I have a MySQL table which looks like this:
id load_transit load_standby
1 40 20
2 30 15
3 50 10
I need to do the following calculations:
load_transit_mean = (40+30+50)/3 = 40
load_standby_mean = (20+15+10)/3 = 15
total_mean = (40+15)/2 = 27.5
Is it possible to do this in a single query? What would the best design be?
I need my answer to be scalable (the real design has more rows and columns), and able to handle some rows containing NULL.
I believe this would do it:
SELECT AVG(Load_transit)
, AVG(load_standby)
, (AVG(Load_transit) + AVG(load_standby))/2.0
FROM table
The AVG() function handles NULL's in that it ignores them, if you want the NULL row to be counted in your denominator you can replace AVG() with SUM() over COUNT(*), ie:
SUM(load_transit)/COUNT(*)
Regarding scalability, manually listing them out like above is probably the simplest solution.
Related
I have a plenty of record in MedicineStock field. i would like to only show the multiple of 25 in MedicineStock.. multiple of 25 [ 50 - 75 - 100.. etc ]
here's query i try
SELECT MedicineID,MedicineName,MedicineStock
FROM c a, MsMedicineType b
WHERE a.MedicineTypeID = b.MedicineTypeID
AND MedicineStock = MedicineStock+25
ORDER BY MedicineName
but it's not working. i'm still student i try to read the modules the teacher give.. but don't find any good refreence for it. and already looking for some refreence in google and couldn't find it. i'm totally stuck. i hope i'll get to know how to do it. in here. thank you in advance
Use the MOD function which represents the modulus operation in math.
MOD() returns the remainder of a number divided by another number, in your case, all multiples of 25 have 0 as remainder.
SELECT MedicineID,MedicineName,MedicineStock
FROM c a, MsMedicineType b
WHERE a.MedicineTypeID = b.MedicineTypeID
AND MOD(a.MedicineTypeID,25) = 0
ORDER BY MedicineName
This query takes 18 seconds
SELECT `wd`.`week` AS `start_week`, `wd`.`hold_code`, COUNT(wd.hold_code) AS hold_code_count
FROM `weekly_data` AS `wd`
JOIN aol_reporting_hold_codes hc ON hc.hold_code = wd.hold_code AND chart = 'GR'
WHERE `wd`.`days` <= 6
AND `wd`.`hold_code` IS NOT NULL
AND NOT `wd`.`hold_code` = ''
AND `wd`.`week` >= '201717'
AND `wd`.`itemgroup` IN ('BOTDTO', 'BOTDWG', 'C&FORG', 'C&FOTO', 'MF-SUB', 'MI-SUB', 'PROPRI', 'PROPTO', 'STRSTO', 'STRSUB')
AND `production_type` = 2
AND `contract` = "1234"
AND `project` = 8
GROUP BY `start_week`, `wd`.`hold_code`
This query takes 4 seconds
SELECT `wd`.`week` AS `start_week`, `wd`.`hold_code`, COUNT(wd.hold_code) AS hold_code_count
FROM `weekly_data` AS `wd`
JOIN aol_reporting_hold_codes hc ON hc.hold_code = wd.hold_code AND chart = 'GR'
WHERE `wd`.`days` <= 6
AND `wd`.`hold_code` IS NOT NULL
AND NOT `wd`.`hold_code` = ''
AND `wd`.`week` >= '201717'
AND `wd`.`itemgroup` IN ('BOTDWG', 'C&FORG', 'C&FOTO', 'MF-SUB', 'MI-SUB', 'PROPRI', 'PROPTO', 'STRSTO', 'STRSUB')
AND `production_type` = 2
AND `contract` = "1234"
AND `project` = 8
GROUP BY `start_week`, `wd`.`hold_code`
All I have done is removed one item from the IN clause. I can remove any one of the items. It runs in 4 seconds as long as there are 9 items or less. It takes 18 seconds to run as soon as I increase to 10 items.
I thought MySQL limited length of command by size i.e. 1MB
More than just the EXPLAIN, use EXPLAIN FORMAT=JSON and get the "Optimizer trace" for the query. I suspect the length of the IN leads to picking a different query plan.
There is virtually no limit to the number of items in IN. I have seen as many as 70K.
That aside, you may be able to speed up even the 4-sec version...
I suggest having this index. Grrr... I can't tell which columns are in which tables. So, if these are all in one table, then make such an index:
INDEX(production_type, contract, project) -- in any order
If those are all in wd, then tack on a 4th column - any of week, itemgroup, days.
Be cautious about COUNT(wd.hold_code).
COUNT(x) checks x for being non-NULL; is that what you want? If not, then simply say COUNT(*).
When JOINing, then GROUP BY, you get an "explode-implode". The number of intermediate rows is big; that is when the COUNT is performed.
It seems wrong to both COUNT(hold_code) and GROUP BY hold_code. What are you trying to do?
For further discussion, please provide SHOW CREATE TABLE and EXPLAIN.
Please note MySql IN clause limit is established with max_allowed_packet value. You may check with NOT IN if results are faster. Also I suggest put values to be checked with IN clause under a buffer string instead of comma separated values and then give a try.
I am trying to find a reliable query which returns the first instance of an acceptable insert range.
Research:
some of the below links adress similar questions, but I could get none of them to work for me.
Find first available date, given a date range in SQL
Find closest date in SQL Server
MySQL difference between two rows of a SELECT Statement
How to find a gap in range in SQL
and more...
Objective Query Function:
InsertRange(1) = (StartRange(i) - EndRange(i-1)) > NewValue
Where InsertRange(1) is the value the query should return. In other words, this would be the first instance where the above condition is satisfied.
Table Structure:
Primary Key: StartRange
StartRange(i-1) < StartRange(i)
StartRange(i-1) + EndRange(i-1) < StartRange(i)
Example Dataset
Below is an example User table (3 columns), with a set range distribution. StartRanges are always ordered in a strictly ascending way, UserID are arbitrary strings, only the sequences of StartRange and EndRange matters:
StartRange EndRange UserID
312 6896 user0
7134 16268 user1
16877 22451 user2
23137 25142 user3
25955 28272 user4
28313 35172 user5
35593 38007 user6
38319 38495 user7
38565 45200 user8
46136 48007 user9
My current Query
I am trying to use this query at the moment:
SELECT t2.StartRange, t2.EndRange
FROM user AS t1, user AS t2
WHERE (t1.StartRange - t2.StartRange+1) > NewValue
ORDER BY t1.EndRange
LIMIT 1
Example Case
Given the table, if NewValue = 800, then the returned answer should be 23137. This means, the first available slot would be between user3 and user4 (with an actual slot size = 813):
InsertRange(1) = (StartRange(i) - EndRange(i-1)) > NewValue
InsertRange = (StartRange(6) - EndRange(5)) > NewValue
23137 = 25955 - 25142 > 800
More Comments
My query above seemed to be working for the special case where StartRanges where tightly packed (i.e. StartRange(i) = StartRange(i-1) + EndRange(i-1) + 1). This no longer works with a less tightly packed set of StartRanges
Keep in mind that SQL tables have no implicit row order. It seems fair to order your table by StartRange value, though.
We can start to solve this by writing a query to obtain each row paired with the row preceding it. In MySQL, it's hard to do this beautifully because it lacks the row numbering function.
This works (http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/4437c0/7/0). It may have nasty performance because it generates O(n^2) intermediate rows. There's no row for user0; it can't be paired with any preceding row because there is none.
select MAX(a.StartRange) SA, MAX(a.EndRange) EA,
b.StartRange SB, b.EndRange EB , b.UserID
from user a
join user b ON a.EndRange <= b.StartRange
group by b.StartRange, b.EndRange, b.UserID
Then, you can use that as a subquery, and apply your conditions, which are
gap >= 800
first matching row (lowest StartRange value) ORDER BY SB
just one LIMIT 1
Here's the query (http://sqlfiddle.com/#!9/4437c0/11/0)
SELECT SB-EA Gap,
EA+1 Beginning_of_gap, SB-1 Ending_of_gap,
UserId UserID_after_gap
FROM (
select MAX(a.StartRange) SA, MAX(a.EndRange) EA,
b.StartRange SB, b.EndRange EB , b.UserID
from user a
join user b ON a.EndRange <= b.StartRange
group by b.StartRange, b.EndRange, b.UserID
) pairs
WHERE SB-EA >= 800
ORDER BY SB
LIMIT 1
Notice that you may actually want the smallest matching gap instead of the first matching gap. That's called best fit, rather than first fit. To get that you use ORDER BY SB-EA instead.
Edit: There is another way to use MySQL to join adjacent rows, that doesn't have the O(n^2) performance issue. It involves employing user variables to simulate a row_number() function. The query involved is a hairball (that's a technical term). It's described in the third alternative of the answer to this question. How do I pair rows together in MYSQL?
I have been trying to resolve this calc field issue for about 30 mins, it looks like I have the single field conditions correct in the expression such as [points] and [contrib] but the combined ([points]+[contrib]) field is not meeting the requirement that sets the field to the correct member type, so when these are added it returns some other member type as basic. Might I use the between operator with the added fields...? I tried it, but there is some compositional error. So in other words if you got 45 points it sets you to basic only named in the points field, if you have contrib of 45 you are set to basic in the calc field as expected, but if it were 50 + 50, instead it is setting to basic when it should be "better" member label. Otherwise this simple statement should seem to be correct but the computer is not reading it so when adding. It must not be recognizing the combined value for some reason and calc fields do not have a sum() func.
Focus here: (([points]+[Contrib]) >= 45 And ([points]+[Contrib]) < 100),"Basic",
IIf(([points] >=45 And [points]<100) Or ([Contrib] >=45 And [Contrib] <100) Or (([points]+[Contrib]) > = 45 And ([points]+[contrib] < 100),"Basic",
IIf(([points] >=100 And [points] <250) Or ([Contrib] >=100 And [Contrib] <250) Or ((([points]+[Contrib]) >=100) And (([points]+[Contrib])<250)),"Better",
IIf(([points] >=250 And [points]<500) Or ([Contrib] >=250 And [Contrib] <500) Or ((([points]+[Contrib]) >=250) And (([points]+[Contrib])<500)),"Great",
IIf(([points] >=500) Or ([Contrib] >=500) Or (([points]+[Contrib]) >=500),"Best","Non-member"))))
Here is a data sample from an Access 2010 table which includes a calculated field named member_type:
id points Contrib member_type
-- ------ ------- ----------
1 1 1 Non-member
2 50 1 Basic
3 200 1 Better
4 300 1 Great
5 600 1 Best
If that is what you want for your calculated field, here is the expression I used for member_type:
IIf([points]+[Contrib]>=45 And [points]+[Contrib]<100,'Basic',IIf([points]+[Contrib]>=100 And [points]+[Contrib]<250,'Better',IIf([points]+[Contrib]>=250 And [points]+[Contrib]<500,'Great',IIf([points]+[Contrib]>=500,'Best','Non-member'))))
In case I didn't get it exactly correct, here is that same expression formatted so that you can better see where you need changes:
IIf([points]+[Contrib]>=45 And [points]+[Contrib]<100,'Basic',
IIf([points]+[Contrib]>=100 And [points]+[Contrib]<250,'Better',
IIf([points]+[Contrib]>=250 And [points]+[Contrib]<500,'Great',
IIf([points]+[Contrib]>=500,'Best','Non-member'
))))
Note if either points or Contrib is Null, member_type will display "Non-member". If that is not the behavior you want, you will need a more complicated expression. Since a calculated field expression can not use Nz(), you would have to substitute something like IIf([points] Is Null,0,[points]) for every occurrence of [points] and IIf([Contrib] Is Null,0,[Contrib]) for [Contrib]
It would be simpler to prohibit Null for those fields (set their Required property to Yes) and set Default Value to zero.
The BETWEEN operator returns TRUE if the value you are testing is >= or <= the limits you have for BETWEEN.
If you are looking at 50+50 then that total = 100 and you are Between 44 and 100. That would result in an answer of "Basic". Change the range for ([points]+[Contrib]) Between 44 And 100) to be ([points]+[Contrib]) Between 44 And 99)
I have table as shown below
gid code time qid
1 123 08:108 15
1 145 11:012 15
1 145 11:216 16
1 123 12:102 16
Now U want to group the 'gid' and add the two time with same code column (ex: i am taking 123, calculating the time (08:108+12:102)/2. Divided by '2' because code 123 appears two time,if it appears three time then divided by 3 this should be dynamic.
I want the result should be
gid code time
1 123 10:105
1 145 11:114
i tried using this query
SELECT sum(time) FROM results group by code; // result in integer values
and SELECT timestamp(sum(time)) FROM results group by code; // result is null
Your time field does not look like it is of the type TIME. A TIME field is in the format HH:MM:SS and doesn't allow to store milliseconds. The MySQL Documentation states that trailing fractions of seconds are allowed in date and time values, but are discarded and not stored.
Your time field looks like it is a varchar and while you can use functions like SUM() or AVG() on that, your notation seconds:milliseconds is wrong.
You can use the following query:
SELECT code,AVG(REPLACE(time,':','.')) FROM results group by code
This replaces the : in your value with ., creating a float number AVG() can handle correctly.
The result:
code AVG(REPLACE(time,':','.'))
123 10.105
145 11.114
Of course this will create more operations on the SQL server. The best way would be to change your column definition to FLOAT and store your seconds and milliseconds as a float:
code time
123 8.108
145 11.012
145 11.216
123 12.102
The result of SELECT code,AVG(time) FROM results GROUP BY code:
code AVG(time)
123 10.1050000190735
145 11.1139998435974
You can use the avg aggregate function on a time column - you'd just need to convert it back to time when you're done, and use time_format if the default format doesn't suit you:
SELECT gid, code, TIME_FORMAT(TIME(AVG(`time`)), '%H-%i.%f')
FROM mytable
GROUP BY gid, code