I have 2 tables which I need to compare to find missing data.
TableA: Definition table
Year, Week, cmp_code, [other columns]
TableB: Cash Receipts
Year, WeekNo, FranchiseID
TableA has all the possible combinations of ID week and year we should have data for. TableB is the data we actually have. I need to list out what we don't have yet, so the delta for B-A. How do I construct the query to find these missing values?
You can use NOT EXISTS
SELECT [Year], [Week], ID
FROM TableA AS a
WHERE NOT EXISTS
( SELECT 1
FROM TableB AS b
WHERE b.[Year] = a.[Year]
AND b.[Week] = a.[Week]
AND b.ID = a.ID
);
You can use theexceptset operator to return the difference between two sets:
SELECT [Year], [Week], cmp_code FROM TableA
EXCEPT
SELECT [Year], [WeekNo], FranchiseID FROM TableB
This will return the rows in TableA that doesn't have exact matches in TableB. The same result can be achieved using a correlatednot existsquery, or aleft join. Thenot existsshould perform best.
Related
I have a table 1
and Table 2
I need to get the following table where the date from table 1 is the closest (i.e. before) to the date from table 2 by id.
I assume I need to join two table where table1.id=table2.id and table1.date<=table2.date and then, rank to get the 'last' record in that merged table? Is it correct? Is there a simpler way?
You can see structure and result in: dbfiddle
select
distinct on (t1.id)
t1.id,
last_value(t1.type) over (order by to_date(t1.date, 'mm/dd/yyyy') desc)
from
table1 t1 inner join table2 t2 on t1.id = t2.id
where
to_date(t1.date, 'mm/dd/yyyy') <= to_date(t2.date, 'mm/dd/yyyy');
I'm trying to find all IDs in TableA that are mentioned by a set of records in TableB and that set if defined in Table C. I've come so far to the point where a set of INNER JOIN provide me with the following result:
TableA.ID | TableB.Code
-----------------------
1 | A
1 | B
2 | A
3 | B
I want to select only the ID where in this case there is an entry for both A and B, but where the values A and B are based on another Query.
I figured this should be possible with a GROUP BY TableA.ID and HAVING = ALL(Subquery on table C).
But that is returning no values.
Since you did not post your original query, I will assume it is inside a CTE. Assuming this, the query you want is something along these lines:
SELECT ID
FROM cte
WHERE Code IN ('A', 'B')
GROUP BY ID
HAVING COUNT(DISTINCT Code) = 2;
It's an extremely poor question, but you you probably need to compare distinct counts against table C
SELECT a.ID
FROM TableA a
GROUP BY a.ID
HAVING COUNT(DISTINCT a.Code) = (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM TableC)
We're guessing though.
So far I have come up with the below:
WHERE (extract(month FROM orders)) =
(SELECT min(extract(month from orderdate))
FROM orders)
However, that will consequently return zero to many rows, and in my case, many, because many orders exist within that same earliest (minimum) month, i.e. 4th February, 9th February, 15th Feb, ...
I know that a WHERE clause can contain multiple columns, so why wouldn't the below work?
WHERE (extract(day FROM orderdate)), (extract(month FROM orderdate)) =
(SELECT min(extract(day from orderdate)), min(extract(month FROM orderdate))
FROM orders)
I simply get: SQL Error: ORA-00920: invalid relational operator
Any help would be great, thank you!
Sample data:
02-Feb-2012
14-Feb-2012
22-Dec-2012
09-Feb-2013
18-Jul-2013
01-Jan-2014
Output:
02-Feb-2012
14-Feb-2012
Desired output:
02-Feb-2012
I recreated your table and found out you just messed up the brackets a bit. The following works for me:
where
(extract(day from OrderDate),extract(month from OrderDate))
=
(select
min(extract(day from OrderDate)),
min(extract(month from OrderDate))
from orders
)
Use something like this:
with cte1 as (
select
extract(month from OrderDate) date_month,
extract(day from OrderDate) date_day,
OrderNo
from tablename
), cte2 as (
select min(date_month) min_date_month, min(date_day) min_date_day
from cte1
)
select cte1.*
from cte1
where (date_month, date_day) = (select min_date_month, min_date_day from cte2)
A common table expression enables you to restructure your data and then use this data to do your select. The first cte-block (cte1) selects the month and the day for each of your table rows. Cte2 then selects min(month) and min(date). The last select then combines both ctes to select all rows from cte1 that have the desired month and day.
There is probably a shorter solution to that, however I like common table expressions as they are almost all the time better to understand than the "optimal, shortest" query.
If that is really what you want, as bizarre as it seems, then as a different approach you could forget the extracts and the subquery against the table to get the minimums, and use an analytic approach instead:
select orderdate
from (
select o.*,
row_number() over (order by to_char(orderdate, 'MMDD')) as rn
from orders o
)
where rn = 1;
ORDERDATE
---------
01-JAN-14
The row_number() effectively adds a pseudo-column to every row in your original table, based on the month and day in the order date. The rn values are unique, so there will be one row marked as 1, which will be from the earliest day in the earliest month. If you have multiple orders with the same day/month, say 01-Jan-2013 and 01-Jan-2014, then you'll still only get exactly one with rn = 1, but which is picked is indeterminate. You'd need to add further order by conditions to make it deterministic, but I have no idea what you might want.
That is done in the inner query; the outer query then filters so that only the records marked with rn = 1 is returned; so you get exactly one row back from the overall query.
