Start Free Trial

asked on

possibly a function with existence check?

it's a lending database. Upon original insertion, or loan submission, many checks are performed to determine whether it is actually a lendable application. I am creating a new check, be it just a procedural check, or a function, it needs to be nothing but fast (and accurate, of course).

We've got two tables, LoanTable and CustomerTable, joined to eachother on CustomerID, and we need to check for the combined RoutingNumber + AccountNumber values, in the following four conditions:

The submitted RoutingNumber + AccountNumber per SSN should not also be
A., associated with a loan in collection status.
B., associated with a loan in outstanding status.
C., associated to a customer within last 45 days, with a denial code of 5.
D., associated to a customer with current loan balance > 0.

A & B checks:
LoanTable JOIN CustomerTable ON CustomerID
WHERE LoanTable.Status IN (B,C,R,N,O,G) -- collection status

C check:
LoanApps for the same RoutingNumber + AccountNumber within the last 45 days (DateEntered), DCode = 5.

D check:
Calculate LoanBalance, then for any record in CustomerTable with the same RoutingNumber + AccountNumber,
sum all associated records and check whether balance is > 0.

This is an example check for loan balance:
select
cast(l.LoanAmt as decimal) + cast(l.FinCharge as decimal) - SUM(cast(Coalesce(p.Pmt, 0) as decimal)) as Balance
FROM
dbo.LoanAppl l (NOLOCK) LEFT JOIN dbo.Payment p (NOLOCK) ON l.ApplNo = p.ApplNo
WHERE
l.status IN ('N', 'O', 'P', 'D', 'B', 'R', 'C', 'G', 'V')
and l.IsOriginated = 1
AND l.ApplNo = 52078012
GROUP BY
l.LoanAmt,
l.FinCharge

terribly pressing, any input is hugely appreciated

SOLUTION

membership

This solution is only available to members.

To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.

Start Free Trial

ASKER

hi lowfat. i think i could probably do it in one. basically, it's just a matter of checking whether the same routingnumber/accountnumber is found to be associated with any of the 4 conditions i listed. performance is key, and i wasn't sure how best to construct the proc. what do you think?

ASKER

hey lowfat, a customer can go into the database, and have several loan submissions over time. for example, customerID A maybe originated back in 1995, and had a loan application in '95, 2000, 2005 and 2010. (just playing here, picking a few dates)

each one of those new loan submissions makes a new entry in LoanTable.
the routingnumber and accountnumber is only in customertable, and the LoanTable is joined to customerTable on CustomerID

IF any of those four conditions exists, I would be denying the loan for the customer's SSN.
So, it is at the entry into the loantable that I have to check those four conditions, if exists.

Do you see what I mean?

so what are you giving to the procedure ...

the ssn so whats the big deal with the routing code/account number?

or the routing code and account number .... implies that more than one customer can exist for an ssn ,,. so what does that mean?

what sql server version are you using ? sql 2008?

ASKER

using v2008

in this check, it's the routingnumber/account that we need to key on. the ssn is also one of the checks being performed

ASKER

i think your point is valid, lowfat. i'm going to check upstream and see why we are not using the SSN, rather than the combined routingnumber/accountnumber. say a customer opens a new account, they're going to get a new accountnumber. but, the ssn stays the same. would seem to me like that would be the value to key on. i will let you know what i find.

ASKER

I have learned there have been applications submitted with different SSNs on the same routingnumber/accountnumber. so the check needs to be keyed on routingnumber/accountnumber.

ASKER

Any thoughts on getting A, B, C and D into one procedural check?

ASKER

well, i have all three pieces, A/B, C and D. but i'm not very comfortable with the flow between each. I'm also not confident that D is as optimal as it could be. I just figured I'd raiserror on the balance > 0, but again, I'm not certain on the best method of wrapping all three together, with the RAISERROR to control the output to the client.

your thoughts?

