Want to protect your cyber security and still get fast solutions? Ask a secure question today.Go Premium

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 312
  • Last Modified:

Is this a correct use of UNION?

When using a UNION to eliminate duplicates, will it work when using count as in columnB below?

ColumnA, count(distinct columnB)
From TableA

UNION

ColumnA, count(distinct columnB)
From TableA
0
rhservan
Asked:
rhservan
  • 5
  • 3
  • 2
  • +1
1 Solution
 
PortletPaulCommented:
it would be pointless

both the upper and lower queries would produce the same results, so the union will disgard one row

you might as well only do the upper query.

I suspect there's more here
0
 
PortletPaulCommented:
select
ColumnA, count(distinct columnB)
From TableA
group by ColumnA

is this what you need?
0
 
Surendra NathTechnology LeadCommented:
yes it will, but you can re-write as below

ColumnA, count(distinct columnB)
From TableA group by ColumnA

UNION

ColumnA, count(distinct columnB)
From TableA group by ColumnA

Open in new window

0
Independent Software Vendors: We Want Your Opinion

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!

 
PortletPaulCommented:
but it remains pointless... I'm not following (or my eyes are deceiving me)

let's say the upper query produces this

ABCD 1
DEFG 3

and the lower produces exactly the same, together when "stacked" and sorted would be:

ABCD 1
ABCD 1
DEFG 3
DEFG 3

the UNION then looks for repeats, and the end result is:

ABCD 1
DEFG 3

i.e. equivalent to the upper query

Note, UNION considers the "whole row"
0
 
ValentinoVBI ConsultantCommented:
rhservan, this is a weird question, it looks like you're not mentioning a crucial part of the story. As Paul already pointed out, query A and query 2 are exactly the same and thus produce the same result, which is then "undone" by the UNION.

Or are you actually trying to duplicate your data? In that case you can use UNION ALL.
0
 
rhservanAuthor Commented:
I'm not sure what I am missing:

If ColumnB in both queries are based on a count, not a list, does the UNION still recognize
duplication of the column being counted?
0
 
PortletPaulCommented:
UNION works across "the whole row", it does not matter if a column is the result of an aggregation - the values of such a column in a row are still considered

the WHOLE row must differ (in some way) to survive the union operation

What UNION will NOT understand is "duplication of the column being counted" because it will  ONLY assess the RESULT of the count.

if you need to remove "duplication of the column being counted" you must do that before counting them.
0
 
PortletPaulCommented:
maybe if I add this it will help...

making rows unique by UNION occurs AFTER each of the subqueries are performed, union therefore only considers the results (not how you got to the results)
0
 
ValentinoVBI ConsultantCommented:
Perhaps we can help you better if you explain a bit more what you're actually trying to achieve with that query...  Show us a couple of data examples.
0
 
rhservanAuthor Commented:
PP this is exactly what I was looking for:

"What UNION will NOT understand is "duplication of the column being counted" because it will  ONLY assess the RESULT of the count.

if you need to remove "duplication of the column being counted" you must do that before counting them."

How can I accomplish this?
0
 
rhservanAuthor Commented:
You mean, logically, something like this would work:

ColumnA, ColumnB , count(distinct columnB)
From TableA

Group By ColumnA, ColumnB

UNION

ColumnA, ColumnB , count(distinct columnB)
From TableA

Group By ColumnA, ColumnB
0

Featured Post

Receive 1:1 tech help

Solve your biggest tech problems alongside global tech experts with 1:1 help.

  • 5
  • 3
  • 2
  • +1
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now