Very similar to my last question, now I want only the, "full combination," for a group in order of priority. So, from this source table:
+-------+-------+----------+
| GROUP | State | Priority |
+-------+-------+----------+
| 1 | MI | 1 |
| 1 | IA | 2 |
| 1 | CA | 3 |
| 1 | ND | 4 |
| 1 | AZ | 5 |
| 2 | IA | 2 |
| 2 | NJ | 1 |
| 2 | NH | 3 |
And so on...
I need a query that returns:
+-------+---------------------+
| GROUP | COMBINATION |
+-------+---------------------+
| 1 | MI, IA, CA, ND, AZ |
| 2 | NJ, IA, NH |
+-------+---------------------+
Thanks for the help, again!
Use listagg() ordering by priority within the group.
SELECT "GROUP",
listagg("STATE", ', ') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY "PRIORITY")
FROM "ELBAT"
GROUP BY "GROUP";
db<>fiddle
Related
I have 3 tables:
Product:
+----------------------------------------+
| ID_product | name_product | Amount |
+----------------------------------------+
| 0 | Door | 450 |
+----------------------------------------+
| 1 | Fence | 1500 |
+----------------------------------------+
Operation:
+----------------------------------------+
| ID_operation | name_operation | cost |
+----------------------------------------+
| 0 | Repair | 250 |
+----------------------------------------+
| 1 | Build | 320 |
+----------------------------------------+
Process:
+----------------------------------------+
| ID_product | ID_operation |
+----------------------------------------+
| 0 | 0 |
+----------------------------------------+
| 0 | 1 |
+----------------------------------------+
| 1 | 0 |
+----------------------------------------+
| 1 | 1 |
+----------------------------------------+
And need to calculate the sum of costs for each product like this:
Result table:
+-----------------------------------+
| name_product | TOTAL_COSTS |
+-----------------------------------+
| Door | 570 (250+320) |
+-----------------------------------+
| Fence | 570 |
+-----------------------------------+
But i don't have any idea how. I think I need some JOINS like below but I don't know how to handle the sum.
SELECT name_product, operation.cost
FROM product
JOIN process ON product.ID_product = process.ID_product
JOIN operation ON operation.ID_operation = process.ID_operation
ORDER BY product.ID_product;
Try the below Query
SELECT P.NAME_PRODUCT,SUM(O.COST)COST
FROM PROCESS PR,PRODUCT P,OPERATION O
WHERE PR.ID_PRODUCT=P.ID_PRODUCT
AND PR.ID_OPERATION=O.ID_OPERATION
GROUP BY P.NAME_PRODUCT;
You are almost there. Your JOINs are OK, you just need to add a GROUP BY clause with aggregate function SUM.
SELECT product.name_product, SUM(operation.cost) total_costs
FROM product
JOIN process ON product.ID_product = process.ID_product
JOIN operation ON operation.ID_operation = process.ID_operation
GROUP BY product.ID_product, product.name_product
ORDER BY product.ID_product;
I am trying to get the count of unique batches in gift_code table for each campaign. The gift_code table is joined to campaign table by campaign_id.
Here is some sample data for campaign table.
--------------+--------------
|campaign_id | name |
--------------+--------------
| 1 | abc |
--------------+--------------
| 2 | xyz |
--------------+--------------
Below is some sample data for gift_code table.
--------------+------------------------+--------------+
|gift_code_id | campaign_id | batch | unique_code |
--------------+-------------+----------+---------------
| 1 | 1 | 1 | zxc23 |
--------------+-------------+----------+--------------+
| 2 | 1 | 2 | rtc26 |
--------------+-------------+----------++-------------+
| 3 | 2 | 1 | z8723 |
--------------+-------------+----------+--------------+
| 4 | 2 | 2 | h7c26 |
--------------+-------------+----------++-------------+
| 5 | 2 | 2 | rrcf6 |
--------------+-------------+----------++-------------+
| 6 | 2 | 3 | r7y28 |
--------------+-------------+----------++-------------+
| 7 | 2 | 3 | bnc26 |
--------------+-------------+----------++-------------+
$campaign = DB::table('campaign')
->select('campaign.*', DB::raw('count(gift_code.batch) as batch_count')->groupBy('gift_code.campaign_id')->groupBy('gift_code.batch'))
->leftjoin('gift_code', 'campaign.campaign_id', '=', 'gift_code.campaign_id')
->get();
My expected results are:
--------------+-------------------------+
|campaign_id | name |batch_count|
--------------+-------------+-----------+
| 1 | abc | 2 |
--------------+-------------+-----------+
| 2 | xyz | 3 |
--------------+-------------+-----------+
Try below query
$data = \DB::table('campaign as c')
->leftJoin('gift_code as gc','c.campaign_id','=','gc.campaign_id')
->select('c.*',\DB::raw('COUNT(distinct(gc.batch)) as batch_count'))
->groupBy('c.campaign_id')
->get();
I need a way to avoid duplicate values from oracle join, I have this scenario.
