I have this situation, I have one offer, and that offer have n number of dates, and n number of options. So I have two additional tables for offer. And third one, which is a price, but price depends of date, and offer. And it is like this:
| | date 1 | date 2 | date 3 |
| offer 1 | price 11 | price 12 | price 13 |
| offer 2 | price 21 | price 22 | price 23 |
| offer 3 | price 31 | price 32 | price 33 |
Is there any way to create TCA custom field to insert all of this Price values at once?
So, basically I need one table with input fields and to store also uid of date and offer in it as reference.
Make more than one table... Tables with dynamic col count are horrible bad to maintain.
Table Offer:
uid | Name | Desc
1 | offer1 | This is some cool shit
2 | offer2 | dsadsad
3 | offer3 | sdadsdsadsada
Table Date:
uid | date
1 | 12.02.2014
2 | 12.03.2014
3 | 20.03.2014
Table Prices:
uid | date | offer | price
1 | 1 | 1 | price11
2 | 1 | 2 | price21
3 | 1 | 3 | price31
4 | 2 | 1 | price12
5 | 2 | 2 | price22
6 | 2 | 3 | price32
7 | 3 | 1 | price13
8 | 3 | 2 | price23
9 | 3 | 3 | price33
And then its straight forward...
Related
This is to confirm if my design is good enough or get the better ideas to solve the bus routing problem with time. Here is my solution with the primary steps given below:
Have one edges table which represents all the edges (the source and target represent vertices (bus stops):
postgres=# select id, source, target, cost from busedges;
id | source | target | cost
----+--------+--------+------
1 | 1 | 2 | 1
2 | 2 | 3 | 1
3 | 3 | 4 | 1
4 | 4 | 5 | 1
5 | 1 | 7 | 1
6 | 7 | 8 | 1
7 | 1 | 6 | 1
8 | 6 | 8 | 1
9 | 9 | 10 | 1
10 | 10 | 11 | 1
11 | 11 | 12 | 1
12 | 12 | 13 | 1
13 | 9 | 15 | 1
14 | 15 | 16 | 1
15 | 9 | 14 | 1
16 | 14 | 16 | 1
Have a table which represents bus details like from time, to time, edge etc.
NOTE: I have used integer format for "from" and "to" column for faster results as I can do an integer query, but I can replace it with any better format if available.
postgres=# select id, "busedgeId", "busId", "from", "to" from busedgetimes;
id | busedgeId | busId | from | to
----+-----------+-------+-------+-------
18 | 1 | 1 | 33000 | 33300
19 | 2 | 1 | 33300 | 33600
20 | 3 | 2 | 33900 | 34200
21 | 4 | 2 | 34200 | 34800
22 | 1 | 3 | 36000 | 36300
23 | 2 | 3 | 36600 | 37200
24 | 3 | 4 | 38400 | 38700
25 | 4 | 4 | 38700 | 39540
Use dijkstra algorithm to find the nearest path.
Get the upcoming buses from the busedgetimes table in the earliest first order for the nearest path detected by dijkstra algorithm. => This leads to a bit complex query though.
Can I do any kind of improvements to this, or are there any better designs?
Links to docs, articles related to this would be really helpful.
This is totally normal and the regular way to do it. See also,
PgRouting Example
I need help with updating table from another table in Postgres Db.
Long story short we ended up with corrupted data in db, and now I need to update one table with values from another.
I have table with this data table wfc:
| step_id | command_id | commands_order |
|---------|------------|----------------|
| 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 1 | 3 | 2 |
| 1 | 4 | 3 |
| 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 2 | 2 | 0 |
| 2 | 3 | 1 |
| 2 | 3 | 1 |
| 2 | 4 | 3 |
and I want to update values in command_order column from another table, so I can have result like this:
| step_id | command_id | commands_order|
|---------|------------|---------------|
| 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 1 | 3 | 2 |
| 1 | 4 | 3 |
| 1 | 1 | 4 |
| 2 | 2 | 0 |
| 2 | 3 | 1 |
| 2 | 3 | 2 |
| 2 | 4 | 3 |
It was looking like easy task, but problem is to update rows for same command_id, it is writing same value in commands_order
SQL that I tried is:
UPDATE wfc
SET commands_order = CAST(sq.input_step_id as INTEGER)
FROM (
SELECT wfp.step_id, wfp.input_command_id, wfp.input_step_id
from wfp
order by wfp.step_id, wfp.input_step_id
) AS sq
WHERE (wfc.step_id=sq.step_id AND wfc.command_id=CAST(sq.input_command_id as INTEGER));
SQL Fiddle http://sqlfiddle.com/#!15/4efff4/4
I am pretty stuck with this, please help.
Thanks in advance.
Assuming you are trying to number the rows in the order in which they were created, and as long as you understand that ctid will chnage on update and with VACCUUM FULL, you can do the following:
select step_id, command_id, rank - 1 as command_order
from (select step_id, command_id, ctid as wfc_ctid, rank() over
(partition by step_id order by ctid)
from wfc) as wfc_ordered;
This will give you the wfc table with the ordering that you want. If you do update the original table, the ctids will change, so it's probably safer to create a copy of the table with the above query.
