I am trying to make a graph that has a point for each day showing the number of horses present per-day.
This is example of data I have (MySQL)
horse_id | start_date | end_date |
1 | 2011-04-02 | 2011-04-03 |
2 | 2011-04-02 | NULL |
3 | 2011-04-04 | 2014-07-20 |
4 | 2012-05-11 | NULL
So a graph on that data should output one row per day starting on 2011-04-02 and ending on CURDATE, for each day it should return how many horses are registered.
I can't quite wrap my head around how I would do this, since I only have a start date and an end date for each item, and I want to know per-day how many was present on that day.
Right now, I do a loop and a SQL query per day, but that is - as you might have guesses - thousands of queries, and I was hoping it could be done smarter.
If a day between 2011-04-02 and now contains nothing, I still want it out but with a 0.
If possible I would like to avoid having a table with a row for each day containing a count.
I hope it makes sense, I am very stuck here.
What you should have, is a table containing just dates from at least the earliest date in your current table till the current date.
Then you can use this table to left join it something like this:
SELECT
dt.date,
COUNT(yt.horse_id)
FROM
dates_table dt
LEFT JOIN your_table yt ON dt.date BETWEEN yt.start_date AND COALESCE(end_date, CURDATE())
GROUP BY dt.date
Be sure to have a column of your_table in the COUNT() function, otherwise it counts the NULL values too.
The COALESCE() function returns the first of its parameter which isn't NULL, so if you don't have an end_date specified, the current date is taken instead.
Related
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.
I'm a bit of a newby at SQL and I don't really understand what to do here, so any help is really appreciated. I have a table full of readings from different readers, there's like 500.000 of them, so I can't do this by hand.
I received the table without the difference in it. I managed to calculate it, but there's a bit of a problem there...
It looks a bit like this:
reader_id | date | reading | difference
1 | 01-01-2013 | 205 | 0
1 | 02-01-2013 | 210 | 5
1 | 03-01-2013 | 213 | 3
... | ... | ... | ...
1 | 31-12-2013 | 2451 | 4
2 | 01-01-2013 | 8543 | 6092
2 | 02-01-2013 | 8548 | 5
reader_id and date form the primary key. The combination is unique.
How can I make sure I don't get the difference calculated when the last column contained a different reader_id?
When querying my data with a query like this one, the data get skewed by the incorrect difference between the two reader_ids:
SELECT AVG(difference), reader_id FROM table GROUP BY reader_id
For
I just want to get the average difference for each reader.
your query is perfectly good. I think you got something wrong in your difference calculation. The first value for reader_id=2, 6092, is the difference of the last reading from reader1 and the first reading from reader 2, i don't think that makes sense. If i'm not mistaken, the difference value is the current day reading - previous day reading. Therefore you should set the difference value of the first reading of each reader to 0.
You can do this with the following query:
UPDATE table t INNER JOIN (SELECT reader_id, min(date) as first_day FROM table GROUP BY reader_id) as tmp ON tmp.reader_id=t.reader_id AND tmp.first_day=t.date SET t.difference=0
Then
SELECT AVG(difference), reader_id FROM table GROUP BY reader_id
will do what you expect.
If you simply want the average difference, you can use the following query:
SELECT
meter_id,
MAX(reading) - MIN(reading) / COUNT(*) average_difference
FROM table
GROUP BY meter_id
ORDER BY meter_id;
It works on the logic that the the total difference for a given meter_id should be equal to MAX(reading) - MIN(reading).
I have a database with a created_at column containing the datetime in Y-m-d H:i:s format.
The latest datetime entry is 2011-09-28 00:10:02.
I need the query to be relative to the latest datetime entry.
The first value in the query should be the latest datetime entry.
The second value in the query should be the entry closest to 7 days from the first value.
The third value should be the entry closest to 7 days from the second value.
REPEAT #3.
What I mean by "closest to 7 days from":
The following are dates, the interval I desire is a week, in seconds a week is 604800 seconds.