The first table contain general information about a person.
+-----------+-------+-------------+
| ID | Name | Birtday_date|
+-----------+-------+-------------+
| 1 | Byron | 12/10/1998 |
| 2 | Peter | 01/11/1973 |
| 4 | Jose | 05/02/2008 |
+-----------+-------+-------------+
The second table contain information about a telephone of the people in the first table.
+-------+----------+----------+----------+
| ID |ID_Person |CELL_TYPE | NUMBER |
+-------+- --------+----------+----------+
| 1221 | 1 | 3 | 099141021|
| 2221 | 1 | 2 | 099091925|
| 3222 | 1 | 1 | 098041013|
| 4321 | 2 | 1 | 088043153|
| 4561 | 2 | 2 | 090044313|
| 5678 | 4 | 1 | 092049013|
| 8990 | 4 | 2 | 098090233|
+----- -+----------+----------+----------+
The Third table contain information about a email of the people in the first table.
+------+----------+----------+---------------+
| ID |ID_Person |EMAIL_TYPE| Email |
+------+- --------+----------+---------------+
| 221 | 1 | 1 |jdoe#aol.com |
| 222 | 1 | 2 |jdoe1#aol.com |
| 421 | 2 | 1 |xx12#yahoo.com |
| 451 | 2 | 2 |dsdsa#gmail.com|
| 578 | 4 | 1 |sasaw1#sdas.com|
| 899 | 4 | 2 |cvcvsd#wew.es |
| 899 | 4 | 2 |cvsd#www.es |
+------+----------+----------+---------------+
I was able to produce a result like this, you can check in this link http://sqlfiddle.com/#!4/8e326/1
+-----+-------+-------------+----------+----------+----------+----------------+
| ID | Name | Birtday_date| CELL_TYPE| NUMBER |EMAIL_TYPE|EMAIL|
+-----+-------+-------------+----------+----------+----------+----------------+
| 1 | Byron | 12/10/1998 | 3 | 099141021|1 |jdoe#aol.com |
| 1 | Byron | 12/10/1998 | 2 | 099091925|2 |jdoe1#aol.com |
| 1 | Byron | 12/10/1998 | 1 | 099091925| | |
| 2 | Peter | 01/11/1973 | 1 | 088043153|1 |xx12#yahoo.com |
| 2 | Peter | 01/11/1973 | 2 | 090044313|2 |dsdsa#gmail.com |
| 4 | Jose | 05/02/2008 | 1 | 092049013|1 |sasaw1#sdas.com |
| 4 | Jose | 05/02/2008 | 2 | 098090233|2 |cvcvsd#wew.es |
+-----+-------+-------------+----------+----------+----------+----------------+
If you check the data in table Email for user with ID_Person = 4 only present two of the three emails that have, the problem for this case is the person have more emails that cellphone numbers and only will present the same number of the cellphone numbers.
The result i expected is something like this.
+-----+-------+-------------+----------+----------+----------+----------------+
| ID | Name | Birtday_date| CELL_TYPE| NUMBER |EMAIL_TYPE|EMAIL|
+-----+-------+-------------+----------+----------+----------+----------------+
| 1 | Byron | 12/10/1998 | 3 | 099141021|1 |jdoe#aol.com |
| 1 | Byron | 12/10/1998 | 2 | 099091925|2 |jdoe1#aol.com |
| 1 | Byron | 12/10/1998 | 1 | 099091925| | |
| 2 | Peter | 01/11/1973 | 1 | 088043153|1 |xx12#yahoo.com |
| 2 | Peter | 01/11/1973 | 2 | 090044313|2 |dsdsa#gmail.com |
| 4 | Jose | 05/02/2008 | 1 | 092049013|1 |sasaw1#sdas.com |
| 4 | Jose | 05/02/2008 | 2 | 098090233|2 |cvcvsd#wew.es |
| 4 | Jose | 05/02/2008 | | |2 |cvsd#www.es |
+-----+-------+-------------+----------+----------+----------+----------------+
This is the way that i need to present the data.
I could not understand why your query was so complex, thus, added the simple full outer join and it seems to be working:
select distinct p.id, p.name,
case when Lag(CELL) over(partition by p.id order by p.id,pe.id) = CELL then null else cell_type end as cell_type,
case when Lag(CELL) over(partition by p.id order by p.id,pe.id) = CELL then null else CELL end as CELL,
EMAIL_TYPE as EMAIL_TYPE, EMAIL as EMAIL
from person p full outer join phones pe on p.id = pe.id
full outer join emails e
on p.id = e.id and pe.cell_type = e.email_type;
I have a SQL statement that has performance issues.
