I'm working on website where I need to find rank of user on the basis of score. Earlier I'm calculating the score and rank of user by sql query .
select * from (
select
usrid,
ROW_NUMBER()
OVER(ORDER BY (count(*)+sum(sup)+sum(opp)+sum(visited)*0.3) DESC) AS rank,
(count(*)+sum(sup)+sum(opp)+sum(visited)*0.3 ) As score
from [DB_].[dbo].[dsas]
group by usrid) as cash
where usrid=#userid
Please don't concentrate more on query because this is only to explain how I select data.
Problem: Now I can't use above query because every time I use rank it need to select rank from dsas table and data of dsas table is increasing day by day and slows down my website.
What I need is select data by above query and insert in another table named as score. Can we do anything like this?
A better solution is to either include score as a field in your user table or have a separate table for scores. Any time you add new sup, opp, or visited data for a user, also recalculate their score at that time.
Then to get the highest ranking users, you will be able to perform a very simple select statement, ordering by score descending, and only fetching the number of rows you want. It will be very fast.
Related
i'm trying to calculate running sum for an account statement using ms-access query but i have problem when there is duplicate dates the sum is not changing until the date changes
this is the img link for results:
https://i.stack.imgur.com/eUfa2.png
and this is the query :
SELECT Trans.TransDate, Trans.Cr, Trans.Dr, (SELECT SUM(t.[Dr]-t.[Cr]) FROM Trans t WHERE t.[TransDate]<= Trans.[TransDate] AND t.Account = Trans.Account) AS Balance
FROM Trans
WHERE (((Trans.Account)="Cash"))
ORDER BY Trans.TransDate;
You can't do that in a query without a unique key. For your sample, you might be able to include the amounts, but that will miss again should two or more records of the account also have the same amount.
In VBA, you could open the query as a recordset and loop the records while you add up the running sum.
I have an sqlite database with a table that logs electric power values over time, i.e. there is a timestamp column and one for the associated power value.
With a value coming in roughly every second, this table grows significantly over time. Which is why I want to thin out old values, for example by replacing all 60 values in a minute with their average.
I know how to query for the average.
I know how to insert the query's result back into the table.
But how do I delete the original values without also deleting the newly inserted average value (which has a timestamp within the same range)?
Note that I would like to perform the operation entirely inside sqlite query language, i.e. without storing for example row ids in the C code that is executing the queries.
The easiest way would be to use a temporary table:
BEGIN;
CREATE TEMP TABLE Averages AS
SELECT MIN(Timestamp), AVG(Value)
FROM MyTable
WHERE (old)
GROUP BY (minute);
DELETE FROM MyTable WHERE (old);
INSERT INTO MyTable(Timestamp, Value) SELECT * FROM Averages;
DROP TABLE Averages;
COMMIT;
I am new to bigquery, so sorry if this is a noob question! I am interested in breaking out sessions by page path or title. I understand one session can contain multiple paths/titles so the sum would be greater than total sessions. Essentially, I want to create a 'session id' and do a count distinct of sessionids where path like a or b.
It might actually be helpful to start at the very beginning and manually calculate total sessions. I tried to concatenate visit id and full visitor id to create a unique visit id, but apparently that is quite different from sessions. Can someone help enlighten me? Thanks!
I am working with our GA site data. Schema is the standard in GA exports.
DATA SAMPLE
Let's use an example out of the sample BigQuery (London Helmet) data:
There are 63 sessions in this day:
SELECT count(*) FROM [google.com:analytics-bigquery:LondonCycleHelmet.ga_sessions_20130910]
How many of those sessions are where hits.page.pagePath like /vests% or /helmets%? How many were vests only vs helmets only? Thanks!
Here is an example of how to calculate whether there were only helmets, or only vests or both helmets and vests or neither:
SELECT
visitID,
has_helmets AND has_vests AS both_helmets_and_vests,
has_helmets AND NOT has_vests AS helmets_only,
NOT has_helmets AND has_vests AS vests_only,
NOT has_helmets AND NOT has_vests AS neither_helmets_nor_vests
FROM (
SELECT
visitId,
SOME(hits.page.pagePath like '/helmets%') WITHIN RECORD AS has_helmets,
SOME(hits.page.pagePath like '/vests%') WITHIN RECORD AS has_vests,
FROM [google.com:analytics-bigquery:LondonCycleHelmet.ga_sessions_20130910]
)
Way 1, easier but you need to repeat on each field
Obviously you can do something like this :
SELECT count(*) FROM [google.com:analytics-bigquery:LondonCycleHelmet.ga_sessions_20130910] WHERE hits.page.pagePath like '/helmets%'
And then have multiple queries for your own substrings (one with '/vests%', one with 'helmets%', etc).
Way 2, works fine, but not with repeated fields
If you want ONE query that'll just group by on the first part of the string, you can do something like that :
Select a, Count(*) FROM (SELECT FIRST(SPLIT(hits.page.pagePath, '/')) as a FROM [google.com:analytics-bigquery:LondonCycleHelmet.ga_sessions_20130910] ) group by a
When I do this, it returns me the following the 63 sessions, with a total count of 63 :).