My Situation
I have some tables in my redshift cluster that all break down into either an order_id, shipment_id, or shipment_item_id depending on how granular the table is. order_id is a 1 to many relationship on shipment_id and shipment_id is a 1 to many on shipemnt_item_id.
My Question
I distribute on order_id, so all shipment_id and shipment_item_id records should be on the same nodes across the tables since they are grouped by order_id. My question is, when I have to join on shipment_id or shipment_item_id then will redshift know that the records are on the same nodes, or will it still broadcast the tables since they aren't joined on order_id?
Example Tables
unified_order shipment_details
+----------+-------------+------------------+ +-------------+-----------+--------------+
| order_id | shipment_id | shipment_item_id | | shipment_id | ship_day | ship_details |
+----------+-------------+------------------+ +-------------+-----------+--------------+
| 1 | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 1/1/2017 | stuff |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | | 2 | 5/1/2017 | other stuff |
| 1 | 1 | 3 | | 3 | 6/14/2017 | more stuff |
| 1 | 2 | 4 | | 4 | 5/13/2017 | less stuff |
| 1 | 2 | 5 | | 5 | 6/19/2017 | that stuff |
| 1 | 3 | 6 | | 6 | 7/31/2017 | what stuff |
| 2 | 4 | 7 | | 7 | 2/5/2017 | things |
| 2 | 4 | 8 | +-------------+-----------+--------------+
| 3 | 5 | 9 |
| 3 | 5 | 10 |
| 4 | 6 | 11 |
| 5 | 7 | 12 |
| 5 | 7 | 13 |
+----------+-------------+------------------+
Distribution
distribution_by_node
+------+----------+-------------+------------------+
| node | order_id | shipment_id | shipment_item_id |
+------+----------+-------------+------------------+
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| 1 | 1 | 3 | 6 |
| 1 | 5 | 7 | 12 |
| 1 | 5 | 7 | 13 |
| 2 | 2 | 4 | 7 |
| 2 | 2 | 4 | 8 |
| 3 | 3 | 5 | 9 |
| 3 | 3 | 5 | 10 |
| 4 | 4 | 6 | 11 |
+------+----------+-------------+------------------+
The Amazon Redshift documentation does not go into detail how information is shared between nodes, but it is doubtful that it "broadcasts the tables".
Rather, information is probably sent between nodes based on need -- only the relevant columns would be shared, and possibly only sub-ranges of the data.
Rather than worrying too much about the internal implementation, you should test various DISTKEY and SORTKEY strategies against real queries to determine performance.
Follow the recommendations from Choose the Best Distribution Style to minimize the amount of data that needs to be sent between nodes and consult Amazon Redshift Best Practices for Designing Queries to improve queries.
You can EXPLAIN your query to see how data will be distributed (or not) during the execution. In this doc you'll see how to read the query plan:
Evaluating the Query Plan
using postgresql 9.3 I have a table that shows indivual permits issued across a single year below:
permit_typ| zipcode| address| name
-------------+------+------+-----
CONSTRUCTION | 20004 | 124 fake streeet | billy joe
SUPPLEMENTAL | 20005 | 124 fake streeet | james oswald
POST CARD | 20005 | 124 fake streeet | who cares
HOME OCCUPATION | 20007 | 124 fake streeet | who cares
SHOP DRAWING | 20009 | 124 fake streeet | who cares
I am trying to flatten this so it looks like
CONSTRUCTION | SUPPLEMENTAL | POST CARD| HOME OCCUPATION | SHOP DRAWING | zipcode
-------------+--------------+-----------+----------------+--------------+--------
1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 20004
1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 20005
1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 20006
1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 20007
1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 20008
have been trying to use Crosstab but its a bit above my rusty SQL experiance. anybody have any ideas
I usually approach this type of query using conditional aggregation. In Postgres, you can do:
select zipcode,
sum( (permit_typ = 'CONSTRUCTION')::int) as Construction,
sum( (permit_typ = 'SUPPLEMENTAL')::int) as SUPPLEMENTAL,
. . .
from t
group by zipcode;
I'm relatively new to PostgreSQL and trying to figure out how to solve the following scenario. Let's say I have three tables:
stores
| store_id |
|----------|
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
products
| product_id |
|------------|
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
store_has_product
| store_id | product_id |
|----------|------------|
| 1 | 3 |
| 1 | 2 |
| 2 | 1 |
| 3 | 3 |
| 1 | 1 |
| 3 | 1 |
| 3 | 2 |
And now I'm trying to build a query to join all products to the stores table and group them in an array, so that I have an output like this:
| store_id | products |
|----------|-----------|
| 1 | {3, 2, 1} |
| 2 | {2} |
| 3 | {3, 1, 2} |
I know that Arrays are possible with PostgreSQL, but I don't get how to write such a query and probably already spent too much time thinking about a solution.
Thanks for your help!
If you are using version 8.4 or later you can use array_agg:
SELECT store_id, array_agg(product_id::text) as products
FROM store_has_product
GROUP BY store_id