I just noticed something about Sphinx Search. If I choose a particular order, like relevance for example, it seems like if I have a number of items from 1 to 10, for some reason, the relevant returns that come back are still in a numbered order. i.e. The records will be in the 1-5 range instead of in the 6-10 range. Is there something I am missing or don't understand?
So, the only way I can get new results to show is to do a sort by ID DESC, but the problem there is I am only getting from the newest ID down and there isn't really any sort on relevance at that point.
Is there some kind of default sort on the back end that can be adjusted?
Related
am trying to get Previous Sum(of someField) based on a variable value which is an Id.
This is not a table, Im doing a KPI
On Qlik you would do something like:
SUM({<Id={"$(=Max(vVariable),-1))"}>} someField)
But I can not achieve it on Tableau, off course is due to my lack of knowledge, unfortunatelly time is tinking at work and wanted to see if anyone has any input!
Thanks
Assuming you may use a sample input like the Superstore (using sales as metric), this could be what you're looking for:
In red you can see your "variable" which allows you to select a value and in blue you'll find the unique row for the previous value (Order ID sorted).
The first thing you need to to do is creating a parameter based on all the Order ID values:
Then things start to get a bit complicated if you're not familiar with LOD (Level of details) and the order of execution in Tableau, especially for filters.
Assuming that you can get some information on your own (otherwise, feel free to ask), the first thing you nee to to do is to "pre-calculate" the equivalent of a table having a rowe for each Order ID, in which you also have the previous Order ID value.
You can achive this combining Fixed (LOD) and Lookup function, creating this Calculated Field "Lookup Order ID":
LOOKUP( max({ FIXED [Order ID] : MAX([Order ID])}),1)
This is actually just a calculated field that you want to "fix" because you need the filter to act after you have made that previous calculus, and then you shift your data by 1 row backward.
Once you've done that, you just nee to create another calculated field in order to test your parametric value, and it could be something like this "check param":
[Lookup Order ID] = [Order ID param]
Moving this calculated field in the filter section and selecting just "true" values, you'll get that unique rows like in the initial image, showing the previous value (blue) related to the one you select in the parameter drop-down menu (red).
My end goal is to have a box change color when the last 3 records input into a field (based on the time of input) in FileMaker achieve a certain criteria (ex. variance < 2). I would like to know how to make this happen, or how a calculation/script can be written to only look at the last 3 records.
There are several ways you could approach this. A simple one would be to use a script to:
Show all records in the given table;
Unsort them (assuming they were entered in chronological order; otherwise sort them by creation timestamp);
Omit all records except the last three;
Get the value of a summary field defined as Standard Deviation of your value field;
Set a global variable/field to the square of the returned value.
Then use the global variable/field to conditionally format your "box".
If you don't want to use a script, you will have to define a relationship in order to get the last three values in the table, regardless of the current found set and/or sort order. Or you may use the ExecuteSQL() function for this.
I will try to explain the problem on an abstract level first:
I have X amount of data as input, which is always going to have a field DATE. Before, the dates that came as input (after some process) where put in a table as output. Now, I am asked to put both the input dates and any date between the minimun date received and one year from that moment. If there was originally no input for some day between this two dates, all fields must come with 0, or equivalent.
Example. I have two inputs. One with '18/03/2017' and other with '18/03/2018'. I now need to create output data for all the missing dates between '18/03/2017' and '18/04/2017'. So, output '19/03/2017' with every field to 0, and the same for the 20th and 21st and so on.
I know to do this programmatically, but on powercenter I do not. I've been told to do the following (which I have done, but I would like to know of a better method):
Get the minimun date, day0. Then, with an aggregator, create 365 fields, each has that "day0"+1, day0+2, and so on, to create an artificial year.
After that we do several transformations like sorting the dates, union between them, to get the data ready for a joiner. The idea of the joiner is to do an Full Outer Join between the original data, and the data that is going to have all fields to 0 and that we got from the previous aggregator.
Then a router picks with one of its groups the data that had actual dates (and fields without nulls) and other group where all fields are null, and then said fields are given a 0 to finally be written to a table.
I am wondering how can this be achieved by, for starters, removing the need to add 365 days to a date. If I were to do this same process for 10 years intead of one, the task gets ridicolous really quick.
I was wondering about an XOR type of operation, or some other function that would cut the number of steps that need to be done for what I (maybe wrongly) feel is a simple task. Currently I now need 5 steps just to know which dates are missing between two dates, a minimun and one year from that point.
I have tried to be as clear as posible but if I failed at any point please let me know!
Im not sure what the aggregator is supposed to do?
The same with the 'full outer' join? A normal join on a constant port is fine :) c
Can you calculate the needed number of 'dublicates' before the 'joiner'? In that case a lookup configured to return 'all rows' and a less-than-or-equal predicate can help make the mapping much more readable.
In any case You will need a helper table (or file) with a sequence of numbers between 1 and the number of potential dublicates (or more)
I use our time-dimension in the warehouse, which have one row per day from 1753-01-01 and 200000 next days, and a primary integer column with values from 1 and up ...