7 days from the first value is equal to 1316578202 (1317183002-604800)
the value closest to 1316578202 (7 days) is... 1316571974
unix timestamp | Y-m-d H:i:s
1317183002 | 2011-09-28 00:10:02 -> appear in query (first value)
1317101233 | 2011-09-27 01:27:13
1317009182 | 2011-09-25 23:53:02
1316916554 | 2011-09-24 22:09:14
1316836656 | 2011-09-23 23:57:36
1316745220 | 2011-09-22 22:33:40
1316659915 | 2011-09-21 22:51:55
1316571974 | 2011-09-20 22:26:14 -> closest to 7 days from 1317183002 (first value)
1316499187 | 2011-09-20 02:13:07
1316064243 | 2011-09-15 01:24:03
1315967707 | 2011-09-13 22:35:07 -> closest to 7 days from 1316571974 (second value)
1315881414 | 2011-09-12 22:36:54
1315794048 | 2011-09-11 22:20:48
1315715786 | 2011-09-11 00:36:26
1315622142 | 2011-09-09 22:35:42
I would really appreciate any help, I have not been able to do this via mysql and no online resources seem to deal with relative date manipulation such as this. I would like the query to be modular enough to be able to change the interval weekly, monthly, or yearly. Thanks in advance!
Answer #1 Reply:
SELECT
UNIX_TIMESTAMP(created_at)
AS unix_timestamp,
(
SELECT MIN(UNIX_TIMESTAMP(created_at))
FROM my_table
WHERE created_at >=
(
SELECT max(created_at) - 7
FROM my_table
)
)
AS `random_1`,
(
SELECT MIN(UNIX_TIMESTAMP(created_at))
FROM my_table
WHERE created_at >=
(
SELECT MAX(created_at) - 14
FROM my_table
)
)
AS `random_2`
FROM my_table
WHERE created_at =
(
SELECT MAX(created_at)
FROM my_table
)
Returns:
unix_timestamp | random_1 | random_2
1317183002 | 1317183002 | 1317183002
Answer #2 Reply:
RESULT SET:
This is the result set for a yearly interval:
id | created_at | period_index | period_timestamp
267 | 2010-09-27 22:57:05 | 0 | 1317183002
1 | 2009-12-10 15:08:00 | 1 | 1285554786
I desire this result:
id | created_at | period_index | period_timestamp
626 | 2011-09-28 00:10:02 | 0 | 0
267 | 2010-09-27 22:57:05 | 1 | 1317183002
I hope this makes more sense.
It's not exactly what you asked for, but the following example is pretty close....
Example 1:
select
floor(timestampdiff(SECOND, tbl.time, most_recent.time)/604800) as period_index,
unix_timestamp(max(tbl.time)) as period_timestamp
from
tbl
, (select max(time) as time from tbl) most_recent
group by period_index
gives results:
+--------------+------------------+
| period_index | period_timestamp |
+--------------+------------------+
| 0 | 1317183002 |
| 1 | 1316571974 |
| 2 | 1315967707 |
+--------------+------------------+
This breaks the dataset into groups based on "periods", where (in this example) each period is 7-days (604800 seconds) long. The period_timestamp that is returned for each period is the 'latest' (most recent) timestamp that falls within that period.
The period boundaries are all computed based on the most recent timestamp in the database, rather than computing each period's start and end time individually based on the timestamp of the period before it. The difference is subtle - your question requests the latter (iterative approach), but I'm hoping that the former (approach I've described here) will suffice for your needs, since SQL doesn't lend itself well to implementing iterative algorithms.
If you really do need to determine each period based on the timestamp in the previous period, then your best bet is going to be an iterative approach -- either using a programming language of your choice (like php), or by building a stored procedure that uses a cursor.
Edit #1
Here's the table structure for the above example.
CREATE TABLE `tbl` (
`id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment PRIMARY KEY,
`time` datetime NOT NULL
)
Edit #2
Ok, first: I've improved the original example query (see revised "Example 1" above). It still works the same way, and gives the same results, but it's cleaner, more efficient, and easier to understand.
