I have two oracle tables :
USERS : ID, USERNAME, PASSWORD, ROLE
ARCHIVE_POSESSION : ID, USERID, ARCHIVEID
What I'm trying to do is obtain a query that returns me the following result set :
Username, Role, Number Of Archives
So far so good, but I can't wrap my head around the query, I'm still a beginner. So far this is where I got:
SELECT users.ID, USERNAME, ROLE, count(archive_posession.USERID)
from users inner join
archive_posession on
users.id = archive_posession.USERID
group by
archive_posession.USERID ;
But it gives me this error
ORA-00979: not a GROUP BY expression
Any tips? I'm sure group by is supposed to work for aggregate functions, but in this case I'm stoked.
The fields that you select are either be declared in group by or you should use an aggregate function.
For example
SELECT archive_posession, Max(USERID USERNAME), Max(ROLE), count(archive_posession.USERID)
FROM users INNER JOIN
archive_posession ON
users.id = archive_posession.USERID
GROUP BY
archive_posession.USERID ;
should do the trick.
The reason why that resolves this issue is because Group By returns a single row. So you should find a way to gather all selected fields that are not in group by in a single row only
It looks to me like you're trying to do something like
SELECT u.USERNAME, u.ROLE, COUNT(a.USERID)
FROM USERS u
INNER JOIN ARCHIVE_POSESSION a
ON a.USERID = u.ID
GROUP BY u.USERNAME, u.ROLE;
All columns in the SELECT list of a GROUP BY query must either be members of the GROUP BY list, or must be an aggregate function such as COUNT. In your query USERNAME and ROLE were not members of the GROUP BY list, and thus the query you saw was produced.
Related
Can someone see where I am going wrong in the below query? I am getting the error message that the GROUP BY column doesn't exist, but it clearly does as I see that column name in the output when I don't use the GROUP BY.
SELECT
(SELECT customer_address.post_code FROM customer_address WHERE customer_address.address_type = 0 AND customer_address.customer_no = orders.customer_no) postcode, SUM(orders.order_no) orders
FROM
orders, customer_address
WHERE
orders.delivery_date = '27-MAY-15'
GROUP BY
postcode;
The answer is: You cannot use an alias name in GROUP BY.
So:
GROUP BY (SELECT customer_address.post_code ...);
Or:
select postcode, sum(order_no)
from
(
SELECT
(SELECT customer_address.post_code FROM customer_address WHERE customer_address.address_type = 0 AND customer_address.customer_no = orders.customer_no) postcode,
orders.order_no
FROM orders, customer_address
WHERE orders.delivery_date = '27-MAY-15'
)
GROUP BY postcode;
EDIT:
However, your query seems wrong. Why do you cross-join orders and customer_address? By mistake I guess. Use explicit joins (INNER JOIN customer_address ON ...), when using joins to avoid such errors. But here I guess you'd just have to remove , customer_address.
Then why do you add order numbers? That doesn't seem to make sense.
looking for solution on my sql query error.I'm trying to create second cascading Input Control in JaspersoftServer. The first Input Control works fine, however when I try to create a second cascade IC it returns with the error. I have 3 tables (user, client, user_client), many to many, so 1 linked table (user_client) between them.The 1st Input Control (client) - works well, end user will select the client, the client can have many users, so cascade is the key. Also, as the output, I would like to get not the user_id, but user's firstname and the lastname as one column field. And here is where i'm stuck. I'm pretty sure it is simple syntaxis error, but spent a good couple of hours to figure out what is wrong with it. Is anyone can have a look at it please and indicate where is the problem in my query ?! So far I've done:
select distinct
u.user_id,(
SELECT CONCAT(first_name, surname) AS user_name from tbl_user ),
c.client_id
FROM tbl_user u
left join tbl_user_client uc
on uc.user_id = u.user_id
left join tbl_client c
on c.client_id = uc.client_id
where c.client_id = uc.client_id
order by c.client_id
Thank you in advance.
P.S. JasperServer + Oracle 11g
You're doing an uncorrelated subquery to get the first/last name from the user table. There is no relationship between that subquery:
SELECT CONCAT(first_name, surname) AS user_name from tbl_user
... and the user ID in the main query, so the subquery will attempt to return every first/last name for all users, for every row your joins find.
You don't need to do a subquery at all as you already have the tbl_user information available:
select u.user_id,
CONCAT(u.first_name, u.surname) AS user_name
c.client_id
FROM tbl_user u
left join tbl_user_client uc
on uc.user_id = u.user_id
left join tbl_client c
on c.client_id = uc.client_id
where c.client_id = uc.client_id
order by c.client_id
If you want to put a space between the first and last name you'll either need nested concat() calls, since that function only takes two arguments:
select u.user_id,
CONCAT(u.first_name, CONCAT(' ', u.surname)) AS user_name
...
