Hi,
In my database im using several union queries as they turn out to be very useful.
However, whenever I have a calculation that involves one of the union queries, things happen at a very slow pace. Is there a way to speed it up a bit?
Thank you
Stacey
I have a front end that is connected to three back end files. The front end is on my local computer while the back end files are on a network drive.
There are a lot of calculations that go into the queries and intermediate queries. For a report, I have based it on a UNION query.
But when trying to design the report it takes about 45 seconds just to do any one thing, e.g.;
- Add Groupings
- Add Grouping Headers//Footer, sorting option
- Add bound textbox
:eek:
Needless to say this is very annoying.
:mad:
The union query itself runs fine (takes about 15 seconds to run) and returns about 12,000 Rows. The union query looks like this (I changed the field names to make it read easier, hopefully);
SELECT a1, a2, a3, a4, a5
FROM qry_A;
UNION SELECT ALL a1, b2 AS a2, b3 AS a3, a4, a5
FROM qry_B;
UNION SELECT ALL a1, c2 AS a2, c3 AS a3, a4, a5
FROM qry_C;
UNION SELECT ALL a1, d2 AS a2, a3, a4, a5
FROM qry_D;
UNION SELECT ALL a1, e2 AS a2, a3, a4, a5
FROM qry_E;
UNION SELECT ALL a1, f2AS a2, tblG.f3 AS a3, tblG.f4 AS a4, a5
FROM qry_F;
One solution I came across when searching the forums was to use an Append Query to append the query results to a table and base my report on that. This does indeed fix the problem.
But what I was wondering if it was is my query design that is causing it to be slow or is it just the fact that I am returning 12,000 rows?
:confused:
In case it matters, I wanted to mention that I can’t use the report wizard to create the report. When I select the union query, the fields will be showed for awhile then they just disappear. That in and of itself doesn’t cause any trouble since I am creating the report using the design view and not the wizard.
I'm having a problem with a UNION / UNION ALL query.It seems there is a application crash fault when running the query that MS are aware of and have issued a hot fix. Unfortunately it will take my IT dept some time to check and install the hot fix If they agree to do it at all.
Problem signature:
Problem Event Name: APPCRASH
Application Name: MSACCESS.EXE
Application Version: 12.0.6606.1000
[code]...
Hi All,
I'm having trouble with access. Basically it has been very slow to load
(over 30 seconds when not opening a database) and when opening a database it just crashes.
Has anyone any idea what could cause this as it worked fine before ?
also would a reinstall help ??
-Elfman
Hi all,
I'm doing the simplest little 'INSERT INTO' type operation here with recordsets in Access 97 (SR2). Inserting into a table whose name is stored in the Const TABLE_CANDIDS.
I have a little piece of code that doesn't move on until the changes are committed to the table (usually this is just a single long integer being added).
The transaction takes up to a second to commit, and sometime doesn't commit at all. I tried putting begintrans and committrans around the loop but it seems to make the problem worse.
Can anyone spot my error?
Thanks,
Rob
' Empty the TABLE_CANDIDS table then start filling it with the current
' list of Candidates
DoCmd.RunSQL "DELETE * FROM " & TABLE_CANDIDS
Set rstCandIDs = CurrentDb.OpenRecordset(TABLE_CANDIDS)
' Find the CandIDs for all selected items (default to select all)
For Each objListItem In objListView.ListItems
If objListItem.Selected Or Not blnSelectionOnly Then
rstCandIDs.AddNew
rstCandIDs!CandIDFiltered = CLng(objListItem.Text)
rstCandIDs.Update
lngCount = lngCount + 1
End If
Next objListItem
rstCandIDs.Close
' Wait for up to 1 second until the new value(s) are committed.
