I have a table with a column called "Priority". No two records should have the same priority value.
If I add a new entry with the same priority value as an existing record, it should increment the
priority of the other records that follow IF the previous row's increment causes a duplicate priority.
For example:
We want to insert a record with a priority of 2.
(BEFORE)
priority
1
2
3
5
(AFTER)
Priority
1
2
3
4
5
Another example:
Insert a record with a priority of 2
(BEFORE)
priority
1
2
3
5
7
(AFTER)
Priority
1
2
3
4
5
7
I am doing this with the following code and it works as long as there are no gaps in sequence:
UPDATE MyTable SET Priority = Priority + 1
WHERE LocationId = #LocationId AND Priority >= #priorityToInsert
The problem is that this update statement increments ALL priority values. Example #2 above fails
because the record with priority 7 gets incremented to 8 when it shouldn't.
Please help!
You could use something like this:
UPDATE MyTable t1
SET t1.Priority = t1.Priority + 1
WHERE t1.LocationId = #LocationId
AND t1.Priority >= #priorityToInsert
AND NOT EXISTS (
SELECT *
FROM MyTable t2
WHERE t2.LocationId = #LocationId
AND t2.Priority = t1.Priority - 1
)
The problem is that if you also had an 8 in your case, it WOULD advance the 8 to 9 because it sees the 7, even though the 7 wouldn't advance.
Because it's recursive like this, you would probably have to use a recursive or iterative technique.
I would think about a different design or perhaps something with triggers.
Related
I have the following tables (example)
Analyze_Line
id
game_id
bet_result
game_type
1
1
WIN
0
2
2
LOSE
0
3
3
WIN
0
4
4
LOSE
0
5
5
LOSE
0
6
6
WIN
0
Game
id
league_id
home_team_id
away_team_id
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
1
1
2
5
2
2
3
6
3
3
4
Required Data:
league_id
WIN
LOSE
GameCnt
1
1
1
2
2
0
2
2
3
2
0
2
The Analyze_Line table is joined with the Game table and simple can get GameCnt grouping by league_id, but I am not sure how to calculate WIN count and LOSE count in bet_result
You can use conditionals in aggregate function to divide win and lose bet results per league.
select
g.league_id,
sum(case when a.bet_result = 'WIN' then 1 end) as win,
sum(case when a.bet_result = 'LOSE' then 1 end) as lose,
count(*) as gamecnt
from
game g
inner join analyze_line a on
g.id = a.game_id
group by
g.league_id
Since there is no mention of postgresql version, I can't recommend using FILTER clause (postgres specific), since it might not work for you.
Adding to Kamil's answer - PostgreSQL introduced the filter clause in PostgreSQL 9.4, released about eight years ago (December 2014). At this point, I think it's safe enough to use in answers. IMHO, it's a tad more elegant than summing over a case expression, but it does have the drawback of being PostgreSQL specific syntax, and thus not portable:
SELECT g.league_id,
COUNT(*) FILTER (WHERE a.bet_result = 'WIN') AS win,
COUNT(*) FILTER (WHERE a.bet_result = 'LOSE') AS lose,
COUNT(*) AS gamecnt
FROM game g
JOIN analyze_line a ON g.id = a.game_id
GROUP BY g.league_id
I have the following input table:
Seq Group GroupSequence
1 0
2 4 A
3 4 B
4 4 C
5 0
6 6 A
7 6 B
8 0
Output table is:
Line NewSeq GroupSequence
1 1
2 2 A
3 2 B
4 2 C
5 3
6 4 A
7 4 B
8 5
The rules for the input table are:
Any positive integer in the Group column indicates that the rows are grouped together. The entire field may be NULL or blank. A null or 0 indicates that the row is processed on its own. In the above example there are two groups and three 'single' rows.
the GroupSequence column is a single character that sorts within the group. NULL, blank, 'A', 'B' 'C' 'D' are the only characters allowed.
if Group has a positive integer, there must be alphabetic character in GroupSequence.
I need a query that creates the output table with a new column that sequences as shown.
External apps needs to iterate through this table in either Line or NewSeq order(same order, different values)
I've tried variations on GROUP BY, PARTITION BY, OVER(), etc. WITH no success.
Any help much appreciated.
Perhaps this will help
The only trick here is Flg which will indicate a new Group Sequence (values will be 1 or 0). Then it is a small matter to sum(Flg) via a window function.
Edit - Updated Flg method
Example
Declare #YourTable Table ([Seq] int,[Group] int,[GroupSequence] varchar(50))
Insert Into #YourTable Values
(1,0,null)
,(2,4,'A')
,(3,4,'B')
,(4,4,'C')
,(5,0,null)
,(6,6,'A')
,(7,6,'B')
,(8,0,null)
Select Line = Row_Number() over (Order by Seq)
,NewSeq = Sum(Flg) over (Order By Seq)
,GroupSequence
From (
Select *
,Flg = case when [Group] = lag([Group],1) over (Order by Seq) then 0 else 1 end
From #YourTable
) A
Order By Line
Returns
Line NewSeq GroupSequence
1 1 NULL
2 2 A
3 2 B
4 2 C
5 3 NULL
6 4 A
7 4 B
8 5 NULL
My data is in the following format:
rep_id user_id other non-duplicated data
1 1 ...