Now... the query above is a group-by query, meaning it shows aggregate results for the "period" groups as I described above - not row-by-row results like a "normal" query. With a group-by query, you're limited to using aggregate columns only. Aggregate columns are those columns that are named in the group by clause, or that are computed by an aggregate function like MAX(time)). It is not possible to extract meaningful values for non-aggregate columns (like id) from within the projection of a group-by query.
Unfortunately, mysql doesn't generate an error when you try to do this. Instead, it just picks a value at random from within the grouped rows, and shows that value for the non-aggregate column in the grouped result. This is what's causing the odd behavior the OP reported when trying to use the code from Example #1.
Fortunately, this problem is fairly easy to solve. Just wrap another query around the group query, to select the row-by-row information you're interested in...
Example 2:
SELECT
entries.id,
entries.time,
periods.idx as period_index,
unix_timestamp(periods.time) as period_timestamp
FROM
tbl entries
JOIN
(select
floor(timestampdiff( SECOND, tbl.time, most_recent.time)/31536000) as idx,
max(tbl.time) as time
from
tbl
, (select max(time) as time from tbl) most_recent
group by idx
) periods
ON entries.time = periods.time
Result:
+-----+---------------------+--------------+------------------+
| id | time | period_index | period_timestamp |
+-----+---------------------+--------------+------------------+
| 598 | 2011-09-28 04:10:02 | 0 | 1317183002 |
| 996 | 2010-09-27 22:57:05 | 1 | 1285628225 |
+-----+---------------------+--------------+------------------+
Notes:
Example 2 uses a period length of 31536000 seconds (365-days). While Example 1 (above) uses a period of 604800 seconds (7-days). Other than that, the inner query in Example 2 is the same as the primary query shown in Example 1.
If a matching period_time belongs to more than one entry (i.e. two or more entries have the exact same time, and that time matches one of the selected period_time values), then the above query (Example 2) will include multiple rows for the given period timestamp (one for each match). Whatever code consumes this result set should be prepared to handle such an edge case.
It's also worth noting that these queries will perform much, much better if you define an index on your datetime column. For my example schema, that would look like this:
ALTER TABLE tbl ADD INDEX idx_time ( time )
If you're willing to go for the closest that is after the week is out then this'll work. You can extend it to work out the closest but it'll look so disgusting it's probably not worth it.
select unix_timestamp
, ( select min(unix_tstamp)
from my_table
where sql_tstamp >= ( select max(sql_tstamp) - 7
from my_table )
)
, ( select min(unix_tstamp)
from my_table
where sql_tstamp >= ( select max(sql_tstamp) - 14
from my_table )
)
from my_table
where sql_tstamp = ( select max(sql_tstamp)
from my_table )
I have two simple Mysql tables:
SYMBOL
| id | symbol |
(INT(primary) - varchar)
PRICE
| id | id_symbol | date | price |
(INT(primary), INT(index), date, double)
I have to pass two symbols to get something like:
DATE A B
2001-01-01 | 100.25 | 25.26
2001-01-02 | 100.23 | 25.25
2001-01-03 | 100.24 | 25.24
2001-01-04 | 100.25 | 25.26
2001-01-05 | 100.26 | 25.28
2001-01-06 | 100.27 | 30.29
Where A and B are the symbols i need to search and the date is the date of the prices. (because i need the same date to compare symbol)
If one symbol doesn't have a date that has the other I have to jump it. I only need to retrive the last N prices of those symbols.
ORDER: from the earliest date to latest (example the last 100 prices of both)
How could I implement this query?
Thank you
Implementing these steps should bring you the desired result:
Get dates and prices for symbol A. (Inner join PRICE with SYMBOL to obtain the necessary rows.)
Similarly get dates and prices for symbol B.
Inner join the two result sets on the date column and pull the price from the first result set as the A column and the other one as B.
This should be simple if you know how to join tables.
I think you should update your question to resolve any of the mistakes you made in representing your data. I'm having a hard time following the details. However, I think based on what I am seeing there are four MySQL concepts you need to solve your problem.
