Okay I'm still fairly new to MS Access, but have got some of the bases down. My next issue is pulling data from two different queries but still needing them to show.
Here's what I have
I have one query with the following information
| ID Number | Points |
The other query has the following
| ID Number | Points over 1000 |
In this new query I need to do display the following
| ID Number | Points | Points over 1000 | Total Points |
There's going to be some rows where Points over 1000 doesn't exist and needs to be empty or a 0, but I need the ID Number In Points over 1000 to match and check the ID Number in just the points column.
and in the end add them up in the Points total
I hope that makes sense?
Thanks again
In theory this Query should work the way you want it to.
SELECT
tmpQ.ID,
Sum(tmpQ.Points) As ActualPoints,
Sum(tmpQ.PointsOver1000) As Over1000,
[ActualPoints] + [Over1000] As TotalPoints
FROM
(
SELECT
qryA.[ID Number] As ID,
Sum(qryA.Points) As Points,
Sum(0) As PointsOver1000
FROM
qryA
GROUP BY
qryA.[ID Number]
UNION ALL
SELECT
qryB.[ID Number] As ID,
Sum(0) As Points,
Sum(qryB.PointsOver1000) As PointsOver1000
FROM
qryB
GROUP BY
qryB.[ID Number]
) As tmpQ
GROUP BY
tmpQ.ID;
Where qryA and qryB are the two queries you have that will give you the result of two different Points.
Related
How can I find the most frequent value within a table, then add up the value from those columns for outputting data?
player | money
player001 | 120
player001 | 140
player002 | 100
player003 | 200
The end result should output something like Player001 has 260 money - sort of like a leaderboard.
Based on your result, you don't want the most frequent value. You want the highest sum per player. That would be:
select player, sum(money)
from t
group by player
order by sum(money) desc
limit 1;
If you want a single string from this, I would recommend doing that at the application layer. However, you could use concat() to format a string in the SQL itself.
I am trying to query a dataset from a single table, which contains quiz answers/entries from multiple users. I want to pull out the highest scoring entry from each individual user.
My data looks like the following:
ID TP_ID quiz_id name num_questions correct incorrect percent created_at
1 10154312970149546 1 Joe 3 2 1 67 2015-09-20 22:47:10
2 10154312970149546 1 Joe 3 3 0 100 2015-09-21 20:15:20
3 125564674465289 1 Test User 3 1 2 33 2015-09-23 08:07:18
4 10153627558393996 1 Bob 3 3 0 100 2015-09-23 11:27:02
My query looks like the following:
SELECT * FROM `entries`
WHERE `TP_ID` IN('10153627558393996', '10154312970149546')
GROUP BY `TP_ID`
ORDER BY `correct` DESC
In my mind, what that should do is get the two users from the IN clause, order them by the number of correct answers and then group them together, so I should be left with the 2 highest scores from those two users.
In reality it's giving me two results, but the one from Joe gives me the lower of the two values (2), with Bob first with a score of 3. Swapping to ASC ordering keeps the scores the same but places Joe first.
So, how could I achieve what I need?
You're after the groupwise maximum, which can be obtained by joining the grouped results back to the table:
SELECT * FROM entries NATURAL JOIN (
SELECT TP_ID, MAX(correct) correct
FROM entries
WHERE TP_ID IN ('10153627558393996', '10154312970149546')
GROUP BY TP_ID
) t
Of course, if a user has multiple records with the maximal score, it will return all of them; should you only want some subset, you'll need to express the logic for determining which.
MySql is quite lax when it comes to group-by-clauses - but as a rule of thumb you should try to follow the rule that other DBMSs enforce:
In a group-by-query each column should either be part of the group-by-clause or contain a column-function.
For your query I would suggest:
SELECT `TP_ID`,`name`,max(`correct`) FROM `entries`
WHERE `TP_ID` IN('10153627558393996', '10154312970149546')
GROUP BY `TP_ID`,`name`
Since your table seems quite denormalized the group by name-par could be omitted, but it might be necessary in other cases.
ORDER BY is only used to specify in which order the results are returned but does nothing about what results are returned - so you need to apply the max()-function to get the highest number of right answers.
I have a system that is used to log kids' their behavior. If a child is naughty it is logged as negative and if it has a well behaviour it is logged as positive.
For instance - if a child is rude it gets a 'Rude' negative and this is logged in the system with minus x points.