Way 3, using a FLATTEN on the table to get each hit individually
Since the "hits" field is repeatable, you would need a FLATTEN in your query :
Select a, Count(*) FROM (SELECT FIRST(SPLIT(hits.page.pagePath, '/')) as a FROM FLATTEN ([google.com:analytics-bigquery:LondonCycleHelmet.ga_sessions_20130910] , hits)) group by a
The reason why you need to FLATTEN here is that the "hits" field is repeatable. If you don't flatten, it won't look into ALL the "hits" in your response. Adding "FLATTEN" will make you work off a sub-table where each hit is in its own row, so you can query on all of them.
If you want it by sessions instead of hits, (it'll be both), do something like :
Select b, a Count(*) FROM (SELECT FIRST(SPLIT(hits.page.pagePath, '/')) as a, visitID as b, FROM FLATTEN ([google.com:analytics-bigquery:LondonCycleHelmet.ga_sessions_20130910] , hits)) group by b, a
I have similar situation like question below.
Mysql speed up max() group by
SELECT MAX(id) id, cid FROM table GROUP BY cid
To optimize above query (shown in the question), creating index(cid, id) does the trick.
However, when I add a column that is not indexed to SELECT, query speed drastically slows down.
For example,
SELECT MAX(id) id, cid, newcolumn FROM table GROUP BY cid
If I create index(cid, id, newcolumn), query time comes back to minimal. It seems I should index all the columns I select while using GROUP BY.
Is there any way other than indexing all the columns to be select?
When all the columns used in the query are part of the index (which is then called a covering index), SQLite can get all values from the index and does not need to access the table itself.
When adding a column that is not indexed, each record must be looked up in both the index and the table.
Furthermore, the order of the records in the table is unlikely to be the same as the order in the index, so the table's pages are not read in order, and are read multiple times, which means that caching will not work as well.
The newcolumn values must be read from either the table or an index; there is no other mechanism to store data.
tl;dr: no
I've got (for example) an index:
CREATE INDEX someIndex ON orders (customer, date);
Does this index only accelerate queries where customer and date are used or does it accelerate queries for a single-column like this too?
SELECT * FROM orders WHERE customer > 33;
I'm using SQLite.
If the answer is yes, why is it possible to create more than one index per table?
Yet another question: How much faster is a combined index compared with two separat indexes when you use both columns in a query?
marc_s has the correct answer to your first question. The first key in a multi key index can work just like a single key index but any subsequent keys will not.
As for how much faster the composite index is depends on your data and how you structure your index and query, but it is usually significant. The indexes essentially allow Sqlite to do a binary search on the fields.
Using the example you gave if you ran the query:
SELECT * from orders where customer > 33 && date > 99
Sqlite would first get all results using a binary search on the entire table where customer > 33. Then it would do a binary search on only those results looking for date > 99.
If you did the same query with two separate indexes on customer and date, Sqlite would have to binary search the whole table twice, first for the customer and again for the date.
So how much of a speed increase you will see depends on how you structure your index with regard to your query. Ideally, the first field in your index and your query should be the one that eliminates the most possible matches as that will give the greatest speed increase by greatly reducing the amount of work the second search has to do.
For more information see this:
http://www.sqlite.org/optoverview.html
I'm pretty sure this will work, yes - it does in MS SQL Server anyway.
However, this index doesn't help you if you need to select on just the date, e.g. a date range. In that case, you might need to create a second index on just the date to make those queries more efficient.
Marc
I commonly use combined indexes to sort through data I wish to paginate or request "streamily".
Assuming a customer can make more than one order.. and customers 0 through 11 exist and there are several orders per customer all inserted in random order. I want to sort a query based on customer number followed by the date. You should sort the id field as well last to split sets where a customer has several identical dates (even if that may never happen).
sqlite> CREATE INDEX customer_asc_date_asc_index_asc ON orders
(customer ASC, date ASC, id ASC);
Get page 1 of a sorted query (limited to 10 items):
sqlite> SELECT id, customer, date FROM orders
ORDER BY customer ASC, date ASC, id ASC LIMIT 10;
2653|1|1303828585
2520|1|1303828713
2583|1|1303829785
1828|1|1303830446
1756|1|1303830540
1761|1|1303831506
2442|1|1303831705
2523|1|1303833761
2160|1|1303835195
2645|1|1303837524
Get the next page:
sqlite> SELECT id, customer, date FROM orders WHERE
(customer = 1 AND date = 1303837524 and id > 2645) OR
(customer = 1 AND date > 1303837524) OR
(customer > 1)
ORDER BY customer ASC, date ASC, id ASC LIMIT 10;
2515|1|1303837914
2370|1|1303839573
1898|1|1303840317
1546|1|1303842312
1889|1|1303843243
2439|1|1303843699
2167|1|1303849376
1544|1|1303850494
2247|1|1303850869
2108|1|1303853285
And so on...
Having the indexes in place reduces server side index scanning when you would otherwise use a query OFFSET coupled with a LIMIT. The query time gets longer and the drives seek harder the higher the offset goes. Using this method eliminates that.
Using this method is advised if you plan on joining data later but only need a limited set of data per request. Join against a SUBSELECT as described above to reduce memory overhead for large tables.