Adding the following index and a SQL hint to use the index improves the performance 10 fold but I do not understand why.
BUS_ID is part of the primary key(T1.REF is the other part fo the key) and clustered index on the T1 table.
The T1 table has about 100,000 rows. BUS_ID has only 6 different values. Similarly the T1.STATUS column can only have a limited number of
possibilities and the majority of these(99%) will be the same value.
If I run the query without the hint(/*+ INDEX ( T1 T1_IDX1) NO_UNNEST */) it takes 5 seconds and with the hint it takes .5 seconds.
I don't understand how the index helps the subquery as T1.STATUS isn't used in any of the 'where' or 'join' clauses in the subquery.
What am I missing?
SELECT
/*+ NO_UNNEST */
t1.bus_id,
t1.ref,
t2.cust,
t3.cust_name,
t2.po_number,
t1.status_old,
t1.status,
t1.an_status
FROM t1
LEFT JOIN t2
ON t1.bus_id = t2.bus_id
AND t1.ref = t2.ref
JOIN t3
ON t3.cust = t2.cust
AND t3.bus_id = t2.bus_id
WHERE (
status IN ('A', 'B', 'C') AND status_old IN ('X', 'Y'))
AND EXISTS
( SELECT /*+ INDEX ( T1 T1_IDX1) NO_UNNEST */
*
FROM t1
WHERE ( EXISTS ( SELECT /*+ NO_UNNEST */
*
FROM t6
WHERE seq IN ( '0', '2' )
AND t1.bus_id = t6.bus_id)
OR (EXISTS
(SELECT /*+ NO_UNNEST */
*
FROM t6
WHERE seq = '1'
AND (an_status = 'Y'
OR
an_status = 'X')
AND t1.bus_id = t6.bus_id))
AND t2.ref = t1.ref))
AND USER IN ('FRED')
AND ( t2.status != '45'
AND t2.status != '20')
AND NOT EXISTS ( SELECT
/*+ NO_UNNEST */
*
FROM t4
WHERE EXISTS
(
SELECT
/*+ NO_UNNEST */
*
FROM t5
WHERE pd IN ( '1',
'0' )
AND appl = 'RYP'
AND appl_id IN ( 'RL100')
AND t4.id = t5.id)
AND t2.ref = p.ref
AND t2.bus_id = p.bus_id);
Edited to include Explain Plan and index.
Without Index hint
------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
Operation | Options |Cost| # |Bytes | CPU Cost | IO COST
------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
select statement | | 20 | 1 | 211 | 15534188 | 19 |
view | | 20 | 1 | 211 | 15534188 | 19 |
count | | | | | | |
view | | 20 | 1 | 198 | 15534188 | 19 |
sort | ORDER BY | 20 | 1 | 114 | 15534188 | 19 |
nested loops | | 7 | 1 | 114 | 62487 | 7 |
nested loops | | 7 | 1 | 114 | 62487 | 7 |
nested loops | | 6 | 1 | 84 | 53256 | 6 |
inlist iterator | | | | | | |
TABLE access t1 | INDEX ROWID | 4 | 1 | 29 | 36502 | 4 |
index-t1_idx#3 | RANGE SCAN | 3 | 1 | | 28686 | 3 |
TABLE access - t2 | INDEX ROWID | 2 | 1 | 55 | 16754 | 2 |
index t2_idx#0 | UNIQUE SCAN | 1 | 1 | | 9042 | 1 |
filter | | | | | | |
TABLE access-t1 | INDEX ROWID | 2 | 1 | 15 | 7433 | 2 |
TABLE access-t6 | INDEX ROWID | 3 | 1 | 4 | 23169 | 3 |
index-t6_idx#0 | UNIQUE RANGE SCAN | 1 | 3 | | 7721 | 1 |
filter | | | | | | |
TABLE access-t6 | INDEX ROWID | 2 | 2 | 8 | 15363 | 2 |
index-t6_idx#0 | UNIQUE RANGE SCAN | 1 | 3 | | 7521 | 1 |
index-t4_idx#1 | RANGE SCAN | 3 | 1 | 28 | 21584 | 3 |
inlist iterator | | | | | | |
index-t5_idx#1 | RANGE SCAN | 4 | 1 | 24 | 42929 | 4 |
index-t3_idx#0 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | 0 | 1 | | 1900 | 0 |
TABLE access-t3 | INDEX ROWID | 1 | 1 | 30 | 9231 | 1 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With Index hint
------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
Operation | Options |Cost| # |Bytes | CPU Cost | IO COST
------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------
select statement | | 21 | 1 | 211 | 15549142 | 19 |
view | | 21 | 1 | 211 | 15549142 | 19 |
count | | | | | | |
view | | 21 | 1 | 198 | 15549142 | 19 |
sort | ORDER BY | 21 | 1 | 114 | 15549142 | 19 |