My structure can be seen in this sqlfiddle - http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/46904
In the users_rewards_logged table, the reward_id column is a foreign key linked to either the deductions OR achievements table depending on the type of column.
If type is 1 is a deduction reward, if the type value is 2 is a achievement reward.
I basically want a query to list out something like this:
+------------------------------+
| reward | points | count |
+------------------------------+
| Good Work | 100 | 1 |
| Rude | -50 | 2 |
+------------------------------+
So it tallys up the figures and matches the reward depending on type (1 is a deduction, 2 is a achievement)
What is a good way to do this, based on the sqlfiddle?
Here's a query that gets the above desired results:
SELECT COALESCE(ua.name, ud.name) AS reward,
SUM(url.points) AS points, COUNT(url.logged_id) AS count
FROM users_rewards_logged url
LEFT JOIN users_deductions ud
ON ud.deduction_id = url.reward_id
AND url.type = 1
LEFT JOIN users_achievements ua
ON ua.achievement_id = url.reward_id
AND url.type = 2
GROUP BY url.reward_id, url.type
Your SQLFiddle had the order of points and type in the wrong order for the table users_rewards_logged.
Here's the fixed SQLFiddle with the result:
reward points count
Good Work 100 1
Rude -50 2
Although eggyal is correct--this is rather bad design for your data--what you ask can be done, but requires a UNION clause:
SELECT users_achievements.name, users_rewards_logged.points, COUNT(*)
FROM users_rewards_logged
INNER JOIN users_achievements ON users_achievements.achievement_id = users_rewards_logged.reward_id
WHERE users_rewards_logged.type = 2
UNION
SELECT users_deductions.name, users_rewards_logged.points, COUNT(*)
FROM users_rewards_logged
INNER JOIN users_deductions ON users_deductions.deduction_id = users_rewards_logged.reward_id
WHERE users_rewards_logged.type = 1
GROUP BY 1, 2
There's no reason NOT to combine the achievements and deductions tables and just use non-conflicting codes. If you combined the tables, then you would no longer need the UNION clause--your query would be MUCH simpler.
I noticed that you have two tables (users_deductions and users_achievements) that defines the type of reward. As #eggyal stated, you are violating the principle of orthogonal design, which causes the lack of normalization of your schema.
So, I have combined the tables users_deductions and users_achievements in one table called reward_type.
The result is in this fiddle: http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/813d5/6
I think it will be easiest to start with the table I have and the result I am aiming for.
Name | Date
A | 03/01/2012
A | 03/01/2012
B | 02/01/2012
A | 02/01/2012
B | 02/01/2012
A | 02/01/2012
B | 01/01/2012
B | 01/01/2012
A | 01/01/2012
I want the result of my query to be:
Name | 01/01/2012 | 02/01/2012 | 03/01/2012
A | 1 | 2 | 2
B | 2 | 2 | 0
So basically I want to count the number of rows that have the same date, but for each individual name. So a simple group by of dates won't do because it would merge the names together. And then I want to output a table that shows the counts for each individual date using php.
I've seen answers suggest something like this:
SELECT
NAME,
SUM(CASE WHEN GRADE = 1 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) AS GRADE1,
SUM(CASE WHEN GRADE = 2 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) AS GRADE2,
SUM(CASE WHEN GRADE = 3 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) AS GRADE3
FROM Rodzaj
GROUP BY NAME
so I imagine there would be a way for me to tweak that but I was wondering if there is another way, or is that the most efficient?
I was perhaps thinking if the while loop were to output just one specific name and date each time along with the count, so the first result would be A,01/01/2012,1 then the next A,02/01/2012,2 - A,03/01/2012,3 - B,01/01/2012,2 etc. then perhaps that would be doable through a different technique but not sure if something like that is possible and if it would be efficient.
So I'm basically looking to see if anyone has any ideas that are a bit outside the box for this and how they would compare.
I hope I explained everything well enough and thanks in advance for any help.
You have to include two columns in your GROUP BY:
SELECT name, COUNT(*) AS count
FROM your_table
GROUP BY name, date
This will get the counts of each name -> date combination in row-format. Since you also wanted to include a 0 count if the name didn't have any rows on a certain date, you can use:
SELECT a.name,
b.date,
COUNT(c.name) AS date_count
FROM (SELECT DISTINCT name FROM your_table) a
CROSS JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT date FROM your_table) b
LEFT JOIN your_table c ON a.name = c.name AND
b.date = c.date
GROUP BY a.name,
b.date
SQLFiddle Demo
You're asking for a "pivot". Basically, it is what it is. The real problem with a pivot is that the column names must adapt to the data, which is impossible to do with SQL alone.