Screen.MousePointer = 11
datStart = Now()
Do While IsNull(DLookup("CandIDFiltered", TABLE_CANDIDS, "CandIDFiltered <> 0"))
If DateDiff("s", datStart, Now()) > 100 Then
Exit Do
End If
DoEvents
Loop
Screen.MousePointer = 0
Any ideas why a particular query would run very slow in access 2007 when it runs fine on 2003. This is running on a terminal services environment and the database connects to a ms sql 2000 server. I will try it outside terminal services when I can but I can't understand the problem. Im not talking about slightly slower its something like a factor of 100 or 200 slower (I had to limit the dataset just to get a return within a day).
The database was an access 2000 mdb for compatibility across computers but I have tried converting it with out any luck.
Hello,
I have the following query that I set up as a test, and it runs fine:
SELECT STATUSHISTORIE.*
FROM STATUSHISTORIE LEFT JOIN PROBLEM_DE ON STATUSHISTORIE.PROBLEM_ID = PROBLEM_DE.PROBLEMNR
WHERE (((STATUSHISTORIE.STATUSDATUM)<#1/1/2005#) AND ((PROBLEM_DE.DATENBEREICH)='SPMO') AND (((Left(([PROBLEM_DE].[MODULZUORDNUNG]),InStr([PROBLEM_DE].[MODULZUORDNUNG],"-")-2)))='K29') AND ((PROBLEM_DE.ERLSTAND)<>"WEIF"))
ORDER BY STATUSHISTORIE.PROBLEM_ID,
STATUSHISTORIE.STATUSDATUM;
I then set up two global variables ( a String and a Date) and respective functions to return them – ReturnE( ) and ReturnKW( ). Now my query looks like this, but takes ages to run:
SELECT STATUSHISTORIE.*
FROM STATUSHISTORIE LEFT JOIN PROBLEM_DE ON [STATUSHISTORIE].[PROBLEM_ID]=[ PROBLEM_DE].[PROBLEMNR]
WHERE (((STATUSHISTORIE.STATUSDATUM)<ReturnKW( ) ) AND ((PROBLEM_DE.DATENBEREICH)='SPMO') AND (((Left(([PROBLEM_DE].[MODULZUORDNUNG]),InStr([PROBLEM_DE].[MODULZUORDNUNG],"-")-2)))=ReturnE( ) ) AND ((PROBLEM_DE.ERLSTAND)<>"WEIF"))
ORDER BY [STATUSHISTORIE].[PROBLEM_ID], [STATUSHISTORIE].[STATUSDATUM];
My two public functions that return the global variables look like this:
Public gstrE As String 'global variable: contains E used for query
Public gdatKW As Date
Public Function ReturnE ()
ReturnE = gstrE
End Function
Public Function ReturnKW ()
ReturnKW = gdatKW
End Function
The tables are actually Views set up from an ODBC Data source. Can anyone please tell me why these global variables are causing the traffic jam? :)
Thanks in advance
J
All,
I'm not sure how well I've managed to search on this as I'm not too sure where to start!
I have an append query as follows:
INSERT INTO tbl_Employee ( Company_No )
SELECT tbl_Co_Data.Company_No
FROM tbl_Co_Data
WHERE (((tbl_Co_Data.Company_No) Not In (select Company_No from tbl_Employee)))
ORDER BY tbl_Co_Data.Company_No;
Basically this query is run a number of times a day and appends new company numbers in to a table - 'tbl_Employee'. It's badly named - it's not got much to do with employees. Any way it takes a good 3 minutes to run with about 20k records in tbl_Co_Data and probably 18k records in tbl_Employee.
It looks to me like it's looping through each record in one table for each record in the other - which is plain daft.
I'm currently experimenting with a DTS package that puts tbl_Co_Data in to SQL server first before the query would run (tbl_Employee is already there) with a view to running a SP and ditching the query.
Does anybody have any other ideas as I'm having problems with the DTS in that it appears to be pretty slow in itself!
Many thanks in advance for any response.