nested loops | | 7 | 1 | 114 | 62487 | 7 |
nested loops | | 7 | 1 | 114 | 62487 | 7 |
nested loops | | 6 | 1 | 84 | 53256 | 6 |
inlist iterator | | | | | | |
TABLE access t1 | INDEX ROWID | 4 | 1 | 29 | 36502 | 4 |
index-t1_idx#3 | RANGE SCAN | 3 | 1 | | 28686 | 3 |
TABLE access - t2 | INDEX ROWID | 2 | 1 | 55 | 16754 | 2 |
index t2_idx#0 | UNIQUE SCAN | 1 | 1 | | 9042 | 1 |
filter | | | | | | |
TABLE access-t1 | INDEX ROWID | 3 | 1 | 15 | 22387 | 2 |
index-t1_idx#1 | FULL SCAN | 2 |97k| | 14643 | |
TABLE access-t6 | INDEX ROWID | 3 | 1 | 4 | 23169 | 3 |
index-t6_idx#0 | UNIQUE RANGE SCAN | 1 | 3 | | 7721 | 1 |
filter | | | | | | |
TABLE access-t6 | INDEX ROWID | 2 | 2 | 8 | 15363 | 2 |
index-t6_idx#0 | UNIQUE RANGE SCAN | 1 | 3 | | 7521 | 1 |
index-t4_idx#1 | RANGE SCAN | 3 | 1 | 28 | 21584 | 3 |
inlist iterator | | | | | | |
index-t5_idx#1 | RANGE SCAN | 4 | 1 | 24 | 42929 | 4 |
index-t3_idx#0 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | 0 | 1 | | 1900 | 0 |
TABLE access-t3 | INDEX ROWID | 1 | 1 | 30 | 9231 | 1 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table Index
CREATE INDEX T1_IDX#1 ON T1 (BUS_ID, STATUS)
Oracle has 2 functions - rank() and dense_rank() - which i've found very useful for some applications. I am doing something in mysql now and was wondering if they have something equivalent to those?
Nothing directly equivalent, but you can fake it with some (not terribly efficient) self-joins. Some sample code from a collection of MySQL query howtos:
SELECT v1.name, v1.votes, COUNT(v2.votes) AS Rank
FROM votes v1
JOIN votes v2 ON v1.votes < v2.votes OR (v1.votes=v2.votes and v1.name = v2.name)
GROUP BY v1.name, v1.votes
ORDER BY v1.votes DESC, v1.name DESC;
+-------+-------+------+
| name | votes | Rank |
+-------+-------+------+
| Green | 50 | 1 |
| Black | 40 | 2 |
| White | 20 | 3 |
| Brown | 20 | 3 |
| Jones | 15 | 5 |
| Smith | 10 | 6 |
+-------+-------+------+
how about this "dense_rank implement" in MySQL
CREATE TABLE `person` (
`id` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`first_name` varchar(20) DEFAULT NULL,
`age` int(11) DEFAULT NULL,
`gender` char(1) DEFAULT NULL);
INSERT INTO `person` VALUES
(1,'Bob',25,'M'),
(2,'Jane',20,'F'),
(3,'Jack',30,'M'),
(4,'Bill',32,'M'),
(5,'Nick',22,'M'),
(6,'Kathy',18,'F'),
(7,'Steve',36,'M'),
(8,'Anne',25,'F'),
(9,'Mike',25,'M');
the data before dense_rank() like this
mysql> select * from person;
+------+------------+------+--------+
| id | first_name | age | gender |
+------+------------+------+--------+
| 1 | Bob | 25 | M |
| 2 | Jane | 20 | F |
| 3 | Jack | 30 | M |
| 4 | Bill | 32 | M |
| 5 | Nick | 22 | M |
| 6 | Kathy | 18 | F |
| 7 | Steve | 36 | M |
| 8 | Anne | 25 | F |
| 9 | Mike | 25 | M |
+------+------------+------+--------+
9 rows in set (0.00 sec)
the data after dense_rank() like this,including "partition by" function
+------------+--------+------+------+
| first_name | gender | age | rank |
+------------+--------+------+------+
| Anne | F | 25 | 1 |
| Jane | F | 20 | 2 |
| Kathy | F | 18 | 3 |
| Steve | M | 36 | 1 |
| Bill | M | 32 | 2 |
| Jack | M | 30 | 3 |
| Mike | M | 25 | 4 |
| Bob | M | 25 | 4 |
| Nick | M | 22 | 6 |
+------------+--------+------+------+
9 rows in set (0.00 sec)
the query statement is
select first_name,t1.gender,age,FIND_IN_SET(age,t1.age_set) as rank from person t2,
(select gender,group_concat(age order by age desc) as age_set from person group by gender) t1
where t1.gender=t2.gender
order by t1.gender,rank