I have 2 criteria and I'm doing a union between them.
The first criteria contains Category, Marks, SUM(0)
The second criteria contains Category, SUM(0), Marks
The difference between these 2 criteria is that the first criteria displays data for the year 2017 and the second criteria displays for the year 2016. But in the resultant column the second criteria marks is always displayed as 0. Is there am going wrong with the union concept?
I don't see why you would use a union report for this. You can use an 'ago' function where you can recreate the measure for a certain timeframe 'ago'. You can read the way to go at http://gerardnico.com/wiki/dat/obiee/obis/ago
Then you can add Marks (measure1), Marks 'ago' (measure2) and category (your dimension).
Can this help solve your problem or is there another reason why you went for a union report here?
Related
I need someone who can explain me about "group function is not allowed here" because I don't understand it and I would like to understand it.
I have to get the product name and the unit price of the products that have a price above the average
I initially tried to use this, but oracle quickly told me that it was wrong.
SELECT productname,unitprice
FROM products
WHERE unitprice>(AVG(unitprice));
search for information and found that I could get it this way:
SELECT productname,unitprice FROM products
WHERE unitprice > (SELECT AVG(unitprice) FROM products);
What I want to know is why do you put two select?
What does group function is not allowed here mean?
More than once I have encountered this error and I would like to be able to understand what to do when it appears
Thank you very much for your time
The phrase "group function not allowed here" is referring to anything that is in some way an "aggregation" of data, eg SUM, MIN, MAX, etc et. These functions must operate on a set of rows, and to operate on a set of rows you need to do a SELECT statement. (I'm leaving out UPDATE/DELETE here)
If this was not the case, you would end up with ambiguities, for example, lets say we allowed this:
select *
from products
where region = 'USA'
and avg(price) > 10
Does this mean you want the average prices across all products, or just the average price for those products in the USA? The syntax is no longer deterministic.
Here's another option:
SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT productname,unitprice,AVG(unitprice) OVER (PARTITION BY 1) avg_price
FROM products)
WHERE unitprice > avg_price
The reason your original SQL doesn't work is because you didn't tell Oracle how to compute the average. What table should it find it in? What rows should it include? What, if any, grouping do you wish to apply? None of that is communicated with "WHERE unitprice>(AVG(unitprice))".
Now, as a human, I can make a pretty educated guess that you intend the averaging to happen over the same set of rows you select from the main query, with the same granularity (no grouping). We can accomplish that either by using a sub-query to make a second pass on the table, as your second SQL did, or the newer windowing capabilities of aggregate functions to internally make a second pass on your query block results, as I did in my answer. Using the OVER clause, you can tell Oracle exactly what rows to include (ROWS BETWEEN ...) and how to group it (PARTITION BY...).
So i built a query for my leadership team that was correct, but i dont understand why oracle gave me the correct answer.
i have 3 tables that i needed to get data out of in order to get the total billed amount.
Here is my query (please forgive me, my 2nd post and im not sure how to properly format my querys)
select b.total_amount_billed as billed from t1.billing_information b
where b.billing_no in
(select h.billing_no
from t1.res_history h where h.res_seq_no in
(Select r.reservation_seq_no
from t1.res r where r.customer_order_no in ('THO40000') ))
so in the deepest select, i take the the sequence number where my customer order number was THO40000, this query returns 2 sequence numbers.
the second sub query returns the billing numbers for my order from the history table where the sequence number match, in this case for this order they both use the same billing number, 312000.
the final select, returns my total billed amount where it matched my billing numbers it found, in my case $110.
the query works, but what i dont understand is why is it not duplicated? why does it not return 110, for each time it found 312000, giving me 2 records of 110? the billing number is a PK in the billing_information table. im not sure why it worked without me using the distinct keyword on the query for the billing number.
anyway thanks for the help, ill do my best to explain if you have questions!