You've identified you know how to do this programmatically and to be fair this problem is more suited to that sort of solution... but that doesn't exclude powercenter by any means, just feed the 2 dates into a java transformation, apply some code to produce all dates between them and for a record to be output for each. Java transformation is ideal for record generation
You've identified you know how to do this programmatically and to be fair this problem is more suited to that sort of solution... but that doesn't exclude powercenter by any means, just feed the 2 dates into a java transformation, apply some code to produce all dates between them and for a record to be output for each. Java transformation is ideal for record generation
Ok... so you could override your source qualifier to achieve this in the selection query itself (am giving Oracle based example as its what I'm used to and I'm assuming your data in is from a table). I looked up the connect syntax here
SQL to generate a list of numbers from 1 to 100
SELECT (MIN(tablea.DATEFIELD) + levquery.n - 1) AS Port1 FROM tablea, (SELECT LEVEL n FROM DUAL CONNECT BY LEVEL <= 365) as levquery
(Check if the query works for you - haven't access to pc to test it at the minute)
I'm trying to get a formula that will break down the amount of times a user enters a contest each day.
I'm pretty new to this whole thing, basically putting it together using google to figure out the code I need to use/modify. Explaining why something works would be greatly appreciated so I can use it elsewhere!
Here's a dummy of the form I'm banging my head against.
I would like the form to be reusable, so on the Sorted form I have a date key that automatically fills out the week when you choose the first day. Because of this, I would like each formula to refer to this date key, instead of manually typing the google equivalent of 'February 1st, 2015' into the formula.
I've tried to use the SUMIFS formula, and I've run in to a few errors.
Apparently both pages have to be the same amount of rows, otherwise I get an 'Array arguments to SUMIFS are of different size'. I didn't want my 'sorted' sheet to be 1761 rows long, since all of the duplicate names will have been condensed and I wanted it prettier. Nuts to that! Guess I can hide the rows? Is there any other solution?
It looks like this works:
=SUMIFS(Entered!E3:E1000, Sorted!E3:E1000, Sorted!$E3, Entered!A3:A1000, date(Sorted!$C7))
Where entered!E: is the number of entries, sortedE: is the list of usernames, and E3 is the specific one I'm looking for. Then EnteredA3 is the list of dates and time, and Sorted!C7 is the specific date I'm looking for. I don't get any results!
If I click on my C7 and sorted!A, the little calender pops up, which means they are dates (I think?). One includes the hours:minutes:seconds and the other doesn't, which I think is my problem. I would like to have sorted!C7 be the entire day, and filter out all of those entries.
This is taking information entered via a google form which I won't have control of, so I can't really change the H:M:S additions to the date column.
Thinking ahead to day 2 and onwards, will the same formula work when sorted!C10 is C$7$+1? Is it not a date anymore?
I would also like to add up the amount of daily entries, in sorted!S7 and below. I've tried wrapping both the column of dates and the date from my day key in the date() thing, but it doesn't seem to work either.
=SUMIF(date(Entered!A3:A),date(Sorted!C7),Entered!E3:E)
It gives me a '1', and I have no idea where that comes from.
I haven't been able to find much about the google SUMIFS function, mostly how to replicate it from before it was a thing.
And for even MORE complexity:
I was wondering if it is possible to have UNIQUE find the IDs in entered!C, and return all the associated usernames. That pesky angelo changed their username to 'pants' midway through the contest, and I'd like to be able to see both names and add up both 'angelo' and 'pants' entries in the same line in my formulas.
I feel like I'll need a few hidden columns that have the UNIQUE ID number and the associated usernames that I pull into my Sorted!Username column, but I don't know how to search the IDs to find the different usernames.
I tried to google that, but I have no idea what I'm googling.
Whewph! That is a lot of questions, thanks for any help!
Too long for my taste, but you might try:
=sumifs(Entered!E:E,Entered!A:A,">="&$C$7,Entered!A:A,"<"&$C$7+1,Entered!B:B,$E3)
in Sorted!F3 and copied down to suit.
Oh my goodness, you are a hero!
My final code wound up being:
=IF(ISBLANK(Sorted!$E3)=TRUE, "", sumifs('Entered'!$E:$E,'Entered'!$A:$A,">="&$C$7,'Entered'!$A:$A,"<"&$C$7+1,'Entered'!$B:$B,$E3))
I changed the start and end points by making $C$7 into $C$7+1, and the ending one into +2. (In case anyone else is looking at this answer.)
I'm super pleased that it worked!
Using this I managed to add up each of the daily entries, just by adding up the columns they were in.
I gave up on the UNIQUE idea, if someone changes their username during the contest, then they can add up the two rows themselves.
Thanks again! I'd upvote you, but I can't yet.
I'm using facets to get partition search results into ranges.
The search returns a list item and each item has a score. In the list the items are ordered by score from high to low. Some items may also have equal score.
I use facets to get the top 10, then the next 100.
My idea is to use the range facet. The problem is that I never know the maxim scor. Each time it is different. But since search results are returned in order by score I can probably use the range facet without caring ab the range:
//top 10 best matches with score: [0-infinity) but since they items are ordered I think it will return top 10 items
FacetBuilders.rangeFacet("top10Matches").field("score").addUnboundedTo(0).size(10)
This is simple enough. Now I'm not sure how to get the next chunk which is wherever the previous facet left off and have a size of 100. I could probably check the score of the last item in the results the first facet returned and use that as my top range, but if there are items with that exact score they will be skipped.
Is there a way to do what I need with facets?
There is a setFrom(Int) method that I can use. No facets needed.
val queryString = client.get.prepareSearch()
.setQuery(QueryBuilders.matchQuery(NODE_PATH_TO_SEARCH, query))
.setFrom(currentPageNumber*MAX_DISPLAYABLE_RESULTS)
.setSize(MAX_DISPLAYABLE_RESULTS)
queryString.execute().actionGet()