October 5, 2016 at 10:37 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Solving FIFO Queues Using Windowed Functions
J. Drew Allen
Business Intelligence Analyst
Philadelphia, PA
October 6, 2016 at 2:28 am
Nice write-up Drew, well done!
😎
One thing I missed seeing in the article was the mentioning of a POC index which is absolutely essential when working with the window functions, especially when more than 90% of the execution cost are the sort operators.
October 6, 2016 at 6:53 am
Interesting logic flow, thanks.
October 6, 2016 at 8:29 am
Excellent write up!
October 6, 2016 at 8:34 am
Very nicely done Drew!
Best,
Kevin G. Boles
SQL Server Consultant
SQL MVP 2007-2012
TheSQLGuru on googles mail service
October 6, 2016 at 8:37 am
Great, great work Drew. Very well done.
-- Itzik Ben-Gan 2001
October 8, 2016 at 6:28 pm
beautiful work, I check the execution plan, the main cost is on sort operator, in fact we do not need that much sort, we just need sort the credit operation by transid in every custid group to make a FIFO, get a correct runningtotalofcredit order, calculate the final sum debits for every custid, and then join the two result on custid , compare two sum number to get the result.
here is the some simple code for that:
set statistics time on
select c.custid, transtype,
case when runningtotalofc + amountd >=0 then 0
when runningtotalofc + amountd < amount or amountd is null then -amount
else -runningtotalofc - amountd
end as remain
from
(
(select custid,transtype,amount,sum(amount) over (partition by custid order by transid) as runningtotalofC
from dbo.transactions where transtype = 'C') as c
full outer join
(select custid,sum(amount) amountd
from dbo.transactions where transtype = 'D' group by custid) as d
on c.custid = d.custid)
order by custid
set statistics time off
please point out if there any problems, thank you.
October 10, 2016 at 10:57 am
wtren (10/8/2016)
beautiful work, I check the execution plan, the main cost is on sort operator, in fact we do not need that much sort, we just need sort the credit operation by transid in every custid group to make a FIFO, get a correct runningtotalofcredit order, calculate the final sum debits for every custid, and then join the two result on custid , compare two sum number to get the result.here is the some simple code for that:
set statistics time on
select c.custid, transtype,
case when runningtotalofc + amountd >=0 then 0
when runningtotalofc + amountd < amount or amountd is null then -amount
else -runningtotalofc - amountd
end as remain
from
(
(select custid,transtype,amount,sum(amount) over (partition by custid order by transid) as runningtotalofC
from dbo.transactions where transtype = 'C') as c
full outer join
(select custid,sum(amount) amountd
from dbo.transactions where transtype = 'D' group by custid) as d
on c.custid = d.custid)
order by custid
set statistics time off
please point out if there any problems, thank you.
One of the requirements of the original question was to display when a credit was depleted, which requires knowing the date of the debit that did so. Since your subquery only contains a grand total of debits for a customer, it cannot return that information.
Drew
Drew
J. Drew Allen
Business Intelligence Analyst
Philadelphia, PA
October 10, 2016 at 11:10 am
I did some performance testing on the two pieces of code. They don't produce the same results, and I haven't worked through where the issues are, so these results may not stand. I've also attached a portion of the data. I couldn't upload the whole set of data due to size restrictions.
Drew...I think that if you remove
WHERE rn = 1
AND Results.debitdate IS NOT NULL
then the number of rows will be the same
iirc, I put this in to meet OP requirement ?
________________________________________________________________
you can lead a user to data....but you cannot make them think
and remember....every day is a school day
December 20, 2017 at 5:02 am
hi drew ,
that is wonderful work , i need a help to write this in SQL DB2 , how can i do this.
December 20, 2017 at 10:16 am
louisjeorge75 - Wednesday, December 20, 2017 5:02 AMhi drew ,that is wonderful work , i need a help to write this in SQL DB2 , how can i do this.
Thanks. I don't know DB2, so I can't help you with the rewrite.
Drew
J. Drew Allen
Business Intelligence Analyst
Philadelphia, PA
November 29, 2018 at 10:59 pm
ISNULL(LAG([to], 1) OVER(PARTITION BY CustID ORDER BY c.TransDate, c.Amount), 0)
Am I misunderstanding something here? The ISNULL check would never return NULL, and thus 0, because you've already provided a default value (1) in your LAG statement in case of NULLs. No?
Edit: Nevermind. It's the offset that's been provided, not the default value. But still, wouldn't this make more sense?LAG([to], 1, 0) OVER(PARTITION BY CustID ORDER BY c.TransDate, c.Amount)
November 29, 2018 at 11:05 pm
Question #2...I am not entirely following this bit:
When SUM() is used with an OVER clause that contains an ORDER BY, then a window frame is "required." If you do not specify a window frame, then it will use the default RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND CURRENT ROW. The problem with this is that RANGE will always write to disk, but ROWS will not if there are fewer than 10,000 records per partition. When used with SUM(), there are only ever TWO rows per partition, because of the way that SQL calculates the running totals.
What is the significance of "writing to disk", and what is the 10k vs 2 rows per partition issue? I'm sorry for my ignorance, trying to understand what you mean here. Thanks!
November 30, 2018 at 7:36 am
autoexcrement - Thursday, November 29, 2018 10:59 PMISNULL(LAG([to], 1) OVER(PARTITION BY CustID ORDER BY c.TransDate, c.Amount), 0)
Am I misunderstanding something here? The ISNULL check would never return NULL, and thus 0, because you've already provided a default value (1) in your LAG statement in case of NULLs. No?Edit: Nevermind. It's the offset that's been provided, not the default value. But still, wouldn't this make more sense?
LAG([to], 1, 0) OVER(PARTITION BY CustID ORDER BY c.TransDate, c.Amount)
That should be more efficient, because the replacement of missing values is coded into the same branch that does the LAG itself, as opposed to being a separate process after the LAG is computed. Looks like a nice find.
Best,
Kevin G. Boles
SQL Server Consultant
SQL MVP 2007-2012
TheSQLGuru on googles mail service
November 30, 2018 at 7:44 am
TheSQLGuru - Friday, November 30, 2018 7:36 AMautoexcrement - Thursday, November 29, 2018 10:59 PMISNULL(LAG([to], 1) OVER(PARTITION BY CustID ORDER BY c.TransDate, c.Amount), 0)
Am I misunderstanding something here? The ISNULL check would never return NULL, and thus 0, because you've already provided a default value (1) in your LAG statement in case of NULLs. No?Edit: Nevermind. It's the offset that's been provided, not the default value. But still, wouldn't this make more sense?
LAG([to], 1, 0) OVER(PARTITION BY CustID ORDER BY c.TransDate, c.Amount)That should be more efficient, because the replacement of missing values is coded into the same branch that does the LAG itself, as opposed to being a separate process after the LAG is computed. Looks like a nice find.
But looking at the lasted code, posted just today, it seems he fixed this:
LAG(tot, 1, 0) OVER(PARTITION BY CustID ORDER BY tot, TransType) AS PrevTot
That is the only LAG in his query now.
Best,
Kevin G. Boles
SQL Server Consultant
SQL MVP 2007-2012
TheSQLGuru on googles mail service
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply