I have a tcxgriddbtableview with multiple columns for amounts. I want to include subtotals in each row. Is it possible to define a column in such a way that it automatically totals several columns? Totalling already happens in SQL, but it should also happen dynamically when the user changes a value in a column of the table.
I'm looking for a property of the tcxgriddbtableview which takes over this function. There must be an easy way to do this, right?
Related
This may seem a bit odd
But I'm trying to think of a way to make a pivot table using a single row across multiple columns.
Rather than having multiple items vertically and amounts in an adjacent column I was wanting to have several columns side by side in a single row in the order of item, amount, item, amount, etc. then total when the items are identical.
So in some columns there would be recurring items where I would like to sum the amount.
The concept is to create unique shopping lists for my nutrition clients.
I have new clients signing up so I was thinking an array formula with a sum function using unique function to aggregate ingredients.
But I can't think of a way to have this behave like a pivot table where it will automatically total items without it being in a single table.
Is what I'm suggesting possible?
Reference/test sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fp6ZTBtgb5E0J9GKOqh8Ae47OzY1smec5ha9BfUfAsY/edit?usp=sharing
I have a Google Sheets document with one sheet (calculator) that pulls some values from another sheet (database). database is organized by two columns: make, and model. I use some weird data validation and helper columns to make dropdowns in calculator. Then I use filter() to pull the matching value from database.
This all works fine but it will be a calculator that gets reused and the data discarded, so I need only a finite number of rows in calculator (10-20). For this, it would be super nice to be able to select the whole row and hit delete to clear the calculation without destroying all the formulas. Ideally, the filter() would happen inside an arrayformula() in a hidden and protected top row to allow the rows to be easily cleared.
For some reason though, I can't get that to work. vlookup() is not an option because I need to match two keys.
On another note, it would be nice to not need the helper columns B:J and the data validation unique to each row. This is workable though as I only need a few rows. In the actual version I hide and protect B:J and there are many more columns there.
I know you said Vlookup() wouldn't work because you need to match on two keys, I think that vlookup() will help in this situation. Try this formula...
=arrayformula(Vlookup(A3:A&K3:K,{database!A$2:A&database!B$2:B,database!C$2:C},2,False))
The concept here is to put those two matches you need into one unique key. So we use the curly brackets {} to build an array within the formula and combine those two lookup fields in your 'database' sheet. So the columns of A and B become concatenated into one element, and the second part of that array is the column C which you need.
To lookup then just combines your A&K columns similarly, so it can lookup that combined element. The rest of the vlookup follows as normal. I.e. we look up this concatenation against that one and when it matches it returns the second column of the array we built, in this case database!C.
I don't think I'm clear on your columns B:J, so I'm not sure if this helps you with that as well.
You can't get rid of the helper column approach, as long as you want the calculator to use drop down selection for the model. Data validation for dropdowns requires either a list of values, ie. static, so no good, or a range of cells.
What you might want to do is to put those cells in a totally separate tab, eg. DataValidation, and then hide that tab. Your Calculator sheet will then be cleaner, with no hidden columns. Column K will use for data validation the "hidden" values, formerly columns B:J, that are now built off in the DataValidation tab.
I am creating a spreadsheet to be used among 40 teachers to assign students to a variety of classes. Student names are in rows while the classes are in columns. As students join a class, there is a cell in the column that adds the total number of students who have joined the class. When the class reaches a specific number, I would like the column to change colors to indicate the class is full or completely lock the column so no more students may be added. Can anyone help?
Richard, if you just want to colour the column, you could try conditional formatting like so:
Pick the range of columns you want to be colour coded
Apply the custom formula =B$1>3. This means that for each column in the range, the formula will look at the first row in that column - that is why the $ is in front of the row number and not the column letter - and if that number is greater than 3 (class capacity), then the column will turn red(ish).
But if you want to lock the column, you'll need to get into Google Apps Script.
I have two tables in PowerBI and a slicer, presented below in an abstracted way.
I want to know the number of orders placed for a customer in a given date range. This data is a sample for illustration - there are actually around 10,000 Customers and 500,000 Orders and both tables have many other fields, Ids etc.
My challenge -
Whilst this is easy enough do by relating the tables and doing a count, the difficulty comes in when I still want to see customers with 0 orders and on top of that I want this to work within a date range. In other words, instead of the customers with no orders disappearing form the list, I want them to appear in the list, but with a 0 value, depending on the date range. It would also be good if this could act as a measure, so I can see the number of total customers that have not ordered on a month by month basis. I have tried outer joins, merge queries, cross joins and lookups and cant seem to crack it.
Example 1: If I set the order date slicer to be: 02/01/2017 to 01/01/2018 I want the following results
Example 2: If I set the order date slicer to be: 03/01/2017 to 06/01/2017 I want the following results
Any help appreciated!
Thanks
This is entirely possible with a Measure. When you're using the Order field to count the rows for each customer, you're essential doing a COUNTROWS() function.
With your relationship still active, we can Prefix this in a measure to check for the blanks, and in those cases, return 0. something like this would work
Measure = IF(ISBLANK(COUNTROWS(Orders)),0,COUNTROWS(Orders))
In this case, 'Orders' is the table containing the Order and Order Date fields
What I have is:
A flat PowerPivot (V2) table to show the data as an ordinary Excel table (very much simplified, it's much wider):
|Starting date|Container|Color|Price|Price inc Tax|
|01.01.2009|container 240|blue|2,50 €|3,05 €|
|01.01.2009|container 240|red |3,60 €|4,39 €|
|01.01.2009|container 360|blue|4,20 €|5,12 €|
Might it be possible to format PowerPivot table so that the summarized columns are not in the end of a row? I'm trying to make a price list/catalog tool. There are a lot of fields in the table and some are less important and I'd like them to be shown after the prices. Starting date, Container and Color are column labels and the Price and Price Tax are summarized data.
Narutally I can't move the summarized data from Value area to Row or Column area in the field list, but is there any other way to reorder the columns so that I get the summarized data e.g. in between Starting date and Container?
Thanks!
Its possible but not totally straightforward.
Writing a measure that returns text is easy for instance:
=VALUES(Table1[Container])
....will return the text from a Column called Container in 'Table1' but ONLY if the context which has been established means that there is only one value for container (VALUES returns a single column table of all values that haven't been filtered out by the current context).
To make this robust you would need to trap errors so your whole formula would look like:
=IF(COUNTROWS(VALUES(Table1[Container]))>1,BLANK(),VALUES(Table1[Container]))
Once perfected this measure can be place after the more important data.
HTH
Jacob