You are being saved because you used IN to get the billing_no values to use, rather than an INNER JOIN between the two tables using b.billing_no = h.billing_no. A join would have duplicated the records, but your IN query is essentially this:
select b.total_amount_billed as billed
from t1.billing_information b
where b.billing_no in (312000, 312000);
If there is a single row in billing_information having billing_no equal to 312000, it is in the list, so the WHERE condition is true and it is included in the results. The fact that it is in the list twice doesn't make the IN condition "more true".
Crosstab report works 99%.
About 20 rows, all but one are ok.
5 columns - Company Division.
The rows are things like cost, revenue, revenue 2, etc.
All the rows that work have three attributes I'm using to select them:
Fiscal Year
Period
Solution.
The problem is there is table that lists an YTD rate for each period. This table is not Division Specific; it's company wide.
All the tables are linked to the accounting period table that has fiscal year and period. So the overall query limits data to fiscal year (?pFiscalYear?) and period <= ?pPeriod?, based on prompt page results.
The source table has this:
FY_CD PD_NO ACT_CURR_RT ACT_YTD_RT
2018 1 0.36121715 0.36121715
2018 2 0.32471476 0.34255512
2018 3 0.25240906 0.31210183
2018 4 0.33154745 0.31925874
Note the YTD rate is not an average of any of the other numbers.
When I select the ACT_YTD_RT, as a row, I want the ACT_YTD_RT that matches the selected period.
What I get is the average if I set the aggregation to average or the lowest if I set it to other aggregations. So sometimes, it looks right (if I run for period 1,2,3, as the rate kept falling), and sometimes it's wrong (period 4
returns .3121 instead of .3192).
I've tried a number of different methods and can generate garbage data (totals, min, max, average) and crossjoins but can't figure out how to get the value I'm looking for.
I want YTD_RT where fiscal year =?pFiscal? and period = ?pPeriod?.
I tried a straight if then clause:
if (sourcetable.fiscalYear = ?pFiscalYear?) and (sourcetable.Period = ?pPeriod?) then (ACT_YTD_RT)
but I get an error like this:
'ACT_YTD_RT' is invalid in the select list because it is not contained in either an aggregate function or the GROUP BY clause. (SQLSTATE=42000, SQLERRORCODE=8120)
If I create another query that generates the right response and try to include it, I get a crossjoin error that the query I'm referencing is trying to crossjoin several other items in the crosstab query.
A union doesn't work (different number of columns).
Not sure how a join would work since the division doesn't exist in the rate table.
I maybe could create a view in the database that did a crossjoin of the division table and the rate table, add that to the framework and then I wouldn't have a crossjoin since the solution would be in the rate "table" (really view), but that seems wrong somehow.
If I could just write a freaking parameterized query direct to the database I'd be done. But in Cognos 11 crosstabs I can't find a place for a SQL query object. And that shouldn't be necessary.
I've spent hours and hours chasing this in circles.
Anybody have any ideas?
Thanks
Paul
So the earlier problem was that this:
if (sourcetable.fiscalYear = ?pFiscalYear?) and (sourcetable.Period = ?pPeriod?) then (ACT_YTD_RT)
Generated an error like this:
'ACT_YTD_RT' is invalid in the select list because it is not contained in either an aggregate function or the GROUP BY clause. (SQLSTATE=42000, SQLERRORCODE=8120)
To fix the above, I had to add a cross join of the division table and the rate table as a view in the database. Then add that to the framework. Then build the data item this way:
total (
if (sourcetable.fiscalYear = ?pFiscalYear?) and (sourcetable.Period = ?pPeriod?) then (ACT_YTD_RT)
)
And now the "total" provides the missing group by. And the crossjoin in the database provides the division information so the crosstab is happy.
I still think there should have been an easier way to do this, but I have a functioning hammer at the moment.
I know there must be a simple answer to this, but I can't find it.
