In my Anylogic model I succesfully create plots of datasets that count the number of trucks arriving from terminals each hour in my simulation. Now, I want to add the actual/"observed" number of trucks arriving at a terminal, to compare my simulation to these numbers. I added these numbers in a database table (see picture below). Is there a simple way of adding this data to the plot?
I tried it by creating a variable that reads the database table for every hour and adding that to a dataset (like can be seen in the pictures below), but this did not work unfortunately (the plot was empty).
Maybe simply delete the variable and fill the dataset at the start of the model by looping through the dbase table data. Use the dbase query wizard to create a for-loop. Something like this should work:
int numEntries = (int) selectFrom(observed_arrivals).count();
DataSet myDataSet = new DataSet(numEntries);
List<Tuple> rows = selectFrom(observed_arrivals).list();
for (Tuple
row : rows) {
myDataSet.add(row.get( observed_arrivals.hour ), row.get( observed_arrivals.terminal_a ));
}
myChart.addDataSet(myDataSet);
You don't explain why it "didn't work" (what errors/problems did you get?), nor where you defined these elements.
(1) Since you want both observed (empirical) and simulated arrivals per terminal, datasets for each should be in the Terminal agent. And then the replicated plot (in Main) can have two data entries referring to data sets terminals(index).observedArrivals and terminals(index).simulatedArrivals or whatever you name them.
(2) Using getHourOfDay to add to the observed dataset is wrong because that just returns 0-23 (i.e., the hour in the current day for the current model date). Your database table looks like it has hours since model start, so you just want time(HOUR) to get the model time in elapsed hours (irrespective of what the model time unit is). Or possibly time(HOUR) - 1 if you only want to update the empirical arrivals for the hour at the end of that hour (i.e., at the same time that you updated the simulated arrivals).
(3) Using a Variable to get the database value each hour doesn't work because a variable's initial value is only evaluated once at model initialisation. You want an hourly cyclic Event in Terminal instead which adds the relevant row's value. (You need to use the Insert Database Query wizard to generate the relevant Java code for the query you need in the event's action.)
(4) Because you have a database table with specifically-named columns for each terminal (columns terminal_a and presumably terminal_b etc.) that makes it slightly more awkward. (This isn't proper relational table design where, instead of 4 columns for the 4 terminals, you'd instead have two columns for terminal_id and observed_value with a row for each time period and terminal combination.)
So your database query expression (in your Terminal agents) will need to use the SQL format (not the QueryDSL format) so that you can 'stitch in' the correct column name into the SQL.
Related
I have a dataset including 3 columns :
ID transac (The unique ID of the transaction - Dimension)
Source (The source of the transaction - Dimension)
Amount € (The amount of the transaction - Stat)
screenshot of my dataset
To Count the number of transactions (for one or more sources), i use COUNT_DISTINCT function
I want to make the sum of the transactions amounts (for one or more sources). But i don't want to additionate the amounts of the transactions with the same ID !
Is there a way to do this calcul with a DataStudio function ?
Thanks for your answers. :-)
EDIT : I saw that we could do this type of calculation via SQL here and I would like to do this in DataStudio (so that I don't have to pre-calculate the amounts per source.)
IMO, your dataset contains wrong data. Each value should be relative only to that line, but this is not the case: if the total is =20, each line should describe the participation of that line to the total. With 4 sources, each line should be =5 or something else that sums 20.
To solve it in DataStudio, you need something like CALCULATE function in PowerBI, but currently DataStudio doesn't support this feature.
But there are some options to consider to repair your data:
If you're sure there are always 4 sources, just create a new calculated field with the expression Amount/4 and SUM it. It is not an elegant solution, but it works.
If your data source is Google Sheets, you can easily repair the data using formulas, like in this example:
Link to spreadsheet
For this spreadsheet, I used this formula in adjusted_amount column: =C2/COUNTIF(A:A,A2). With this column in DataStudio, just use the usual SUM aggregation function to summarize it correctly.
While using Power BI for a few months now, we (the user group) encountered an issue that is not really clear to us.
We use Power-BI with a remote SQL-Server data source, we access the data source through direct query.