What would be a better way to do below query --
UPDATE (tblAFFIRMATION_REC_TOOL LEFT JOIN tbl_TZero_Spns ON tblAFFIRMATION_REC_TOOL.CptySPN = tbl_TZero_Spns.SPN) INNER JOIN Entity ON tblAFFIRMATION_REC_TOOL.ReferenceEntity = Entity.ReferenceEntity
SET tblAFFIRMATION_REC_TOOL.[Scope Reason] = IIf(IsNull(tbl_TZero_Spns!SPN) Or (Entity!Test='EM'),tblAFFIRMATION_REC_TOOL![Scope Reason],'TZero Trade')
WHERE ((([tblAFFIRMATION_REC_TOOL]![Scope Reason])="Affirmation Eligible"));
the way it right now, it's running for about half hour..
Could that be IIF statement that slows it down ?
Ok my database tracks escalations through my team, I have a main table that stores the unique ID's from the other tables I use in my Combo boxes, this part works really well, no problems.
My issue is with a tableI have claled "TBL_EscJournal", this table has the following fields:
JournalID (Unique Ref, generated by autonumber)
EscID (the escalation Id that this journal is relevant to)
Journalcreator (captures name of person who as entered the journal)
JournalNotes (memo field where you enter your update)
JournalDate (Date/Time the journal was entered)
So typically when viewing the main detailed form for a particular escalation I have a subform that shows all the journal entries relevant ot that escalation.
This table is huge, about 70% the total size of my database, partly because of the number of journal entries and partly because it is a memo field and a lot of data is required sometimes.
Up until now th edatabase has been located on a local server and has been fine for local users (2-3 of us) however there is a requirement for another office to use this database.
I am now experiencing massive performance issues, whereby the data is tkaig a long time to refresh on the other sites.
I have migrated the DB over to a SQL back end but still finding performance issues, which further testing has shown that the TBL_EscJournal is the cause.
So a coupel of things really, is there another way I can layout this table to improve performance or should I be uerying the data from this tabel in another way, would it be better for me to split TBL_EscJournal in two, the first part keeping the date/time and person who entered and the second part keeping the notes. Possibly increasing the query speed by carrying out the query on the first part of the table and not on the notes (memo) part ?
I hope this makes sense, if not feel free to PM me,
Appreciate any help or assitance you could offer
MattP
I am trying to use a criteria to filter out nulls in concatenated variable, which slows the query considerably.The part that makes it slow looks like this -
WHERE ... AND (([tbl1].[x] & [tbl1].[y]) <> "") AND ...
If I work them individually, it's not a problem, the query is fast, but I have to combine them first in order to produce the correct output.
I have an access 2007 database connect to sql server 2008.I am running a pass though query to search between two dates (this query has been fine for years)
If I now run any search using parameters from 26th March 2014 to date - the query takes 10+ minutes to run.If I then change the date to 25th March 2014 to date - it runs in a nano second.I have not changed the back tables and I have not changed the format the data is saved in.
Hello All,
I'm trying to run a UNION query that joins five queries through a MS WorkSpace into a DAO.recordset in VB. I'm pulling the data from a SQL Server Database through VB in Access. I'm attempting to open a recordset with a query passed to it as a string. The query is below. For some reason, I'm receiving a message: "MS Jet database engine cannot find the input table or query. Runtime Error 3078".
Here's what's puzzling. When I run a single query without any UNION statement, the code finds the table and runs fine without error, but anytime I join two or more queries with a UNION statement in the VB, it gives me the error.
I've executed the same UNION query in both Access Query Builder and SQL Server's Query Analyzer and they work fine in both environments. It's only when I call the query from a DAO.Recodset with VB that it causes this problem. The following is a sample of the UNION query joining two of the five queries. Does anyone have any idea what could be the problem? The following query executes in about 5 seconds so I don't think there's a "time-out" issue. I'm thinking that the UNION statement may be the culprit. Maybe there's another way to approach joining these separate queries? Any help would be most appreciated. Thanks.