1 2 ...
2 3 ...
3 4 ...
3 5 ...
I am trying to achieve a column for deduped_rep with 0/1 such that only first rep id across the associated users has a 1 and rest have 0.
Expected result:
rep_id user_id deduped_rep
1 1 1
1 2 0
2 3 1
3 4 1
3 5 0
For reference, in Excel, I would use the following formula:
IF(SUMPRODUCT(($A$2:$A2=A2)*($A$2:$A2=A2))>1,0,1)
I know there is the FIXED() LoD calculation http://kb.tableau.com/articles/howto/removing-duplicate-data-with-lod-calculations, but I only see use cases of it deduplicating based on another column. However, mine are distinct.
Define a field first_reg_date_per_rep_id as
{ fixed rep_id : min(registration_date) }
The define a field is_first_reg_date? as
registration_date = first_reg_date_per_rep_id
You can use that last Boolean field to distinguish the first record for each rep_id from later ones
try this query
select
rep_id,
user_id,
row_number() over(partition by rep_id order by rep_id,user_id) deduped_rep
from
table
How can I add a series in length of 4 to a table like this:
Source table:
id
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Results table:
id series
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 1
6 2
7 3
8 4
I'm using PostgreSQL 9.1.
If your IDs are really consecutive and gapless, you can just use id % 4 + 1. But I imagine that in reality your IDs aren't so orderly, and if they're generated from a SEQUENCE you shouldn't rely on them being gapless.
You can do it properly with row_number(), as shown here: http://sqlfiddle.com/#!12/22767/5
SELECT
id,
(row_number() OVER (ORDER BY id) - 1) % 4 + 1
FROM Table1
ORDER BY 1;
It's also possible to do using generate_series as a set-returning-function in the SELECT list, but that's a PostgreSQL extension, wheras the above is standard SQL that'll work in any modern database except MySQL, which doesn't support window functions.
If you want to actually add a column to the table it gets a bit more complicated. I'm not really sure why you'd want to do that, but it's possible using UPDATE ... FROM:
BEGIN;
ALTER TABLE table1 ADD COLUMN col2 INTEGER;
WITH gen_num(id,n) AS (
SELECT
id,
(row_number() OVER (ORDER BY id) - 1) % 4 + 1
FROM Table1
ORDER BY 1)
UPDATE table1 SET col2 = n
FROM gen_num
WHERE gen_num.id = table1.id;
COMMIT;
I have a UDF which returns table variable like
--
--
RETURNS #ElementTable TABLE
(
ElementID INT IDENTITY(1,1) PRIMARY KEY NOT NULL,
ElementValue VARCHAR(MAX)
)
AS
--
--
Is the order of data in this table variable guaranteed to be same as the order data is inserted into it. e.g. if I issue
INSERT INTO #ElementTable(ElementValue) VALUES ('1')
INSERT INTO #ElementTable(ElementValue) VALUES ('2')
INSERT INTO #ElementTable(ElementValue) VALUES ('3')
I expect data will always be returned in that order when I say
select ElementValue from #ElementTable --Here I don't use order by
EDIT:
If order by is not guaranteed then the following query
SELECT T1.ElementValue,T2.ElementValue FROM dbo.MyFunc() T1
Cross Apply dbo.MyFunc T2
order by t1.elementid
will not produce 9x9 matrix as
1 1
1 2
1 3
2 1
2 2
2 3
3 1
3 2
3 3
consistently.
Is there any possibility that it could be like
1 2
1 1
1 3
2 3
2 2
2 1
3 1
3 2
3 3
How to do it using my above function?
No, the order is not guaranteed to be the same.
Unless, of course you are using ORDER BY. Then it is guaranteed to be the same.
Given your update, you obtain it in the obvious way - you ask the system to give you the results in the order you want:
SELECT T1.ElementValue,T2.ElementValue FROM dbo.MyFunc() T1
Cross join dbo.MyFunc() T2
order by t1.elementid, t2.elementid
You are guaranteed that if you're using inefficient single row inserts within your UDF, that the IDENTITY values will match the order in which the individual INSERT statements were specified.
Order is not guaranteed.
But if all you want is just simply to get your records back in the same order you inserted them, then just order by your primary key. Since you already have that field setup as an auto-increment, it should suffice.
...or use a deterministic function
SELECT TOP 9
M1 = (ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY id) + 2) / 3,
M2 = (ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY id) + 2) % 3 + 1
FROM
sysobjects
M1 M2
1 1
1 2
1 3
2 1
2 2
2 3
3 1
3 2
3 3