I have added a couple of textboxes to a Matrix in a BIDS/SSRS report. I've given these textboxes values such as:
=Fields!WEEK1USAGE.Value
It works (after a fashion); when I run the report (either on the Preview tab, or on the Report Server site) I see the first corresponding data value on the report - but only one.
I would think that once a value has been assigned via expressions such as "=Fields!WEEK1USAGE.Value", each value would display (rows would automatically be added).
There must be some property on the Matrix or the textbox that specified this, but I can't see what it might be.
Here is how my report looks (very minimalistic, so far) in the Layout pane:
...and after running, on the Preview tab:
Obviously, I want the report to display as many rows as necessary, not just one. The textboxes do have a "RepeatWith" property, but there description doesn't sound interesting/useful/promising.
I don't see any property on the Matrix control that looks right, either.
I thought maybe the designer was only showing one row of values, and ran the report on the server, too, but there also it just shows the two values.
So what do I need to do to get all the data for a provided field?
Matrices are for display of grouped data and summary information, usually in a horizontally expanding pivot table type of format. Is a matrix really what you are after? Looking at your expression you have =Fields!Week1Usage.Value but in a matrix what I expect to see would be at least =Sum(Fields!Week1Usage.Value) or even better just =Sum(Fields!Usage.Value). Then you would have ProactDescription as your row group and the week as your column group and it would all just work out everything for you, grouping and summing by Proact vertically and expanding the weeks out horizontally.
What seems to be happening is that you have no grouping on rows or columns and no aggregation so it is falling back to the default display which is effectively the First function - it displays the first row of data and as far as the matrix is concerned it has done its job because there is no grouping.
Without knowing your problem or data, I'll make up a scenario that might be what you are doing and discuss how the matrix does the heavy lifting to solve that problem. Let's say you have usage data for multiple Proacts. Each time one is used you record the usage amount and the date and time it is used. It could be used multiple times per day but certainly multiple times in a week. So you might be able to get the times each Proact is used from a table like so:
SELECT ProactDescription, TimeUsed, Usage
FROM ProactUsage
ORDER BY ProactDescription, TimeUsed
In your report you want to show the total weekly usage for each Proact over multiple weeks. Something like this:
Proact Week1 Week2 Week3 ...
Description Usage Usage Usage ...
--------------------------------------------
Anise, Fennel 1 CT 20.00 22.50 16.35 ...
St John's Wort 15.20 33.90 28.25 ...
...
and so on. Using a dataset based on the SQL above we create a matrix and in the row group properties we group on =Fields!ProactDescription.Value and in the column group properties we group on a week expression like =DateDiff(DateInterval.Week, Fields!TimeUsed.Value, Today) and then in the intersection of the row and column we put =Sum(Fields!Usage.Value). To display the header of the column nicely put an expression like
="Week " & DateDiff(DateInterval.Week, Fields!TimeUsed.Value, Today)
The matrix automatically does all the summing by week and product and expands the weeks horizontally for as many as you are reporting. For bonus points you can also put totaling at the end of the columns and the rows to show the total use of that Proact for the period (row total) and total use of all Proacts in that week (column total).
I have to create a matrix in SSRS to detail the number uses leaving an organisation.
The columns will all represent spaces of time spanning 1 week and the rows will all represent departements in the organisation. The detail portion will be a count of people who have left that area in that week.
I have a leaving date field in the DB but nothing that flags the specific intevals I have been told to use. That means that as the matrix is, it counts each of users that have left a specific department however the date range columns is 1 day, not 1 week. Is there a way to force the column headers to respect the week intervals I want given that they are currently coming from the dataset and are not hard coded?
Firstly try to manage your data in sql itself by using Group By with date and making each group as one week period. That way you can manage to get all data in your required format
I don't know what is your columns so I am just showing a way to get the week groups from table and get the count of the people
SELECT DATEPART(wk, datevaluecolumn) weekno
, SUM(peopleleavingcolumn) totalvalue
FROM yourTable
GROUP BY DATEPART(wk, datevalue)