SELECT SalespersonID, Sum([SlsPrice]-[RtnPrice]-[SlsDiscnt]+[RtnDiscnt]) AS fldPrice FROM MyTable WHERE (((Source)='d') AND ((DistrictID)='01') AND ((CategoryID) = 'HCPROD') AND ((BrandID)<>'CSS')) AND (((BrandID)<>'1356')) AND (((BrandID)<>'1400')) AND (((BrandID)<>'1551')) AND (((BrandID)<>'555')) AND (((BrandID)<>'66'))
AND (TransDate >= 07/01/2005) AND (TransDate <= 07/31/2005) GROUP BY SalespersonID
UNION
SELECT SalespersonID, Sum([SlsPrice]-[RtnPrice]-[SlsDiscnt]+[RtnDiscnt]) AS fldPrice FROM MyTable WHERE (((Source)='d') AND ((DistrictID)='01') AND ((ProductID) = '0029800')) AND (TransDate >= 07/01/2005) AND (TransDate <= 07/31/2005) GROUP BY SalespersonID
Set wrkJet = CreateWorkspace("", "pw", "", dbUseJet)
Set db = wrkJet.OpenDatabase("DW", _
dbDriverNoPrompt, True, _
"ODBC;DATABASE=DW;DSN=DW2")
'Set rs1 = db.OpenRecordset(strSQL)
created a query (in Access 2010) that joins several linked tables (to an Oracle database). The query runs in about 20 seconds when I filter with a hard coded date (e.g., #12/31/2014#). The Oracle table column Im filtering on is defined as date/time.
When I attempt to change the hard coded value to a soft coded value (e.g., Forms![Form1]![Latest_Extract_Date]), the query runs over 5 minutes. In this case, the form field has the exact same value (12/31/2014).
Ive encountered similar issues using Access 2000, 2003, etc. This is quite frustrating. Does Access interpret #date value# is a special way? Is there a way to trick Access into the thinking a soft coded date is a hard coded date?
I have created a report that provides me with employee expenses for temps per week. The types of expenses have been defined as Ad_hoc amounts.
An SQL union query I have used to combine fields
Adhoc_Code_1 - 3
Adhoc_description_1 - 3
Adhoc_Pay_Amount_1 - 3
(details of full sql query below)
I have tried to run for a particular week which should have 3 expense entries but only 2 have been picked up.
I think this is because both Adhoc_ Pay_Amount_2 and 3 have a value of 6 and the UNION operation will not return duplicate records. I have amended to UNION ALL but all entries are duplicated. Can anyone help?
Thanks
SELECT dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Employer_Ref, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Personnel_Ref, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Department, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Tax_Yr_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Period_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Session_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Code_1, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Description_1, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Pay_Amount_1, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Timesheet_Number
FROM dbo_Valid_Timesheets
WHERE (((dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Pay_Amount_1)<>0));
UNION ALL
SELECT dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Employer_Ref, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Personnel_Ref, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Department, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Tax_Yr_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Period_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Session_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Code_2, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Description_2, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Pay_Amount_2, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Timesheet_Number
FROM dbo_Valid_Timesheets
WHERE (((dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Pay_Amount_2)<>0));
UNION ALL
SELECT dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Employer_Ref, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Personnel_Ref, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Department, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Tax_Yr_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Period_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Session_Proc_By_Payroll, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Code_3, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Description_3, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Pay_Amount_3, dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Timesheet_Number
