I have a problem that I have been trying to solve... I Think it is fairly easy but I am new to SSRS. I have made a matrix showing the values of 2 different columns per country on one row. However I want to show only 1 value per row, that means that each country should get 2 rows each.
I Think it has something to do with adjacent but I can't get it right :(
At the moment it looks like this:
France 10 20
But I want it to look like this (don't the dashes...):
France 10
France --- 20
I think this should be possible to do without coding, I just can't find the right property/or Tablix function.
Is there anyone out there who can help me?
Change your data source so that it splits the rows. So for example:
select Country, Value1
From CountryTable
Union All
Select Country, Value2
From CountryTable
You will have to consider your sorting to make sure that your rows are aligned how you need them.
This feels like a weird requirement. But, setting the Row Grouping to Country and then Value should achieve this if I'm understanding your data structure properly.
Related
I hope to display grouped data in two table, like following:
It much like following format:
Group 1:
table 1 table2
1 A 5 E
2 B 6 F
3 C
4 D
It's like the folding of data, once left side table is fully , and then put the data into right side.
In the above case, the data group has six elements, they are {(1,A),(2,B),(3,C),(4,D),(5,E),(6,F)}
Is cystral report support that? And how to meet it, thanks a lot.
After doing some research, I try to use subgroup and put them in both side,
the new problem I meet is the linked parameter what I used is formula, and its content is {PaymentInfo.M_D}+{PaymentInfo.generalOrderGroup}+{PaymentInfo.examName}. However, I don't know why this value is always showing on the subgroup title, like following:
How to hide this infos and delete the upper and bottom empty section, thanks a lot.
In my organisation, there are a couple of excel functions that return large array like more than 2000 rows and several columns.
Dummy Code / Dummy Example :
{=FunctionThatReturnArray(param1)}
where param1 is the date
I need to retrieve the selling price for the combination « Shoes » « Yellow » for different dates.
I don’t want to display an entire array, for every date I’m interested in.
Instead, I would like to display only the value that I need.
I tried to used the Index function as below, but as the combination Shoes/Yellow isn’t always at the fifth row, it doesn’t work.
{=INDEX(FunctionThatReturnArray(param1),5,4)}
where 5 is the RowNumber and 4 the ColNumber
I believe I need to use the Match Function somehow, but on the 2 different column.
How could I do that without displaying the entire array on my worksheet ?
Thanks in advance and kind regards
Largo
I'm not sure if this is the answer you want, but you are right, you would have to match on both the 2nd and 3rd columns then index into the 4th column like this:
=INDEX({43466,"Pants","Yellow",40;43466,"Shirt","Green",20;43466,"Shoes","Blue",70;43466,"Shoes","Yellow",75},MATCH(1,
(INDEX({43466,"Pants","Yellow",40;43466,"Shirt","Green",20;43466,"Shoes","Blue",70;43466,"Shoes","Yellow",75},0,2)=B2)*
(INDEX({43466,"Pants","Yellow",40;43466,"Shirt","Green",20;43466,"Shoes","Blue",70;43466,"Shoes","Yellow",75},0,3)=C2),0),4)
Where I have used an array constant to test it, you would need multiple references to your Array Function to achieve this.
BTW the 43466 is the number representation of 1/1/2019.
I have a table that has an auto-incrementing identity "Reference" field and a pair of other fields that determine the sort order. What I need to do is find the 'next' item in the table when sorted based on the pair of fields based on the reference field of an initial item.
So my data looks like this when sorted by SortParent.SortChild:
Reference SortParent SortChild Data
------------------------------------------
9 1 2 Fred
7 1 3 Jim
11 1 4 Sheila
4 2 1 Micro
5 2 2 Archimedes
12 2 3 Electron
So in this example the "Jim" row (Reference=7) comes after "Fred" (Reference=9) even though it's reference is smaller.
So i want to be able to find which row comes after Fred by searching based on Jim's reference
At the moment in code I do a query to find the values for Fred's row:
SELECT SortParent,SortChild From MyTable WHERE Reference=9
Which returns 1,2. Then do a search for the first row that comes after 1,2:
SELECT * FROM MyTable
WHERE ((SortParent=1 and SortChild>2) OR (SortParent>2))
ORDER BY SortParent,SortChild
Which will therefore come back with the row having reference 7 and sort values 1,3
I'm pretty sure this can be done in a single query, but i'm stumped on the best way.
Incidentally, if anyone has any suggestions on alternate way of handling the two part sort columns that would make this easier, please feel free to help!
