SQL: Relating rows base on relative sequence of non-matching data












1















So I'm sure this is probably a duplicate question, but I haven't been able to find the right post with an answer. Looking for a solution that works in T-SQL.



The problem I am trying to solve is relating two tables with loosely coupled data. For example:



CREATE TABLE things1 (
id INT NOT NULL,
parentgroup CHAR(1),
datecreated DATETIME NOT NULL)
GO

INSERT INTO things1
SELECT 1, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:00:00.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'A' '2018-10-01 01:00:02.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:00:02.345'
UNION ALL
SELECT 4, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:00:01.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 5, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:00:03.000'
GO

CREATE TABLE things2 (
id INT NOT NULL,
parentgroup CHAR(1),
datecreated DATETIME NOT NULL)
GO

INSERT INTO things2
SELECT 1, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:04:00.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'A' '2018-10-01 01:05:12.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:05:02.345'
UNION ALL
SELECT 4, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:06:01.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 5, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:07:03.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 6, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:04:08.000'
GO


And what I am trying to populate is:



CREATE TABLE things1xthings2 (thing1id INT, thing2id INT)
GO


The rules for how rows from these two tables need to be coupled is by sequencing their datecreated values for a given parentgroup (thus the title of this post). With the example data above, the rule would play out like:



thing1id    thing2id
-------- --------
1 1 (matching lowest datecreated for group A)
2 3 (matching next lowest)
3 2 (matching next lowest)
4 6 (matching lowest datecreated for group B)


Important point: it is possible for there to be more rows for a given group in either table. The "extras" just wouldn't have a mate or a row in the cross table.



I don't know of a way to accomplish this in a single set-based JOIN operation, but if there is a way to do that, I would love to see it.



My approach was to add a column to each table:



ALTER TABLE things1 ADD sequence INT
GO

ALTER TABLE things2 ADD sequence INT
GO


This column would essentially turn the datecreated value into an enumerated sequence that could then be matched in a set-based JOIN operation to populate the cross table:



INSERT INTO things1xthings2
SELECT t1.id, t2.id
FROM things1 t1
JOIN things2 t2 ON t2.parentgroup = t1.parentgroup
AND t2.sequence = t1.sequence


The problem is I also don't know how to build the values of that sequence column. I just know the data would look like this when I'm done:



SELECT * FROM things1
id parentgroup datecreated sequence
-- ----------- ----------- --------
1 A 2018-10-01 01:00:00.000 1
2 A 2018-10-01 01:00:02.000 2
3 A 2018-10-01 01:00:02.345 3
4 B 2018-10-01 01:00:01.000 1
5 B 2018-10-01 01:00:03.000 2

SELECT * FROM things2
id parentgroup datecreated sequence
-- ----------- ----------- --------
1 A 2018-10-01 01:04:00.000 1
2 A 2018-10-01 01:05:02.345 2
3 A 2018-10-01 01:05:12.000 3
4 A 2018-10-01 01:06:01.000 4
5 A 2018-10-01 01:07:03.000 5
6 B 2018-10-01 01:04:08.000 1


Thanks for any help!



(Edit: My 'f' and 'd' keys were sticking!)










share|improve this question

























  • What database are you working with?

    – GGadde
    Nov 13 '18 at 16:13








  • 1





    This is a very elaborated question! +1 from my side. You might read about ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER()-clause. This allows for (partitioned) numbered sequences...

    – Shnugo
    Nov 13 '18 at 16:23











  • @GGadde This is for SQL Server 2012

    – Jason
    Nov 13 '18 at 23:31











  • Thanks @Shnugo! I was suspecting those might be part of the solution. I'll take a closer look with your suggested clauses and see if I can make something work.

    – Jason
    Nov 13 '18 at 23:32
















1















So I'm sure this is probably a duplicate question, but I haven't been able to find the right post with an answer. Looking for a solution that works in T-SQL.



The problem I am trying to solve is relating two tables with loosely coupled data. For example:



CREATE TABLE things1 (
id INT NOT NULL,
parentgroup CHAR(1),
datecreated DATETIME NOT NULL)
GO

INSERT INTO things1
SELECT 1, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:00:00.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'A' '2018-10-01 01:00:02.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:00:02.345'
UNION ALL
SELECT 4, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:00:01.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 5, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:00:03.000'
GO

CREATE TABLE things2 (
id INT NOT NULL,
parentgroup CHAR(1),
datecreated DATETIME NOT NULL)
GO

INSERT INTO things2
SELECT 1, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:04:00.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'A' '2018-10-01 01:05:12.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:05:02.345'
UNION ALL
SELECT 4, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:06:01.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 5, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:07:03.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 6, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:04:08.000'
GO


And what I am trying to populate is:



CREATE TABLE things1xthings2 (thing1id INT, thing2id INT)
GO


The rules for how rows from these two tables need to be coupled is by sequencing their datecreated values for a given parentgroup (thus the title of this post). With the example data above, the rule would play out like:



thing1id    thing2id
-------- --------
1 1 (matching lowest datecreated for group A)
2 3 (matching next lowest)
3 2 (matching next lowest)
4 6 (matching lowest datecreated for group B)


Important point: it is possible for there to be more rows for a given group in either table. The "extras" just wouldn't have a mate or a row in the cross table.