FROM dbo_Valid_Timesheets
WHERE (((dbo_Valid_Timesheets.Adhoc_Pay_Amount_3)<>0));
UNION ALL SELECT dbo_EE_Payment_History.Employer_Ref, dbo_EE_Payment_History.Personnel_Ref, dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Department, dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Year, dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Period, dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Session, dbo_EE_Payment_History.Payment_Ref, dbo_EE_Payment_History.Type, Val([Payment_Value]) AS [Value], "" AS Timesheet
FROM dbo_EE_Payment_History INNER JOIN dbo_Payslip_Static_Data ON (dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Session = dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Session_Number) AND (dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Period = dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Period_Number) AND (dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Year = dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Tax_Year) AND (dbo_EE_Payment_History.Personnel_Ref = dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Personnel_Ref) AND (dbo_EE_Payment_History.Employer_Ref = dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Employer_Ref)
WHERE (((dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Year)=[Forms]![Misc]![year]) AND ((dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Period)=[Forms]![Misc]![period]) AND ((dbo_EE_Payment_History.Tax_Session)=[Forms]![Misc]![session]) AND ((dbo_EE_Payment_History.Payment_Ref)=777));
UNION ALL SELECT dbo_EE_Payments.Employer_Ref, dbo_EE_Payments.Personnel_Ref, dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Department, [Forms]![Misc]![year] AS Tax_Year, [Forms]![Misc]![period] AS Tax_Period, [Forms]![Misc]![session] AS Tax_Session, dbo_EE_Payments.Payment_Ref, dbo_EE_Payments.X_Type, Val([Calculated_Value]) AS [Value], "" AS Timesheet
FROM dbo_EE_Payments INNER JOIN dbo_Payslip_Static_Data ON (dbo_EE_Payments.Personnel_Ref = dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Personnel_Ref) AND (dbo_EE_Payments.Employer_Ref = dbo_Payslip_Static_Data.Employer_Ref)
WHERE (((dbo_EE_Payments.Payment_Ref)=777));
OK, so I am UNIONing two tables using UNION ALL. It works fine. The resultant table has 192 records (63 + 129).
If a use just UNION or UNION DISTINCT I get 184 records. I'm pretty sure that is telling me that 8 records (192 - 184) exist in both tables.
How do I query to find out what those 8 records are?? I'm trying to use an INTERSECT in MS Access, but it doesn't want to work. Here is my original query:
select * from qryMOE_Active_All
UNION ALL select * from qryMOE_Closed_All;
Thanks,
Brian
I am a basic access user so please forgive my ignorance. I have created a union query of three tables. There is one field from the third table that I would like to have in the final table but this field does not exist in the first table. If I put "none" in the first SELECT line, then it queries correctly but the field name on the table is "Expr1006". If I put "Field 2" or [Field 2] in that same space of the first SELECT line, then it asks me for a parameter value and whatever I enter it fills in all the cells of that field with that value. I just don't know that language very well or even if you can add a new field into the first SELECT table. Thank you for any thoughts
Ex: SELECT [Field 1], [Field 2], "none", [Field 3]
FROm [Table 1]
UNION
SELECT [Field 1], "none", [Field 2], [Field 3]
FROM [Table 2]
Hello All,
I need help with an Union All Query. It is ignoring the second select statement. Can anyone see what I am doing wrong?
SELECT
CEPM_PLGR.COST_ELEM_CTGY AS [COST_ELEM_CTGY]
, CEPM_PLGR.PROJ_ELEM_ID AS [PROJ_ELEM_ID]
, CEPM_PLGR.COST_ELEM AS [COST_ELEM]
, CEPM_PLGR.SUM_UNIT AS [SUM_UNIT]
, CEPM_PLGR.PRD AS [PRD]
, CEPM_PLGR.CUR_BUD AS [CUR_BUD]