The first is JOINS you would use a join to put two tables together so you may select related data using the key that you describe as "id_symbol"
The second would be to use LIMIT which will allow you to specify the number of records to return such as that if you wanted one record you would use the keywould LIMIT 1 or if you wanted a hundred records LIMIT 100
The third would be to use a WHERE clause to allow you to search for a specific value in one of your fields from the table you are querying.
The last is the ORDER BY which will allow you to specify a field to sort your returned records and the direction you want them sorted ASC or DESC
An Example:
SELECT *
FROM table1
JOIN table2 ON table1.id = table2.table1_id
WHERE table1.searchfield = 'search string'
LIMIT 100
ORDER BY table1.orderfield DESC
(This is pseudo code so this query may not actually work but is close and should provide you with the correct idea.)
I suggest referencing the MySQL documentation found here it should provide everything you need to keep going.
I've been bashing my head on this for a while, so now I'm here :) I'm a SQL beginner, so maybe this will be easy for you guys...
I have this query:
SELECT COUNT(*) AS counter, recur,subscribe_date
FROM paypal_subscriptions
WHERE recur='monthly' and subscribe_date > "2010-07-16" and subscribe_date < "2010-07-23"
GROUP BY subscribe_date
ORDER BY subscribe_date
Now the dates I've shown above are hard coded, my application will supply a variable date range.
Right now I'm getting a result table where there is a value for that date.
counter |recur | subscribe_date
2 | Monthly | 2010-07-18
3 | Monthly | 2010-07-19
4 | Monthly | 2010-07-20
6 | Monthly | 2010-07-22
I'd like to return in the counter column if the date doesn't exist.
counter |recur | subscribe_date
0 | Monthly | 2010-07-16
0 | Monthly | 2010-07-17
2 | Monthly | 2010-07-18
3 | Monthly | 2010-07-19
4 | Monthly | 2010-07-20
0 | Monthly | 2010-07-21
6 | Monthly | 2010-07-22
0 | Monthly | 2010-07-23
Is this possible?
You will need a table of dates (new table added), and then you will have to do an outer join between that table and your query.
This question is also similar to another question. Answers can be quite similar.
Insert Dates in the return from a query where there is none
You will need a table of dates to group against. This is quite easy in MSSQL using CTE's like this - I'm not sure if MySQL has something similar?
Otherwise you will need to create a hard table as a one off exercise
EDIT : Give this a try:
SELECT COUNT(pp.subscribe_date) AS counter, dl.date, MIN(pp.recur)
FROM date_lookup dl
LEFT OUTER JOIN paypal pp
on (pp.subscribe_date = dl.date AND pp.recur ='monthly')
WHERE dl.date >= '2010-07-16' and dl.date <= '2010-07-23'
GROUP BY dl.date
ORDER BY dl.date
The subject of the query needs to be changed to the date_lookup table
(the order of the Left Outer Join becomes important)
Count(*) isn't going to work since the 'date' record always exists - need to count something in the PayPay table
pp.recur ='monthly' is now a join condition, not a filter because of the LOJ
Finally, showing pp.recur in the select list isn't going to work.
I've used an aggregate, but MIN(pp.recur) will return null if there are no PayPal records
What you could do when you parameterize your query is to just repeat the Recur Type Filter?
Again, plz excuse the MSSQL syntax
SELECT COUNT(pp.subscribe_date) AS counter, dl.date, #ppRecur
FROM date_lookup dl
LEFT OUTER JOIN paypal pp
on (pp.subscribe_date = dl.date AND pp.recur =#ppRecur)
WHERE dl.date >= #DateFrom and dl.date <= #DateTo
GROUP BY dl.date
ORDER BY dl.date
Since there was no easy way to do this, I had to have the application fill in the blanks for me rather than have the database return the data I wanted. I do get a performance hit for this, but it was necessary for the completion of the report.
I will definitely look into making this return what I want from the DB in the near future. I'll give nonnb's solution a try.
thanks everyone!