I believe You are looking at the LEAD or LAG windowed function:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/library/hh213125.aspx
SELECT
NextReference
FROM
(SELECT
reference
, LEAD(reference, 1,0) OVER (ORDER BY SortParent,SortChild) AS NextReference
, *
FROM
mytable
) newTable
WHERE
reference = 9
I used LEAD, but try it with LAG if you are looking in the other direction for the row
I havn't tested this particular query, so my not be syntactically sound, but let me know if you have any troubles with it and I'll go over it a bit more once I'm back at my desk
EDIT: Used the wrong sql from your question as my base
EDIT2: Put the lead into a subquery to allow us to query on it
If I have the following data:
Results Table
.[Required]
I want one grape
I want one orange
I want one apple
I want one carrot
I want one watermelon
Fruit Table
.[Name]
grape
orange
apple
What I want to do is essentially say give me all results where users are looking for a fruit. This is all just example, I am looking at a table with roughly 1 million records and a string field of 4000+ characters. I am expecting a somewhat slow result and I know that the table could DEFINITELY be structured better, but I have no control of that. Here is the query I would essentially have, but it doesn't seem to do what I want. It gives every record. And yes, [#Fruit] is a temp table.
SELECT * FROM [Results]
JOIN [#Fruit] ON
'%'+[Results].[Required]+'%' LIKE [#Fruit].[Name]
Ideally my output should be the following 3 rows:
I want one grape
I want one orange
I want one apple
If that kind of think is doable, I would try the other way round:
SELECT * FROM [Results]
JOIN [#Fruit] ON
[Results].[Required] LIKE '%'+[#Fruit].[Name]+'%'
This topic interests me, so I did a little bit of searching.
Suggestion 1 : Full Text Search
I think what you are trying to do is Full Text Search .
You will need Full-Text Index created on the table if it is not already there. ( Create FULLTEXT Index ).
This should be faster than performing "Like".
Suggestion 2 : Meta Data Search
Another approach I'd take is to create meta data table, and maintain the information myself when the [Result].Required values are updated(or created).
This looks more or less doable, but I'd start from the Fruit table just for conceptual clarity.
Here's roughly how I would structure this, ignoring all performance / speed / normalization issues (note also that I've switched around the variables in the LIKE comparison):
SELECT f.name, r.required
FROM fruits f
JOIN results r ON r.required LIKE CONCAT('%', f.name, '%')
...and perhaps add a LIMIT 10 to keep the query from wasting time while you're testing it out.
This structure will:
give you one record per "match" (per Result row that matches a Fruit)
exclude Result rows that don't have a Fruit
probably be ungodly slow.
Good luck!
Ok, from the title it seems to be impossible to understand, I'll try to be as clear as possible.
Basically, I have a table, let's call it 'records'. In this table I have some products, of which I store 'id', 'codex' (which is a unique identifier for a certain product in the whole database), 'price' and 'situation'. This last one is a string which tells me wether the product has just entered the store (in that case it is set to 'IN'), or it has already been sold ('OUT' in this case).
The database was not created by us, I HAVE to work with that although it is horribly structured... The guy who originally projected the database decided to register when a product's situation passes from 'IN' to 'OUT' in the following way: instead of UPDATEing the corresponding value in the table, he used to take the row of data with 'IN' as situation, and to DUPLICATE it setting, that time, 'OUT' as situation.
Just to sum up: if a product has not been sold yet, it will have one row of dedicated data; otherwise those rows will be two, identical except for the 'situation' field.
What I need to do is: select a product if (and ONLY if) there is no duplicate for it. Basically, I can (and should) look for a 'codex', and if I my Count(codex) ends up being >1, I do not select the row.
I hope the explanation of the process is clear enough...
I tryed many alternative (no, SELECT DISTINCT is not a solution): des anyone have an idea of how to do that? Because really, none of us three could come up with a good solution!
Here is the schema for the table, I hope it is sufficiently clear, and if not do not hesitate asking for more details.
Just as a reminder: the project is in (sigh...) VB.net, the database is in Microsoft Access (mdb).
I could not find a solution on StackOverFlow, I hope this is not a duplicate question! Thanks in advance for the help.
id codex price situation
1 1 2.50 IN
2 1 2.50 OUT
3 2 3.45 IN
4 3 21.50 IN
5 2 3.45 OUT
6 4 1.50 IN
To check if I understand what your problem is... In your example table you just want to get the lines with ID 4 a 6, right?
If is that what you want, and If you want only the not sold ones try this command
SELECT
*
FROM
records
WHERE
codex
not in
(
SELECT
codex
FROM
records
WHERE
situation ='OUT'
)