, CEPM_PLGR.PRD_BUD AS [PRD_BUD]
, CEPM_PLGR.CURRENT_ACT AS [CURRENT_ACT]
, CEPM_PLGR.PERIOD_ACT AS [PERIOD_ACT]
, CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_ELEM_DESC AS [PROJ_ELEM_DESC]
, CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_ELEM_MGR AS [PROJ_ELEM_MGR]
, CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_ELEM_TYPE AS [PROJ_ELEM_TYPE]
, NULL AS [COMMIT GA]
, CSIOWNER_PELM.COST_STAT AS [COST_STAT]
, CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_NBR AS [PROJ_NBR]
,NULL AS [COMMIT $]
FROM
CEPM_PLGR INNER JOIN CSIOWNER_PELM ON CEPM_PLGR.PROJ_ELEM_ID = CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_ELEM_ID
WHERE
((CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_TYPE)<>"T&M" And (CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_TYPE)<>"T7M") AND ((CSIOWNER_PELM.COST_MODE)="D")
AND ((CEPM_PLGR.PROJ_ELEM_ID)<>" ")
UNION ALL SELECT
NULL AS [COST_ELEM_CTGY]
, NULL AS [PROJ_ELEM_ID]
, NULL AS [COST_ELEM]
, NULL AS [SUM_UNIT]
, NULL AS [PRD]
, NULL AS [CUR_BUD]
, NULL AS [PRD_BUD]
, NULL AS [CURRENT_ACT]
, NULL AS [PERIOD_ACT]
, NULL AS [PROJ_ELEM_DESC]
, NULL AS [PROJ_ELEM_MGR]
, NULL AS [PROJ_ELEM_TYPE]
, (IIf( [PROJECT ID] Like "N0160*" And "N8100*" And "N9004*"
,(NZ([COMMIT $],0))
,(NZ([COMMIT GA $],0)))) AS [COMMIT GA]
, NULL AS [COST_STAT]
, NULL AS [PROJ_NBR]
, [PURCHASE_COMMITMENTS_FINAL].[COMMIT $] AS [COMMIT $]
FROM
[PURCHASE_COMMITMENTS_FINAL]
WHERE [PURCHASE_COMMITMENTS_FINAL].[PROJECT ID]
IN
(SELECT CEPM_PLGR.PROJ_ELEM_ID AS [PROJ_ELEM_ID]
FROM
CEPM_PLGR INNER JOIN CSIOWNER_PELM ON CEPM_PLGR.PROJ_ELEM_ID = CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_ELEM_ID
WHERE
((CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_TYPE)<>"T&M" And (CSIOWNER_PELM.PROJ_TYPE)<>"T7M") AND ((CSIOWNER_PELM.COST_MODE)="D")
AND ((CEPM_PLGR.PROJ_ELEM_ID)<>" ")) AND (([PURCHASE_COMMITMENTS_FINAL].[PROJECT ID]) <> " ");
I think it is my where clause IN function. But I do not know how to fix it. any help would be great!!!!
Thanks in advanced, Kerrie
Okay, people. I am getting married in a few days and my mind is on other things. Consequently, I can't get my head around this one.
I have two queries, Query1 and Query2. Both have a different number of fields but they have the field "IA Code" in common.
I want to create a new query containing all rows from Query1 and all rows from Query2. Where the [IA Code] matches, I'd like the information to be displayed in one row.
I think I need to use Union somewhere along the lines, but I can't work it out.
Any pointers/syntax greatly appreciated.
I have 2 tables with employee details in it. There is no natural link between the 2. I wish to write a query that will sum up the total pay for both tables.
I've had a look through the forum and it seems that a Union query is probably best.
I haven't worked with Unions before, so I did 2 sub queries to total the pay in both table and then union the 2 queries. I did this because there are some date parameters that I query each table by so I do this in the sub queries.
This works but I get 2 outputs in the result, the total pay from each table. I wanted to have just one output, which is the sum of all pay.
Can anyone help please.
SQL:
SELECT QrySub_TotalPay1.TotalPay 'sub query that sums up table 1
FROM QrySub_TotalPay1
UNION SELECT QrySub_TotalPay2.TotalPay 'sub query that sums up table 2
FROM QrySub_TotalPay2;
TIA.
I have 2 tables and I m trying to get sum of qty for each product
I tried union qurey following way but doesn't work.
Product_Master table has primary key set up on productcode. I need to pick up OpeningBal along with ProductName and ProductCode from this table.
T_PurInvFoot table contains multiple records of the similar ProductCode. I want to make sum of these PurQty data and add it with OpeningBal data from Product_master table and present it in one line.
The avalable quanities are in 2 diff. tables are here.
Product_Master.OpeningBal=5
(1 Record)
T_PurInvFoot.PurQty =4
T_PurInvFoot.PurQty =6
(2 Records)
So total it should be 15 when it produce records. But it show only 10 records from below query.