Let's pretend we have 2 Tables as below-
Table name: Issue
Column:
ResolutionTime(Date/Time)
IssueID(Unique Numbers)
Table Name: WorkItem
Column:
start (Date/Time)
end (Date/Time)
IssueID (Unique Numbers, Foreign Key to "Issue" table)
Table WorkItem also contain a calculated column "WorkTime" which uses this DAX-expression as below-
WorkTime = WorkItem[end] - WorkItem[start]
The two tables are configured through Power-Bi having a two-way 1:n relationship that can be queried to collect all "WorkItem"(s) assigned to an "Issue" entry, using the "IssueID" as correlation column.
To be able to compute the aggregated "work-time" for each "WorkItem", we use a new/calculated table with the following DAX expression to aggregate the total amount of time invested for a single "Issue":
SumWork =
SUMMARIZE(
WorkItem, WorkItem[IssueID], "All work per item", SUM(WorkItem[WorkTime])
)
The above table computes the total invested work-time for a particular issue, grouping/summarizing results based on the "IssueID" foreign key. This new calculated table is also configured to have a relationship with the "Issue" table, this time a "1:1" relationship, using the IssueID as correlation column.
Now to compute the time that the issue was worked on + the time for Resolution should be summarized in a calculated column inside "Issue", but this does not work:
ResolutionAndWorkTime = Issue[ResolutionTime] + SumWork["All work per item"]
But the above DAX expression fails to compile, as it always reports that it returns "more than one result", thus not being a singular result. But that is suprising, as the two table ("Issue" and "SumWork" are related to each other with a "1:1" relationship).
Tables:
Issues
IssueID ResolutionTime ResolutionAndWorkTime
1 03:20:20 ???
2 01:20:20 ???
3 00:20:20 ???
WorkItem
IssueID start end WorkTime
1 1-2-2020 3:20:20 1-2-2020 3:25:20 00:05:00
1 2-2-2020 6:20:20 2-2-2020 7:20:20 01:00:00
3 1-3-2020 3:20:20 1-3-2020 3:29:20 00:09:00
Any ideas what to look for? Data-types? Table-definition? Table-relationships? We checked other Stackoverflow questions/answers, but no good ideas retrieved so far.
NOTE that a lot of join/merge features of Power BI are not available if direct-query is used and thus joining the tables is not really an option (we think).
You need this following code for your new Calculated column.
Visit HERE To know more about RELATED.
ResolutionAndWorkTime = Issues[ResolutionTime] + RELATED(SumWork[All work per item])
Based on input provided by "mkRabbani" (see other answer) we investigated why "RELATED" does not function as expected. The problem originates in the access to the database. As suspected earlier the function delivers the expected results once the database access is switched to "import" instead of "direct-query".
As a workaround we now joins the data inside the SQL server by using traditional database views. Of course this only works for scenarios where the database is under control of the data analytics team.
I would need your help with and SQL query that has to remove duplicate entries from a table, mostly using the datestamp column as a criteria in two passes.
Microsoft SQL DBMS is in question.
Here is a little more details:
Terminology: Module is basically a group of single machine workplaces onto which users operate.
Table:
ModNam column is fixed, there are 15 modules from M A01 to M A15, then goes the B row M B01 ... M B15 and so on until row F.
Pos column is irrelevant at the moment.
MdCod column represents a code of the machine being added to the position in the certain module. It can be replaced by another machine at any given time.
I have one query that will be inserting data into this table by copying entries from another table, every time a new machine is added to one of the positions.
Tricky part for me is a second query that should be comparing records in two phases and if:
1) Inside same module (first pass of the query represented with red color in the example pic attached):
ModNam value is the same, MdCod matches between the entries then the most recent datestamp decides the single one to stay and others duplicates get deleted
2) Inside other module (second pass of the query represented with purple color in the example pic attached):
ModNam values are different and MdCod matches between the entries then the most recent datestamp decides the single one to stay and others duplicates get deleted.
Please help and advise.
Example pic (updated):
Thank you all in advance.
I'm fairly new to SQL and I have been issued my first report to build. I have written an SQL query to give me a set of results that I would like to publish in a report.
I have unioned about 20 small queries all containing the correct amount of columns. One column is a misc column with about 15 different descriptions in (this is what I want to count).
I have uploaded my data set and now want to be able to choose a cell in my report to bring back a certain description.
At the minute I'm using
=count(fields!misc.values)
and it's giving me the whole count, about 200.
I would like to know if there is any kind of "where clause" (filter) which I can use to state which description results I want to bring back.