This also avoids the situation where the earliest day number is not in the earliest month number - say if you only had 01-Jan-2014 and 02-Feb-2014; comparing the day and month separately would look for 01-Feb-2014, which doesn't exist.
SQL Fiddle (with Thomas Tschernich's anwer thrown in too, giving the same result for this data).
To join the result against your invoice table, you don't need to join to the orders table again - especially not with a cross join, which is skewing your results. You can do the join (at least) two ways:
SELECT
o.orderno,
to_char(o.orderdate, 'DD-MM-YYYY'),
i.invno
FROM
(
SELECT o.*,
row_number() over (order by to_char(orderdate, 'MMDD')) as rn
FROM orders o
) o, invoices i
WHERE i.invno = o.invno
AND rn = 1;
Or:
SELECT
o.orderno,
to_char(o.orderdate, 'DD-MM-YYYY'),
i.invno
FROM
(
SELECT orderno, orderdate, invno
FROM
(
SELECT o.*,
row_number() over (order by to_char(orderdate, 'MMDD')) as rn
FROM orders o
)
WHERE rn = 1
) o, invoices i
WHERE i.invno = o.invno;
The first looks like it does more work but the execution plans are the same.
SQL Fiddle with your pastebin-supplied query that gets two rows back, and these two that get one.
Sorry about the lame Title... If I could summarize this in a few words I might have had better luck finding an existing solution here!
I have a table that simplified looks like this:
ID PRODUCT
___ _________
100 Savings
200 Mortgage
200 Visa
300 Mortgage
300 Savings
I need to select rows based on the product of each ID. For example, I can do this:
SELECT DISTINCT ID
FROM table1
WHERE Product NOT IN ('Savings', 'Chequing')
This would return:
ID
___
200
300
However, in the case of ID 300 they do have Savings so I actually do not want this returned. In plain English I want to
Select * from table1 where 'Savings' and 'Chequing' are not the product for any row with that ID.
Desired result in this case would be one row with ID 200 since they do not have Savings or Chequing.
How can I do this?
Select the rows that match the item you do not want to match then compare therr ids
e.g.
select distinct id from table1 where id not in (
SELECT ID
FROM table1
WHERE Product IN ('Savings', 'Chequing')
)
You can use NOT EXISTS:
SELECT DISTINCT t1.ID
FROM dbo.Table1 t1
WHERE NOT EXISTS
(
SELECT 1 FROM dbo.Table1 t2
WHERE t2.Poduct IN ('Savings', 'Chequing')
AND t2.ID = t1.ID
)
Demo
Worth reading: Should I use NOT IN, OUTER APPLY, LEFT OUTER JOIN, EXCEPT, or NOT EXISTS?
The query below returns 9,817 records. Now, I want to SELECT one more field from another table. See the 2 lines that are commented out, where I've simply selected this additional field and added a JOIN statement to bind this new columns. With these lines added, the query now returns 649,200 records and I can't figure out why! I guess something is wrong with my WHERE criteria in conjunction with the JOIN statement. Please help, thanks.
SELECT DISTINCT dbo.IMPORT_DOCUMENTS.ITEMID, BEGDOC, BATCHID
--, dbo.CATEGORY_COLLECTION_CATEGORY_RESULTS.CATEGORY_ID
FROM IMPORT_DOCUMENTS
--JOIN dbo.CATEGORY_COLLECTION_CATEGORY_RESULTS ON
dbo.CATEGORY_COLLECTION_CATEGORY_RESULTS.ITEMID = dbo.IMPORT_DOCUMENTS.ITEMID
WHERE (BATCHID LIKE 'IC0%' OR BATCHID LIKE 'LP0%')
AND dbo.IMPORT_DOCUMENTS.ITEMID IN
(SELECT dbo.CATEGORY_COLLECTION_CATEGORY_RESULTS.ITEMID FROM
CATEGORY_COLLECTION_CATEGORY_RESULTS
WHERE SCORE >= .7 AND SCORE <= .75 AND CATEGORY_ID IN(
SELECT CATEGORY_ID FROM CATEGORY_COLLECTION_CATS WHERE COLLECTION_ID IN (11,16))
AND Sample_Id > 0)
AND dbo.IMPORT_DOCUMENTS.ITEMID NOT IN
(SELECT ASSIGNMENT_FOLDER_DOCUMENTS.Item_Id FROM ASSIGNMENT_FOLDER_DOCUMENTS)
One possible reason is because one of your tables contains data at lower level, lower than your join key. For example, there may be multiple records per item id. The same item id is repeated X number of times. I would fix the query like the below. Without data knowledge, Try running the below modified query.... If output is not what you're looking for, convert it into SELECT Within a Select...
Hope this helps....
Try this SQL: SELECT DISTINCT a.ITEMID, a.BEGDOC, a.BATCHID, b.CATEGORY_ID FROM IMPORT_DOCUMENTS a JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT ITEMID FROM CATEGORY_COLLECTION_CATEGORY_RESULTS WHERE SCORE >= .7 AND SCORE <= .75 AND CATEGORY_ID IN (SELECT DISTINCT CATEGORY_ID FROM CATEGORY_COLLECTION_CATS WHERE COLLECTION_ID IN (11,16)) AND Sample_Id > 0) B ON a.ITEMID =b.ITEMID WHERE a.(a.BATCHID LIKE 'IC0%' OR a.BATCHID LIKE 'LP0%') AND a.ITEMID NOT IN (SELECT DIDTINCT Item_Id FROM ASSIGNMENT_FOLDER_DOCUMENTS)