--A/B
DECLARE @Status TABLE (Status CHAR(1), PRIMARY KEY (Status))
INSERT @Status VALUES
('B'),('C'),('R'),('N'),('O'),('G');

IF EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM dbo.LoanTable l1 JOIN dbo.CustomerTable c
	  ON l1.customerID = c.customerID
	WHERE c.RoutingNumber = @RoutingNumber
	AND c.AccountNumber = @AccountNumber
	AND EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM @Status l2 WHERE l1.Status = l2.Status))
	BEGIN
RAISERROR('The given RoutingNumber/AccountNumber is in the system with collection status.',0,1)  
	  RETURN;
	END


--C
IF EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM dbo.LoanTable l 
WHERE l.DateEntered >= DATEADD(day,-45,GETDATE())
AND DCode = 5
AND l.RoutingNumber = @RoutingNumber
AND l.AccountNumber = @AccountNumber)
BEGIN
	   RAISERROR('The given RoutingNumber/AccountNumber has a DCode = 5, within last 5 days.',0,1)  
	RETURN;
END	


--D
DECLARE @Status TABLE (Status CHAR(1), PRIMARY KEY (Status))
INSERT @Status VALUES
('N'),('O'),('P'),('D'),('B'),('R'),('C'),('G'),('V');

SELECT 1 FROM
(
SELECT CAST(la.LoanAmt AS DECIMAL) + CAST(la.Charge AS DECIMAL) - SUM(CAST(COALESCE(p.Pmt, 0) AS DECIMAL)) AS Balance
	FROM dbo.LoanTable la (NOLOCK) LEFT JOIN dbo.PaymentTable p (NOLOCK) 
	   ON la.Ano = p.ANo JOIN dbo.CustomerTable c
	     ON la.CustomerID = c.CustomerID      
	WHERE la.IsO = 1      
	AND EXISTS(SELECT 1 FROM @Status l WHERE l.Status = la.Status) 
	GROUP BY la.LoanAmt,la.Charge ) x
	HAVING SUM(x.Balance) > 0

Open in new window

ASKER

lowfat, or eugene? any suggestions on the most appropriate way of wrapping this into a proc? optimally?

ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION

membership

This solution is only available to members.

To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.

Start Free Trial

ASKER

fairly simple, it seems. thank you, eugene. i can't test it out until a little later, but i will let you know

ASKER

let's say i just want to return 0/1, pass or fail, if any of the checks come back w/results.

for example

begin
select 1 [A/B]
...
end

--
in case all criterias may work at same run and you wish to have combined result
like you can use some temp table...

status | criteria
1 A/B
0 C
1 D

you still can use
Begin
RETURN(1)..

End

ASKER

if any check fails, we will return 0, and be done with it.
if the checks collectively succeed, we will return 1, and be done.

ASKER

couldn't i just do this:

BEGIN
RAISERROR('The given RoutingNumber/AccountNumber is in the system with collection status.',0,1)
RETURN (0)
END

yeah?

ASKER

naah, i think i'll do it without the RAISERROR

Begin
RETURN(1)..

End

eugene, do you feel that either approach is better than the other?

ASKER

>>if any check fails, we will return 0, and be done with it.
if the checks collectively succeed, we will return 1, and be done.

I should clarify. By 'fail', i did not mean a functional problem with the sql, I just meant if it found data. IF EXISTS came back with anything, that is a bad check. Or a 'failure', per se. 0

If it comes back with nothing, the check is clean, or a success. Or 1.

ASKER

I am so sorry for having left this open. Eugene, lowfat, please forgive. for my output, I ended up using the SELECT suggested here, eugene: ID:36537935
thank you both very much for your time.

ASKER

>>a procedure rather than a function is probably the better solution
You are right, lowfat, the procedure was fine. Thank you, Eugene, for your suggestion.

ASKER

Hey lowfat, or eugene, i put that procedure together the other day, but it really is not performing as well as is needed. I have reviewed the indices/constraints, and that is good. There was a table scan that i managed to change to a clustered index scan.... couldn't get to the seek. Would either of you have a moment to take a look at the logic? i can open another inquiry, if necessary.