I'm trying to generate a result set from a table with effectively a unique/primary key as billyear, billmonth and type along with cost and consumption. So there could be 3 bill year and bill month identical entries but the type could be one of three values: E, W or NG.
I need to create a result set that has just one row per billyear and billmonth entry.
(
select month as billmonth, year as billyear, cost_estimate as eleccost, consumption_estimate as eleccons from tblbillforecast where buildingid=19 and type='E'
)
UNION (
select month as billmonth, year as billyear, cost_estimate as gascost, consumption_estimate as gascons from tblbillforecast where buildingid=19 and type='NG'
)
UNION (
select month as billmonth, year as billyear, cost_estimate as watercost, consumption_estimate as watercons from tblbillforecast where buildingid=19 and type='W'
)
This generates a result set with only billmonth, billyear, eleccost and eleccons columns. I've tried all kinds of solutions but the above example is the simplest to show where it's going wrong.
Additionally it still has 3 rows per billmonth/billyear unique combination instead of merging to one.
UPDATE:
Sample data
SELECT month AS billmonth,
year AS billyear,
SUM(CASE type WHEN 'E' THEN cost_estimate END) AS eleccost,
SUM(CASE type WHEN 'NG' THEN cost_estimate END) AS gascost,
SUM(CASE type WHEN 'W' THEN cost_estimate END) AS watercost
FROM tblbillforecast
WHERE buildingid=19
GROUP BY billmonth, billyear;
Result:
Expected result, eg:
year | month | eleccost | gascost | watercost
2018 | 1 | 32800 | 4460 | 4750
This is behaving correctly. An SQL query result set has one name per column, and this name applies to all the rows. So if you try to rename the column in the second or subsequent queries of the UNION, those new names are ignored. The name of the column is determined only by the first query of the UNION.
Additionally it still has 3 rows per billmonth/billyear unique combination instead of merging to one.
That's also correct behavior, according to the query you tried. UNION does not merge multiple rows into one, it only appends sets of rows.
As Akina hinted in the comments above, you may use multiple columns:
SELECT month AS billmonth,
year AS billyear,
SUM(CASE type WHEN 'E' THEN cost_estimate END) AS eleccost,
SUM(CASE type WHEN 'NG' THEN cost_estimate END) AS gascost,
SUM(CASE type WHEN 'W' THEN cost_estimate END) AS watercost
FROM tblbillforecast
WHERE buildingid=19
GROUP BY billmonth, billyear;
This uses GROUP BY to "merge" rows together, so you get one row in the result per month/year.
A quick bit of guidance on various data shaping operations in SQL:
JOIN - makes resultsets wider (more columns) by bringing together tables/resultsets in a side-by-side fashion generating output rows that have all the columns of the two input column sets
SELECT - typically makes resultsets narrower by allowing you to specify which columns you're interested in and which you are not; by not mentioning an available column it disappears meaning you output fewer columns
UNION - makes resultsets taller (more rows) by bringing together resultsets and outputting one on top of the other. Because columns always have a fixed data type and one name, you must have the same number of and type of, and order of columns
WHERE - makes resultsets shorter (fewer rows) by allowing you to specify truth based filters that exclude rows
It's not hard and fast; you can use select to create more columns too, but just in a very rudimentary sense these concepts hold true - JOIN to widen, UNION for taller, SELECT for narrower and WHERE for shorter. All the work you do with SQL is a data shaping exercise; you're either paring a rectangular block of data down or extending it, and in either a vertical or horizontal direction (or a mix).
I'm not going to get into grouping because that mixes rows up, and isn't something you tried in the question.. The reason for me writing this out was purely because you'd attempted to use a UNION (height-increasing) operation when you actually wanted a widen which, regardless of how it is done (JOIN or as per Bill's answer a SELECT+GROUP, which is valid, but relies on the "mixes rows up" aspect of grouping), specifically isn't done with a UNION. Union only makes stuff taller.
To give an example of how it might be done in an alternative way to Bill's approach, this task of yours has one huge table that is "too tall" - it uses 3 rows where 1 would do, if only it were a bit wider. That is to say if only there were 3 columns for electric/gas/water then we wouldn't need 3 rows with 1 utility in each.
