |
+--------------+-----------------+-----------------+--------------+
+---------------------------------------+
| statuses_table |
+------------------+--------------------+
| status_id | status |
+------------------+--------------------+
| 1 | requested |
+------------------+--------------------+
| 2 | accepted |
+------------------+--------------------+
| 3 | rejected |
+------------------+--------------------+
| 4 | blocked |
+------------------+--------------------+
many (users) to many (friends) with a users_friends "pivot" table AND
many (friends) to single (staus) with a direct insert of status in the column
I was trying to insert number in my database which should be start with 100. following is my query which i tried to insert in my database but it is showing every time with one not by 101.
INSERT INTO jps_final_tickets(ft_ticket_number, ft_event, ft_package_id, ft_contact_person)
SELECT COUNT(ft_ticket_number)+1, '$eventID' AS ft_event, '$ticketID' AS ft_package_id, '$contactPerson' AS ft_contact_person,
FROM jps_final_tickets WHERE ft_package_id = '$ticketID'
Above query showing following output, everything is fine but ticket number should be start from 100 series.
-------------------------------------------------
| Ticket Number | event ID | Ticket Id | Name |
| 1 | 645 | 70 | Santosh |
| 2 | 645 | 70 | Sandeep |
| 1 | 645 | 71 | Sahil |
| 1 | 645 | 72 | Jagveer |
--------------------------------------------------
Following output which i want:
-------------------------------------------------
| Ticket Number | event ID | Ticket Id | Name |
| 101 | 645 | 70 | Santosh |
| 102 | 645 | 70 | Sandeep |
| 101 | 645 | 71 | Sahil |
| 101 | 645 | 72 | Jagveer |
--------------------------------------------------
Please help me how can i insert above ticket number in my table.
Just increment the counter by 101.
SELECT COUNT(ft_ticket_number) + 101
Detailed explanation:
Initially there are no records for let's say ticket Id 70
COUNT(ft_ticket_number) will return 0 for ticket Id 70. So first value will be 0 + 101 = 101
Next time table already has 1 record. So COUNT(ft_ticket_number) will return 1 which will calculate Ticket Number as 1 + 101 = 102 and so on.
The counter will reset automatically for new Ticket Id.
This would be appropriate for you..
INSERT INTO jps_final_tickets(ft_ticket_number, ft_event, ft_package_id, ft_contact_person)
SELECT COUNT(ft_ticket_number)+101, '$eventID' AS ft_event, '$ticketID' AS ft_package_id, '$contactPerson' AS ft_contact_person,
FROM jps_final_tickets WHERE ft_package_id = '$ticketID'
What about telling it mysql directly. If you make ticket_number an auto increment value starting at 100.
If jps_ticket_number is your primary key this will work.
ALTER TABLE jps_final_tickets AUTO_INCREMENT=100;
I'd like to use GROUP BY multiple columns, I think it's best to start with an example:
SELECT
eventsviews.eventId,
showsActive.showId,
showsActive.venueId,
COUNT(*) AS count
FROM eventsviews
INNER JOIN events ON events.eventId = eventsviews.eventId
INNER JOIN showsActive ON showsActive.eventId = eventsviews.eventId
WHERE events.status = 1
GROUP BY showsActive.venueId, showsActive.showId, showsActive.eventId
ORDER BY count DESC
LIMIT 100;
Output:
| *eventId* | *showId* | *venueId* | *count* |
+-----------+----------+-----------+---------+
[...snip...]
| 95 | 92099 | 9770 | 32 |
| 95 | 105472 | 10702 | 32 |
| 3804 | 41225 | 8165 | 17 |
| 3804 | 41226 | 8165 | 17 |
| 923 | 2866 | 5451 | 14 |
| 923 | 20184 | 5930 | 14 |
[...snip...]
What I would like instead:
| *eventId* | *showId* | *venueId* | *count* |
+-----------+----------+-----------+---------+
| 95 | 92099 | 9770 | 32 |
| 3804 | 41226 | 8165 | 17 |
| 923 | 20184 | 5930 | 14 |
So, I want my data grouped by eventId, but only once for each showId and venueId ...
I actually have a SQL query that does that, but it has 8 subqueries and is as slow as a T-Ford ... And since this is executed on every page load, speeding things up looks like a good idea!
There are a few questions like this, and I've tried many different things, but I've been at this query for an hour and I can't seem to get it to work as I want :-(
Thanks!
You probably want either a min or a max on showid, and then not include it in the group by, I can't tell which because looking at your "prefered" resultset, you have both.
If you want your data grouped by eventId, group just by eventId and you'll get exactly the result you're looking for.
This is a MySQL feature (?) that it allows you to select non-aggregate columns, in which case it will return the first row available. In other DBMS it's achieved by DISTINCT ON, which is not available in MySQL.
I have developed a website (PHP) that allow staffs to add records on to our system.
Staffs will be adding thousands of records into our database.
I need a way to keep track of what record have been done and the process/status of record.
Here a number of Teams I could think of:
Data Entry Team
Proof Reading Team
Admin Team
When staff (Data Entry Team) completed a record - he/she will then click on the Complete button. Then somehow it should asssign to 'Proof Reading Team' automatically.
A record need to be checked twice from a Proof Reading Team. If StaffB finish proof reading then another member from Proof Reading Team need to check it again.
When Proof reading is done, Admin Team will then assign "Record Completed"
In a few months later record might need to be updated (spelling mistake, price change, etc) - Admin might to assign record to Data entry team.
Is this good data entry management solution? How do I put this into Database Design perspective?