SELECT Product_Master.ProductCode, Product_Master.ProductName,Sum(Product_Master.Open ingBal) as Stock
From Product_Master INNER JOIN T_PurInvFoot ON T_PurInvFoot.ProductCode=Product_Master.ProductCod e
Group By Product_Master.ProductCode,Product_Master.ProductN ame
UNION Select T_PurInvFoot.ProductCode, T_PurInvFoot.ProductName, sum(T_PurInvFoot.PurQty) as Stock
From T_PurInvFoot INNER JOIN Product_Master ON T_PurInvFoot.ProductCode=Product_Master.ProductCod e
Group By T_PurInvFoot.ProductCode,T_PurInvFoot.ProductName
ORDER BY Product_Master.ProductCode;
Can somebody advice me how to do it.
I need to add 3rd table here in future to get sum of the qty of the similar ProductCode so how to the query would be?
One more thing, can we do it in VBA and set the RecordSource to a form or report ?
With kind regards,
Ashfaque
Hello All,
What I am trying to do is if the field (CAR) or (PAR) or (Incident) is checked in this table (Inventory Worksheet) then show it. I not sure how to use the union query to accomplish this.
Any Ideas?
Thanks,
I have two tables with data and I want to join the data together for a report.
Example:
SELECT tbl1.a tbl1.b tbl1.c tbl1.d
FROM tbl1
UNION SELECT tbl2.a tbl2.b tbl2.c
FROM tbl2;
Currently I can't join them b/c the column counts aren't the same.
If table1 has more columns than table2 can I join them by indicating some kind of phantom column 'd' for table2 to be joined to column 'd' of table1?
Will you help me built a union query ? I have 2 queries, qryinput and qryoutput.Out of these query i have a third query called qryDiff substracting these
queries. However qryDiff does not show all the goods sold, only those goods that are substracted.Therefore i want to build an union query but somehow i cannot do it. Will you help ?
My first query, qryinput is :
SELECT [order details].ProductID, Sum([order details].Quantity) AS Sum1, orders.orderid
FROM (orders INNER JOIN [order details] ON orders.orderid = [order details].OrderID) INNER JOIN products ON [order details].ProductID = products.Productid
GROUP BY [order details].ProductID, orders.orderid;
My second query, qryoutput is :
SELECT [order details].ProductID, orders.orderid, [order details].Quantity AS Sum2
FROM ((orders INNER JOIN [order details] ON orders.orderid = [order details].OrderID) INNER JOIN Customers ON orders.customerid = Customers.Customerid) INNER JOIN products ON [order details].ProductID = products.Productid;
My thirs query, qryDiff is :
SELECT qryProducts.ProductID, Sum(qryInput.Sum1) AS imported, Sum(qryOutput.Sum2) AS exported
FROM (qryProducts LEFT JOIN qryInput ON qryProducts.ProductID = qryInput.ProductID) LEFT JOIN qryOutput ON qryProducts.ProductID = qryOutput.ProductID
GROUP BY qryProducts.ProductID;
Now i want to convert the query qryDiff into an union query, but i cannot do it.I somehow managed to build a simple query showing all the products:
SELECT ProductID
FROM qryInput
UNION SELECT ProductID
FROM qryOutput;
This query shows the productsid indeed, but i cannot add the other items form the qryinput and qryoutput as the sum etc.
I also i cannot convert my query qryDiff into an uinion query, with fields for the imported and the exported sums and also for the product names.
Where is my error and now could i achieve my aim? My aim is that in the query qryDiff to show all the products, and not only the products sold.
I will be very grateful for any comments
I have 2 tables, Employees and Customers. Each table has a column called active.
How can I make a union query that will return all active employees and customers?
Hello friends
How are you
Please I need help in Union Queries
what does this code mean
"SELECT [Query_buy] ,Type.[Query_buy].Sum0 ,no AS InQuin , "Return" as Description From [Query_buy]"
I need to make combined report shows the reteurnd items.
I hope that my words are enough clear
Thank you all