Here's how you do it:
SELECT
Name,
SUM(`Date` = '01/01/2012') AS `01/01/2012`,
SUM(`Date` = '02/01/2012') AS `02/01/2012`,
SUM(`Date` = '03/01/2012') AS `03/01/2012`
FROM mytable
GROUP BY Name
Note the cool way you can SUM() a condition in mysql, becasue in mysql true is 1 and false is 0, so summing a condition is equivalent to counting the number of times it's true.
It is not more efficient to use an inner group by first.
Just in case anyone is interested in what was the best method:
Zane's second suggestion was the slowest, I loaded in a third of the data I did for the other two and it took quite a while. Perhaps on smaller tables it would be more efficient, and although I am not working with a huge table roughly 28,000 rows was enough to create significant lag, with the between clause dropping the result to about 4000 rows.
Bohemian's answer gave me the least amount to code, I threw in a loop to create all the case statements and it worked with relative ease. The benefit of this method was the simplicity, besides creating the loop for the cases, the results come in without the need for any php tricks, just simple foreach to get all the columns. Recommended for those not confident with php.
However, I found Zane's first suggestion the quickest performing and despite the need for extra php coding it seems I will be sticking with this method. The disadvantage of this method is that it only gives the dates that actually have data, so creating a table with all the dates becomes a bit more complicated. What I did was create a variable that keeps track of what date it is supposed to be compared to the table column which is reset on each table row, when the result of the query is equal to that date it echoes the value otherwise it does a while loop echoing table cells with 0 until the dates do match. It also had to do a check to see if the 'Name' value is still the same and if not it would switch to the next row after filling in any missing cells with 0 to the end of that row. If anyone is interested in seeing the code you can message me.
Results of the two methods over 3 months of data (a column for each day so roughly 90 case statements) ~ 12,000 rows out of 28,000:Bohemian's Pivot - ~0.158s (highest seen ~0.36s)Zane's Double Group by - ~0.086s (highest seen ~0.15s)
I have a query that outputs address order data:
SELECT ordernumber
, article_description
, article_size_description
, concat(NumberPerBox,' pieces') as contents
, NumberOrdered
FROM customerorder
WHERE customerorder.id = 1;
I would like the above line to be outputted NumberOrders (e.g. 50,000) divided by NumberPerBox e.g. 2,000 = 25 times.
Is there a SQL query that can do this, I'm not against using temporary tables to join against if that's what it takes.
I checked out the previous questions, however the nearest one:
is to be posible in mysql repeat the same result
Only gave answers that give a fixed number of rows, and I need it to be dynamic depending on the value of (NumberOrdered div NumberPerBox).
The result I want is:
Boxnr Ordernr as_description contents NumberOrdered
------+--------------+----------------+-----------+---------------
1 | CORDO1245 | Carrying bags | 2,000 pcs | 50,000
2 | CORDO1245 | Carrying bags | 2,000 pcs | 50,000
....
25 | CORDO1245 | Carrying bags | 2,000 pcs | 50,000
First, let me say that I am more familiar with SQL Server so my answer has a bit of a bias.
Second, I did not test my code sample and it should probably be used as a reference point to start from.
It would appear to me that this situation is a prime candidate for a numbers table. Simply put, it is a table (usually called "Numbers") that is nothing more than a single PK column of integers from 1 to n. Once you've used a Numbers table and aware of how it's used, you'll start finding many uses for it - such as querying for time intervals, string splitting, etc.
That said, here is my untested response to your question:
SELECT
IV.number as Boxnr
,ordernumber
,article_description
,article_size_description
,concat(NumberPerBox,' pieces') as contents
,NumberOrdered
FROM
customerorder
INNER JOIN (
SELECT
Numbers.number
,customerorder.ordernumber
,customerorder.NumberPerBox
FROM
Numbers
INNER JOIN customerorder
ON Numbers.number BETWEEN 1 AND customerorder.NumberOrdered / customerorder.NumberPerBox
WHERE
customerorder.id = 1
) AS IV
ON customerorder.ordernumber = IV.ordernumber
As I said, most of my experience is in SQL Server. I reference http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Advanced+Querying/2547/ (registration required). However, there appears to be quite a few resources available when I search for "SQL numbers table".