Here what I tried:
mysql> select * from records;
+----+------------+----------------------+
| id | name | address |
+----+------------+----------------------+
| 1 | Bill Gates | Text 1 Text Text 1 |
| 2 | Jobs Steve | Text 2 Text 2 Text 2 |
+----+------------+----------------------+
mysql> select * from staffs;
+----+-----------+-----------+---------------+
| id | username | password | group |
+----+-----------+-----------+---------------+
| 1 | admin1 | admin1 | admin |
| 2 | DEntryA | DEntryA | data_entry |
| 3 | DEntryB | DEntryB | data_entry |
| 4 | PReadingA | PReadingA | proof_reading |
| 5 | PReadingB | PReadingB | proof_reading |
+----+-----------+-----------+---------------+
mysql> select * from data_entry;
+----+------------+-----------+------------------------+
| id | records_id | staffs_id | record_status |
+----+------------+-----------+------------------------+
| 1 | 2 | 3 | data_entry_processiing |
| 2 | 2 | 3 | data_entry_completed |
| 3 | 2 | 4 | proof_read_processing |
| 4 | 2 | 4 | proof_read_completed |
| 5 | 2 | 5 | proof_read_processing |
| 6 | 2 | 5 | proof_read_completed |
+----+------------+-----------+------------------------+
Is there alternative better solution of database design?
i think design it's well done. but may be you want to separate group into groups table, and record_status into status table. If you're storing a lot of records you would store a lot of useless information, at least create an enum type for record_status field and group field
table: groups
id - name 1 - admin 2 - data_entry 3 - proof_reading
...
table: status
id - name 1 - data_entry_processing ...
and if you want the users to be in different groups at a time, you could create users_group table
table: user_groups
group_id - user_id 1 - 1 2 - 1 1 - 4 3 -
4 4 - 4 ....
Hope this helps
I have a table with pairs of matching records that I query like this:
select id,name,amount,type from accounting_entries
where name like "%05" and amount != 0 order by name limit 10;
Results:
+------+----------------------+--------+-------+
| id | name | amount | type |
+------+----------------------+--------+-------+
| 786 | D-1194-838HELLUJP-05 | -5800 | DEBIT |
| 785 | D-1194-838HELLUJP-05 | -5800 | DEBIT |
| 5060 | D-1195-UOK4HS5POF-05 | -5000 | DEBIT |
| 5059 | D-1195-UOK4HS5POF-05 | -5000 | DEBIT |
| 246 | D-1196-0FUCJI66BX-05 | -7000 | DEBIT |
| 245 | D-1196-0FUCJI66BX-05 | -7000 | DEBIT |
| 9720 | D-1197-W2J0EC1BOB-05 | -6500 | DEBIT |
| 9719 | D-1197-W2J0EC1BOB-05 | -6500 | DEBIT |
| 2694 | D-1198-MFKIKHGW0S-05 | -5500 | DEBIT |
| 2693 | D-1198-MFKIKHGW0S-05 | -5500 | DEBIT |
+------+----------------------+--------+-------+
10 rows in set (0.01 sec)
I need to perform an update so that the resulting data will look like this:
+------+----------------------+--------+--------+
| id | name | amount | type |
+------+----------------------+--------+--------+
| 786 | D-1194-838HELLUJP-05 | -5800 | DEBIT |
| 785 | C-1194-838HELLUJP-05 | 5800 | CREDIT |
| 5060 | D-1195-UOK4HS5POF-05 | -5000 | DEBIT |
| 5059 | C-1195-UOK4HS5POF-05 | 5000 | CREDIT |
| 246 | D-1196-0FUCJI66BX-05 | -7000 | DEBIT |
| 245 | C-1196-0FUCJI66BX-05 | 7000 | CREDIT |
| 9720 | D-1197-W2J0EC1BOB-05 | -6500 | DEBIT |
| 9719 | C-1197-W2J0EC1BOB-05 | 6500 | CREDIT |
| 2694 | D-1198-MFKIKHGW0S-05 | -5500 | DEBIT |
| 2693 | C-1198-MFKIKHGW0S-05 | 5500 | CREDIT |
+------+----------------------+--------+--------+
10 rows in set (0.01 sec)
One entry should negate the other entry. It doesn't matter if I update the first or second matching record, what matters is that one has a positive amount and the other has a negative amount. And the type and name need to be updated.
Any clues on how to do this? What would the update command look like? Maybe using a group by clause? I have some ideas on how to do it with a stored procedure, but can I do it with a simple update?
Try this:
UPDATE accounting_entries as ae
SET name = 'C' + SubString(name, 1, Length(name) - 1))
amount = amount * -1
type = 'Credit'
WHERE id =
(SELECT MIN(id) FROM
(SELECT * FROM accounting_entries) as temp
GROUP BY name)
The key is the subquery in the WHERE section that limits the updates to the lowest ID of each name value. The assumption is that the lower ID is the one that you will always want to update. If this is not correct, then update the subquery based on whatever rule you would use.
Edit: Update to subquery based on technique found here, due to limitation on mysql defined here.
This query gives a method for updating all records at once (as it seemed like this is what the OP was looking for. However, the most efficient way to do this would be to enumerate through all records in code (php, asp.net, etc), and through code-based methods update the rows that needed to change. This would eliminate the performance issues inherent with running updates off of subqueries in mysql.
If the ID:s for a pair always match the formula x and x+1, you could say something like
WHERE MOD(`id`, 2) = 1
EDIT: I haven't tested this code, so I can't guarantee that it's possible to put a column name into a MOD like this, but it might be worth a try, and/or further investigation.
Does this constraint hold true all the time (D == -C) ?
If so, you do not need to keep redundant data in your table, store only one "amount" value (for example the debit):
786 | 1194-838HELLUJP-05 | -5800
and then, on the application level, append a D- to the name and get the raw amount or append a C- and get the - amount.