... or perhaps more readably use the concatenation operator instead:
select u.user_id,
u.first_name ||' '|| u.surname AS user_name
...
If the first control has selected a client and this query is supposed to find the users related to that client, you're joining the tables the wrong way round, aren't you? And you aren't filtering on the selected client - but no idea how that's actually implemented in Jasper. Maybe you do want the entire list and will filter it on the Jasper side.
I have a table something like this:
ID|Value
01|1
02|4
03|12
01|5
02|14
03|22
01|9
02|32
02|62
01|13
03|92
I want to know how much progress have each id made (from initial or minimal value)
so in sybase I can type:
select ID, (value-min(value)) from table group by id;
ID|Value
01|0
01|4
01|8
01|12
02|0
02|10
02|28
02|58
03|0
03|10
03|80
But monetdb does not support this (I am not sure may be cz it uses SQL'99).
Group by only gives one column or may be average of other values but not the desired result.
Are there any alternative to group by in monetdb?
You can achieve this with a self join. The idea is that you build a subselect that gives you the minimum value for each id, and then join that to the original table by id.
SELECT a.id, a.value-b.min_value
FROM "table" a INNER JOIN
(SELECT id, MIN(value) AS min_value FROM "table" GROUP BY id) AS b
ON a.id = b.id;
I need help! For example, there are four tables: cars, users, departments and join_user_department. Last table used for M: N relation between tables user and department because some users have limited access. I need to get the number of cars in departments where user have access. The table “cars” has a column department_id. If the table join_user_department doesn’t have any record by user_id this means that he have access to all departments and select query must be without any condition. I need do something like this:
declare
DEP_NUM number;--count of departments where user have access
CARS_COUNT number;--count of cars
BEGIN
SELECT COUNT (*) into DEP_NUM from join_user_departments where user_id=?;
SELECT COUNT(*) into CARS_COUNT FROM cars where
IF(num!=0)—it meant that user access is limited
THEN department_id IN (select dep_id from join_user_departments where user_id=?);
A user either has access to all cars (I'm assuming all cars are tied to a department, and the user has access to all departments) or the user has limited access. You can use a UNION ALL to bring these two groups together, and group by user to do a final count. I've cross joined the users with unlimited access to the cars table to associate them with all cars:
(UPDATED to also count the departments)
select user_id,
count(distinct department_id) as dept_count,
count(distinct car_id) as car_count,
from (
select ud.user_id, ud.department_id, c.car_id
from user_departments ud
join cars c on c.department_id = ud.department_id
UNION ALL
select u.user_id, v.department_id, v.car_id
from user u
cross join (
select d.department_id, c.car_id
from department d
join cars c on c.department_id = d.department_id
) v
where not exists (
select 1 from user_departments ud
where ud.user_id = u.user_id
)
)
group by user_id
A UNION ALL is more efficient that a UNION; a UNION looks for records that fall into both groups and throws out duplicates. Since each user falls into one bucket or another, UNION ALL should do the trick (doing a distinct count in the outer query also rules out duplicates).
"If the table join_user_department doesn’t have any record by user_id
this means that he have access to all departments"
This seems like very bad practice. Essentially you are using the absence of records to simulate the presence of records. Very messy. What happens if there is a User who has no access to a Car from any Department? Perhaps the current business logic doesn't allow this, but you have a "data model" which won't allow to implement such a scenario without changing your application's logic.
Can someone help me out with the following Linq statement? I'm trying to get join 4 tables through Linq, group by the last table and sum a property of the first.
var payments = (
from payment in db.Payments
join payees in db.cmsMembers on payment.PayeeID equals payees.nodeId
join payeeGroups in db.cmsMember2MemberGroups on payees.nodeId equals payeeGroups.Member
join groups in db.umbracoNodes on payeeGroups.MemberGroup equals groups.id
group groups by new {groups.text, payment} into groupedPayments
select new
{
Group = groupedPayments.Key.text,
Count = groupedPayments.Count(),
Amount = groupedPayments.Sum(?)
}
).ToList();
The issue I'm having is that the in the groupedPayments.Sum(..) call I'm only getting access to the "groups" object. This is fine for the Group name and count aspect but the SUM has to be performed on the payment.Amount property.
I've managed to resolve my issue. I hadn't realised that the object in the group declaration would become the actual object witin the resulting group item. By altering the original statement to the following:
group payment by groups into groupedPayments
it seems that each instance of groupedPayments.Key in the select statement now corresponds to the payment row which is what I required.