Of course, we have this "one utility per row" because it is very flexible. Database tables don't have varying numbers of columns but they DO have varying numbers of rows. If a new bill type came along tomorrow - internet - no table changes are needed to accommodate it; add a new type I, and away you go, adding another row. We now store 4 rows of 1 utility where 1 row with 4 columns would do, but crucially we didn't have to change the table structure. We could have infinite different kinds of bills, and not need infinite columns because we can already have infinite rows
So you want to reshape your data from 4-rows-by-1-column to 1-row-by-4-columns. It could be solved as :
narrow the table to just year,month,building,type,cost AND shorten it to just electricity
separately narrow the table to just year,month,building,type,cost AND shorten it to just gas
separately narrow the table to just year,month,building,type,cost AND shorten it to just water
join (widening) all these newly created result sets , then narrow to remove the repeated year,month,building,type columns
That would look like:
SELECT e.year, e.month, e.building, e.cost, g.cost, w.cost
FROM
(SELECT year,month,building,cost FROM t WHERE type = 'E') e
JOIN
(SELECT year,month,building,cost FROM t WHERE type = 'NG') g
ON
e.year = g.year AND e.month = g.month AND e.building = g.building
JOIN
(SELECT year,month,building,cost FROM t WHERE type = 'W') w
ON
e.year = w.year AND e.month = w.month AND e.building = w.building
WHERE
e.building = 19
You can see clearly the 3 narrowing-and-shortening operations that pick out "just the gas", "just the electric", and "just the water" - they're the (SELECT year,month,building,cost FROM t WHERE type = 'NG') and that's what reduces the height of the original table, making it three times shorter than it was in each case. If we had 999 rows X 5 cols in the big table it goes to 3 sets of 333 x 5 rows each
You can see that we then JOIN these together to widen the results - our e.g 3 sets of 333 x 5 rows each widens to 333 x 15 when JOINed..
Then went from 333x15 down to 333 X 7 when SELECTed to ditch the repeated columns
It's likely not perfect (I'd perhaps left join all 3 onto a 4th set of numbers that are just the common columns in case some utilities aren't present for a particular month), and perhaps some people will come along complaining that it's less performant because it hits the table 3 times.. All that is accessory to the point I'm making about SQL being an exercise in reshaping data - tables are the starting blocks of data and you cut them up narrower and shorter, then stick them together side by side, or on top of each other and that becomes your new data block that's maybe wider, higher, both.. In any case it's definitely a different shape to what you started with. And then you can cut and shape again, and again..
Go with Bill's conditional agg (though this way would be fine if there is one row per building/year/month) but take away a stronger notion about in what direction these common operations (SELECT/JOIN/WHERE/UNION) reshape your data
Footnote about Bill's conditional aggregation (I know I said I wouldn't talk about it but it might make more sense to now). If you have:
Type, Cost
E, 123
NG, 456
W, 789
And you do a
SELECT
CASE WHEN Type = 'E' THEN Cost END as CostE,
CASE WHEN Type = 'NG' THEN Cost END as CostG,
CASE WHEN Type = 'W' THEN Cost END as CostW
...
It spreads the data out over more columns - the data has "gone from vertical to diagonal"
CostE, CostNG, CostW
123, NULL, NULL
NULL, 456, NULL
NULL, NULL, 789
But it's still too tall. If you then run a GROUP BY, which mixes rows up and ask for e.g. just the MAX from each column, then all the NULLs will disappear (because there is a non null somewhere in the column, and NULL is lost if there is a non null, no matter what you're doing) and the rows collapse, mixing together, into one:
CostE, CostNG, CostW
123, 456, 789
The data has pivoted round from being vertical, to being horizontal - another data shaping. It was pulled wider, and squashed flatter
I am wondering if anyone could help me with a current problem i am having.
I have a database table which has the following columns
enter image description here
I have various different Areas which can have the same product and what i am looking to do is to sum the difference for all the different products in their respective areas. for example in the table above i would get the below results ( product 1 in area 1 total is 3 minutes etc)
Area Product Time
Retail Product 1 00:03:00'
Packing Product 2 00:02:00'
The start and stop columns have the DATETIME datatype
I have tried sum(timediff(stop,start)) and group it by product but this does not appear to work.