You can use am expression to count the misc.value you need. It will work like a count using a where clause:
=Sum(iif(Fields!misc.Value ="Some description",1,0))
Example:
For count the FSMethod with MethodOne as value I used this expression:
=Sum(iif(Fields!FSMethod.Value ="MethodOne",1,0))
Note the expression sums by 1 if the FSMethod.Value is MethodOne.
For count the rows with FSMethod column with MethodTwo value.
=Sum(iif(Fields!FSMethod.Value ="MethodTwo",1,0))
Let me know if this can help you.
I have a tricky problem trying to find an efficient way of ordering a set of objects (~1000 rows) that contain a large (~5 million) number of indexed data points. In my case I need a query that allows me to order the table by a specific datapoint. Each datapoint is a 16-bit unsigned integer.
I am currently solving this problem by using an large array:
Object Table:
id serial NOT NULL,
category_id integer,
description text,
name character varying(255),
created_at timestamp without time zone NOT NULL,
updated_at timestamp without time zone NOT NULL,
data integer[],
GIST index:
CREATE INDEX object_rdtree_idx
ON object
USING gist
(data gist__intbig_ops)
This index is not currently being used when I do a select query, and I am not certain it would help anyway.
Each day the array field is updated with a new set of ~5 million values
I have a webserver that needs to list all objects ordered by the value of a particular data point:
Example Query:
SELECT name, data[3916863] as weight FROM object ORDER BY weight DESC
Currently, it takes about 2.5 Seconds to perform this query.
Question:
Is there a better approach? I am happy for the insertion side to be slow as it happens in the background, but I need the select query to be as fast as possible. In saying this, there is a limit to how long the insertion can take.
I have considered creating a lookup table where every value has it's own row - but I'm not sure how the insertion/lookup time would be affected by this approach and I suspect entering 1000+ records with ~5 million data points as individual rows would be too slow.
Currently inserting a row takes ~30 seconds which is acceptable for now.
Ultimately I am still on the hunt for a scalable solution to the base problem, but for now I need this solution to work, so this solution doesn't need to scale up any further.
Update:
I was wrong to dismiss having a giant table instead of an array, while insertion time massively increased, query time is reduced to just a few milliseconds.
I am now altering my generation algorithm to only save a datum if it non-zero and changed from previous update. This has reduced insertions to just a few hundred thousands values which only takes a few seconds.
New Table:
CREATE TABLE data
(
object_id integer,
data_index integer,
value integer,
)
CREATE INDEX index_data_on_data_index
ON data
USING btree
("data_index");
New Query:
SELECT name, coalesce(value,0) as weight FROM objects LEFT OUTER JOIN data on data.object_id = objects.id AND data_index = 7731363 ORDER BY weight DESC
Insertion Time: 15,000 records/second
Query Time: 17ms
First of all, do you really need a relational database for this? You do not seem to be relating some data to some other data. You might be much better off with a flat-file format.
Secondly, your index on data is useless for the query you showed. You are querying for a datum (a position in your array) while the index is built on the values in the array. Dropping the index will make the inserts considerably faster.
If you have to stay with PostgreSQL for other reasons (bigger data model, MVCC, security) then I suggest you change your data model and ALTER COLUMN data SET TYPE bytea STORAGE external. Since the data column is about 4 x 5 million = 20MB it will be stored out-of-line anyway, but if you explicitly set it, then you know exactly what you have.
Then create a custom function in C that fetches your data value "directly" using the PG_GETARG_BYTEA_P_SLICE() macro and that would look somewhat like this (I am not a very accomplished PG C programmer so forgive me any errors, but this should help you on your way):
// Function get_data_value() -- Get a 4-byte value from a bytea
// Arg 0: bytea* The data
// Arg 1: int32 The position of the element in the data, 1-based
PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1(get_data_value);
Datum
get_data_value(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
{
int32 element = PG_GETARG_INT32_P(1) - 1; // second argument, make 0-based
bytea *data = PG_GETARG_BYTEA_P_SLICE(0, // first argument
element * sizeof(int32), // offset into data
sizeof(int32)); // get just the required 4 bytes
PG_RETURN_INT32_P((int32*)data);
}
The PG_GETARG_BYTEA_P_SLICE() macro retrieves only a slice of data from the disk and is therefore very efficient.
There are some samples of creating custom C functions in the docs.
Your query now becomes:
SELECT name, get_data_value(data, 3916863) AS weight FROM object ORDER BY weight DESC;