So far I have a query with a result set (in a temp table) with several columns but I am only concerned with four. One is a customer ID(varchar), one is Date (smalldatetime), one is Amount(money) and the last is Type(char). I have multiple rows with the same custmer ID and want to evaluate them based on Date, Amount and Type. For example:
Customer ID Date Amount Type
A 1-1-10 200 blue
A 1-1-10 400 green
A 1-2-10 400 green
B 1-11-10 100 blue
B 1-11-10 100 red
For all occurrences of A I want to compare them to identify only one, first by earliest date, then by greatest Amount, then if still tied by comparing Types. I would then return one row for each customer.
I would provide some of the query but I am at home now after spending two days trying to get a correct result. It looks something like this:
(query to populate #tempTable)
GROUP BY customer_id
HAVING date_cd =
(SELECT MIN(date_cd)
FROM order_table ot
WHERE ot.customerID = #tempTable.customerID
)
OR date_cd IS NULL
I assume the HAVING would result in only one row per customer_id. This did not end up being the case since there were some ties there.
I am not sure I can do the OR - there are some with NULL values here - and it did not account for the step to the next comparison if they were all the same anyway. I am not seeing a way to avoid doing some row processing of the temp table with some kind of IF or WHERE loop.
As I write I am thinking maybe I use #tempTable.date_cd in the HAVING clause instead of looking at the original table. but that should return the same dates?
Am I on the right track or is there something missing? Suggestions? More info??
try below query :-
select * from #tempTable
GROUP BY customer_id
HAVING isnull(date_cd,"1900/01/01") =min(isnull(date_cd,"1900/01/01"))
Related
I have an array with products, I need to display only 1 product, with the largest number in available_amount. How can i do this?
How do I iterate to display products with parameters:
- #part.wh_ps.sort_by(&:available_amount).each do |whp|
product number1: available_amount: 2;
product number2: available_amount: 5;
If those objects are mapped from the database being the result of a query and you already have them in memory, then you could use Enumerable#max_by:
#part.wh_ps.max_by(&:available_amount)
It should return the object within that array with the biggest available_amount if any.
If you need the one with the lowest available_amount, then Enumerable#min_by, and if you need both Enumerable#minmax_by.
However if that's not the case and you're hitting the database again, you could consider making the exact query using SQL (ActiveRecord) asking for the row with the biggest value for the given column.
I have about 200,000 rows of 24 hour data as follows:
I can use the query to create a room node with time, roomtemp, and set temp as properties. Moreover, I can also, define the relationship of each room with its corresponding temperatures.
Now, I need to find:
all rows that show an update/increase/decrease from initial temperature till set temperature for all rooms. e.g. based on above data, I need:
Here I have discarded 5th row data as 16 was repetitive and showed no update(increase or decrease) in temp value. The temperature values continued till it reached set temperature '18'.
I can manually create the temperature states by giving its values one by one, but I am unsure how to MERGE the above requirement into the graph using Cypher.
Can I utilize any other programming language to obtain same results using Neo4j in conjunction?
Do I have to utilize in-graph time-tree for this scenario? Can I retrieve my results without creating a time tree?
Filter temparature by room and date (which can also be a date-node)
Sort by time
Collect into a list
Filter by differences in two subsequent temperatues
Turn list into rows
Here is a query that does this:
MATCH (r:Room)<-[:TEMP]-(t:Temparature)
WHERE t.time STARTS WITH "2016-01-01"
AND t.temp < room.temp ADN t.temp > {initial}
WITH t ORDER by t.time ASC
WITH collect(t) temps
WITH [idx in range(0,size(temps)-2) WHERE temps[idx].temp <> temps[idx+1].temp | temps[idx] ] as filtered
UNWIND filtered as t
RETURN t;
I am trying to create a report in SSRS. Below is a small example of what my dataset looks like.
Example Data Set
So, there are three different stores (A,B,C) and each has a landlord (a,b,c). Landlords can pay via three different methods (1,2,3) and the amounts paid per method are shown.