Consequently I also want to sum the difference based on the area bit no matter what I put in i always get 181
I would appreciate any help on this
All you need to do is group by your area and product, and sum the times for each. The answer here should help. For your query, you'll just need something like this:
select
area
,product
,SEC_TO_TIME(SUM(TIME_TO_SEC(`stop`) - TIME_TO_SEC(`start`))) as timediff
from products_in_area
group by area, product
If you're not tied to showing the end result as a TIME value (e.g. you can do the formatting in your calling application), your query would look a bit cleaner:
select
area
,product
,SUM(TIMESTAMPDIFF(MINUTE, `start`, `stop`)) Minutes
from products_in_area
group by area, product
Its little complicated query as it contains some conditions.
I have tables like this:
table DC - which contains one row for one northing-easting pair
Columns - Id Northing Easting
PossibleValues - Guid Std value Std value
table DCR - which contains multiple rows for each row in DC. Each row here corresponds to data on each pass on that exact location.
Columns - Id VibStatus DrivingDir CompactionValue UtcDate
PossibleValues - Guid 0/1 Forward/Reverse/Neutral +ve integers Timestamp
table DCMappings - which contains mapping between both tables.
DCId DCRId
The output I need should contain fields like this:
ResultTable
DCId DCRId Northing Easting VibStatus DrivingDir CompValue Position CompProgress
Here, Position is its position in chronological order when sorted by UtcDate grouped by DC.Id(See query at end to understand more).
And CompProgress has some conditions which is making it complicated.
CompProgress is percentage increase/decrease in CompValue compared to its previous row which was in same driving direction when arranged in ASC order of UtcDate(chronological) where the rows to be considered here should only be the ones with VibStatus set to ON(1) grouped by DCId's.
Each row in DC has multiple rows in DCR. So if row 1 in DC has 10 rows in DCR, the CompProgress should consider these 10 rows alone for calculation and then for row 2 in DC, etc...
I have written following query to extract needed fields except calculation of CompProgress. Please help me in this.
SELECT DC.Id, DCR.Id, Northing, Easting, VibStatus, DrivingDir, CompValue, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION By dcm."DCId" ORDER BY dcr."UtcDate") as passNo
FROM "DCR" dcr LEFT JOIN "DCMappings" dcm ON "Id" = dcm."DCRId"
LEFT JOIN "DC" dc ON dc."Id" = dcm."DCId"
Need evaluation of CompProgress in this query.
Sorry for lot of text. But it was necessary to make others understand what is needed.
I am trying to have a mysql query return a calculated result, but am having some challenges as I am only able to get it to return 1 value.
http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/5e9276/1
Is it possible to get total count for agents that are robot types within a department, and then the total of agents within department to calculate %?
example:
department 1, has 4 out of 5 robots. (80% robots)
the type field may not always have the same value, but will contain at least the keyword 'robot' or 'human'.
I know I can get the % programmatically, but wanted to check if there was a way to do this directly using mysql query.
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks,
Maybe this is what you want:
SELECT
department,
SUM(type LIKE '%robot%') robots,
COUNT(department) total,
SUM(type LIKE '%robot%') / COUNT(department) robot_percentage
FROM agents
GROUP BY department;
Example SQL Fiddle
To format the robot_percentage with percent sign you coud do:
CONCAT(FORMAT( (SUM(type LIKE '%robot%')*100 / COUNT(department)),2),'%') robot_percentage
I have a regular Table in SSRS. With 3 Groups...
(Parent) STORE - CLERK - PRODUCT (Child)
I have some regular aggregations. How many PRODUCTS Sold by a CLERK , How Many CLERKS Per STORE and Eventually How many PRODUCTS Per STORE
On top of the Regular Sums And Avgs, I need To Find Out The Percentage of PRODUCT (Type) Meaning a Particular value of that Group.
Example STORE 001 Has Sold 10 RADIOS (a PRODUCT) and There has Been 100 RADIOS sold by all Stores
So Basically What I Need is to show STORE 001 is Responsible for 10% of all RADIO Sales.
(A note: Ideally , I would Like to show this To adjust to the Data - So if I add new products It will group those as products (Naturally) but still give me those percentages)
= fields!product.value / sum(fields!product.value)
in its most basic form you would want to use something like this.
The first will give you the total of the current row of data and the second will give you the total of all rows of that product.
Thus you would have 10 / 100 (per your example).
This is assuming that you have your data structured correctly. Depending on the structure of you report you may need to add a scope to your total summation to make sure that you are not totaling any other datasets that may reference the same product or field.
sum(fields!product.value, "--your dataset here--")