assigning values to fields

hey all,
let's say i have the following records:
Name, Inv#, Desc
--
Cust1, null, Desc1
Cust1, null, Desc2
Cust1, 1, Desc1
Cust1, 2, Desc1
Cust1, 2, Desc2
How would you make those null values 3's or the MAX(Inv#) for Cust1?
thanks,
rodcharIf this is your entire table, you might need to clean it up to include a
key. Otherwise,
UPDATE tbl
SET Inv# = ( SELECT MAX( Inv# ) + 1
FROM tbl t1 )
WHERE Inv# IS NULL ;
Anith|||Try:
SELECT NAME, ISNULL(INV,3), DESCCOL
FROM YOURTABLE
OR
SELECT NAME, ISNULL(INV,(SELECT MAX(INV)FROM YOURTABLE)), DESCCOL
FROM YOURTABLE
OR
DECLARE @.VAL INT
SELECT @.VAL = MAX(INV) FROM YOURTABLE
SELECT NAME, ISNULL(INV,@.VAL), DESCCOL
FROM YOURTABLE
HTH
Jerry
"rodchar" <rodchar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:34412E99-897D-42DE-AB25-25C689902ABA@.microsoft.com...
> hey all,
> let's say i have the following records:
> Name, Inv#, Desc
> --
> Cust1, null, Desc1
> Cust1, null, Desc2
> Cust1, 1, Desc1
> Cust1, 2, Desc1
> Cust1, 2, Desc2
> How would you make those null values 3's or the MAX(Inv#) for Cust1?
> thanks,
> rodchar
>|||UPDATE YourTable
SET [Inv#] =
(
SELECT MAX([Inv#])
FROM YourTable Y1
WHERE Y1.Name = YourTable.Name
)
WHERE YourTable.[Inv#] IS NULL
Adam Machanic
SQL Server MVP
http://www.datamanipulation.net
--
"rodchar" <rodchar@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:34412E99-897D-42DE-AB25-25C689902ABA@.microsoft.com...
> hey all,
> let's say i have the following records:
> Name, Inv#, Desc
> --
> Cust1, null, Desc1
> Cust1, null, Desc2
> Cust1, 1, Desc1
> Cust1, 2, Desc1
> Cust1, 2, Desc2
> How would you make those null values 3's or the MAX(Inv#) for Cust1?
> thanks,
> rodchar
>|||3 things for everyone:
1st: Thanks for the great replies
2nd:
UPDATE Transactions
SET InvNo = ( SELECT MAX( InvNo ) + 1
FROM Transactions t1 )
WHERE InvNo IS NULL ;
This worked for me but what i thought would happen with this is that once it
updated the first null and made it a 3 the 2nd null would become a 4. Can
anyone explain please?
3rd:
This same query didn't work in an access database it said that this wasn't
an updateable query. any ideas?
thanks again,
rodchar
"Anith Sen" wrote:

> If this is your entire table, you might need to clean it up to include a
> key. Otherwise,
> UPDATE tbl
> SET Inv# = ( SELECT MAX( Inv# ) + 1
> FROM tbl t1 )
> WHERE Inv# IS NULL ;
> --
> Anith
>
>|||>> This worked for me but what i thought would happen with this is that once
I am not sure what to explain, since the code is simple and clear. In case,
you are looking for sequentially incrementing value to replace the NULLs,
you'd have to use a "ranking" mechanism like:
UPDATE tbl
SET Inv# = ( SELECT MAX( Inv# )
FROM tbl t1 ) +
( SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM tbl t1
WHERE t1.Name = tbl.Name
AND t1.Descr <= tbl.Descr
AND t1.Inv# IS NULL )
FROM tbl
WHERE Inv# IS NULL ;
Depending on the ranking variations you need, you'll have to adjust the
correlations in the subquery using COUNT(*).
Access has different updateability rules and different UDPATE dialect than
SQL Server. If you are using MS Access, consider posting this question in an
Access forum.
Anith|||i'm sorry for not being clear. your code posting is exactly what i needed. i
was just curious why it didn't make the nulls sequential. Because once it
makes the first null record a 3 wouldn't that be the new MAX(InvNo), and in
turn making the last null value a 4.
just trying to understand how the engine thinks and works. this helped a lot
.
"Anith Sen" wrote:

> I am not sure what to explain, since the code is simple and clear. In case
,
> you are looking for sequentially incrementing value to replace the NULLs,
> you'd have to use a "ranking" mechanism like:
> UPDATE tbl
> SET Inv# = ( SELECT MAX( Inv# )
> FROM tbl t1 ) +
> ( SELECT COUNT(*)
> FROM tbl t1
> WHERE t1.Name = tbl.Name
> AND t1.Descr <= tbl.Descr
> AND t1.Inv# IS NULL )
> FROM tbl
> WHERE Inv# IS NULL ;
> Depending on the ranking variations you need, you'll have to adjust the
> correlations in the subquery using COUNT(*).
>
> Access has different updateability rules and different UDPATE dialect than
> SQL Server. If you are using MS Access, consider posting this question in
an
> Access forum.
> --
> Anith
>
>|||>> i was just curious why it didn't make the nulls sequential.
With no correlation, the value is generated only once for the entire
dataset. With a correlation, the values are generated for each matching row
in the dataset.
No problem.
Anith|||thank you everyone for the help. this has been very productive.
"Anith Sen" wrote:

> With no correlation, the value is generated only once for the entire
> dataset. With a correlation, the values are generated for each matching ro
w
> in the dataset.
>
> No problem.
> --
> Anith
>
>|||On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:09:04 -0700, ari wrote:

>2nd:
>UPDATE Transactions
>SET InvNo = ( SELECT MAX( InvNo ) + 1
>FROM Transactions t1 )
>WHERE InvNo IS NULL ;
>This worked for me but what i thought would happen with this is that once i
t
>updated the first null and made it a 3 the 2nd null would become a 4. Can
>anyone explain please?
Hi ari,
In SQL, all operations are done "at once". At least in theory. In
practice, they will eventuelly, somewhere deep in the engine, be
processed one row at a time, but the DB should behave as if the complete
statement is executed at once.
That's why you can swap columns without temp storage to hold the old
value, like you would in procedural languages:
UPDATE SomeTable
SET A = B,
B = A
WHERE ...
The right-hand B and A both refer to the "old" values (before the
update). The DB can process this internally ion any order it wants, as
long as the result looks as if it was all executed at once.
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)