Right now, I have two filters set up. The first is by Store and the second is by Landlord.
What I am having trouble with is:
How can I set up a filter by the Amount that will return information from an entire Store/Landlord?
So for example, if I wanted to filter Amount by 150, I would like to return all the "payment" information for the store(s) that have a payment of 150. Such as the following:
Desired Result
Is it possible to add a filter to return information from the entire group? (Store and Landlord are the group in this case)
I am new to SSRS so any help/insight would be greatly appreciated!
You can use LookUpSet to locate the matching groups, JOIN to put the results in a string and the INSTR function to filter your results.
=IIF(ISNOTHING(Parameters!AMOUNT.Value) OR INSTR(
Join(LOOKUPSET(Fields!Amount.Value, Fields!Amount.Value, Fields!Store.Value, "DataSet1"), ", ") ,
Fields!Store.Value
) > 0, 1, 0)
This translates to:
If the Store value is found (INSTR > 0) in the list (JOIN) of Stores where the Amount is the current Amount (Lookupset).
In your filter, put the above expression in the Expression, change the type to INTEGER and the Value to 1.
[
I have a model with following columns
Charges Model
Date
fee
discount
Data
1/1/15, 1, 1
1/1/15, 2, 1
2/2/15, 3, 3
I have a few named scopes like this_year
I want to do something like Charges.this_year.summed_up
How do I make a named scope for this.
The returned response then should be:
1/1/15, 3, 2
2/2/15, 3, 3
Assuming you have a model with a date field(eg. published_at) and 2 integer fields(eg. fee, discount). You can use "group" method to run GROUP BY on published_at. Then just use sum method if you want only sum of one fields. If you want more than one field, you have to run a select with SQL SUMs inside, to get multiple column sums. Here is an example.
Charge..group(published_at)
.select("published_at, SUM(fee) AS sum_fee, SUM(discount) AS sum_discount")
.order("published_at")
Note: Summarized fields won't show up in rails console return value prompt. But they are there for you to use.
Depending upon what end result you want, you may want to look at .group(:attribute) rather than .group_by:
Charge.group(:date).each do |charge|
charge.where('date = ?', charge.date).sum(:fee)
charge.where('date = ?', charge.date).sum(:discount)
end
I found this approach easier, especially if setting multiple conditions on the data you want to extract from the table.
In any case, I had an accounting model that presented this kind of issue where I needed credit and debit plus type of payment info on a single table and spent a fruitful few hours learning all about group_by before realizing that .group() offered a simple solution.
I have a table with almost 300K records in it. I run a simple select statement with a where clause on an indexed column ('type' is indexed):
SELECT *
FROM Asset_Spec
WHERE type = 'County'
That query is fast - about 1 second. Additionally I want to test against status:
SELECT *
FROM Asset_Spec
WHERE type = 'County'
AND status = 'Active'
The second one is VERY slow (minutes). Status is NOT indexed and in this particular case 99.9% of values in the db ARE 'Active'.
Any ideas how I can get better performance? We are compiling our own version of SQLite so I can tweak many settings (FYI - same performance on iOS pre-canned SQLite)
I looked at the query plan and the estimate for number of rows was off by an astounding amount. Asset_Spec (~2 rows) - actual number of rows is almost 300,000. Ran 'ANALYZE' - now the same query runs in 16ms.
the first thing I would try is using a subquery
SELECT * FROM
(SELECT *
FROM Asset_Spec
WHERE type = 'County')
WHERE status = 'Active'
and as Robert suggests, adding an index on any column you want to filter by is a good idea. I'd also consider changing fields Type and Status to be something other than string.
Any reason you need to select *?
Suggestions:
Do you need to retrieve multiple records? If all you need is the first record found, then add "limit 1" to the end of the query.
If you're just checking for the existence of a row, i.e. you only need to know that there is one row with status active, then "select 1" instead of "select *".