I don't know of a way to accomplish this in a single set-based JOIN operation, but if there is a way to do that, I would love to see it.



My approach was to add a column to each table:



ALTER TABLE things1 ADD sequence INT
GO

ALTER TABLE things2 ADD sequence INT
GO


This column would essentially turn the datecreated value into an enumerated sequence that could then be matched in a set-based JOIN operation to populate the cross table:



INSERT INTO things1xthings2
SELECT t1.id, t2.id
FROM things1 t1
JOIN things2 t2 ON t2.parentgroup = t1.parentgroup
AND t2.sequence = t1.sequence


The problem is I also don't know how to build the values of that sequence column. I just know the data would look like this when I'm done:



SELECT * FROM things1
id parentgroup datecreated sequence
-- ----------- ----------- --------
1 A 2018-10-01 01:00:00.000 1
2 A 2018-10-01 01:00:02.000 2
3 A 2018-10-01 01:00:02.345 3
4 B 2018-10-01 01:00:01.000 1
5 B 2018-10-01 01:00:03.000 2

SELECT * FROM things2
id parentgroup datecreated sequence
-- ----------- ----------- --------
1 A 2018-10-01 01:04:00.000 1
2 A 2018-10-01 01:05:02.345 2
3 A 2018-10-01 01:05:12.000 3
4 A 2018-10-01 01:06:01.000 4
5 A 2018-10-01 01:07:03.000 5
6 B 2018-10-01 01:04:08.000 1


Thanks for any help!



(Edit: My 'f' and 'd' keys were sticking!)










share|improve this question

























  • What database are you working with?

    – GGadde
    Nov 13 '18 at 16:13








  • 1





    This is a very elaborated question! +1 from my side. You might read about ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER()-clause. This allows for (partitioned) numbered sequences...

    – Shnugo
    Nov 13 '18 at 16:23











  • @GGadde This is for SQL Server 2012

    – Jason
    Nov 13 '18 at 23:31











  • Thanks @Shnugo! I was suspecting those might be part of the solution. I'll take a closer look with your suggested clauses and see if I can make something work.

    – Jason
    Nov 13 '18 at 23:32














1












1








1








So I'm sure this is probably a duplicate question, but I haven't been able to find the right post with an answer. Looking for a solution that works in T-SQL.



The problem I am trying to solve is relating two tables with loosely coupled data. For example:



CREATE TABLE things1 (
id INT NOT NULL,
parentgroup CHAR(1),
datecreated DATETIME NOT NULL)
GO

INSERT INTO things1
SELECT 1, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:00:00.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'A' '2018-10-01 01:00:02.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:00:02.345'
UNION ALL
SELECT 4, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:00:01.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 5, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:00:03.000'
GO

CREATE TABLE things2 (
id INT NOT NULL,
parentgroup CHAR(1),
datecreated DATETIME NOT NULL)
GO

INSERT INTO things2
SELECT 1, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:04:00.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'A' '2018-10-01 01:05:12.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:05:02.345'
UNION ALL
SELECT 4, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:06:01.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 5, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:07:03.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 6, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:04:08.000'
GO


And what I am trying to populate is:



CREATE TABLE things1xthings2 (thing1id INT, thing2id INT)
GO


The rules for how rows from these two tables need to be coupled is by sequencing their datecreated values for a given parentgroup (thus the title of this post). With the example data above, the rule would play out like:



thing1id    thing2id
-------- --------
1 1 (matching lowest datecreated for group A)
2 3 (matching next lowest)
3 2 (matching next lowest)
4 6 (matching lowest datecreated for group B)


Important point: it is possible for there to be more rows for a given group in either table. The "extras" just wouldn't have a mate or a row in the cross table.



I don't know of a way to accomplish this in a single set-based JOIN operation, but if there is a way to do that, I would love to see it.



My approach was to add a column to each table:



ALTER TABLE things1 ADD sequence INT
GO

ALTER TABLE things2 ADD sequence INT
GO


This column would essentially turn the datecreated value into an enumerated sequence that could then be matched in a set-based JOIN operation to populate the cross table:



INSERT INTO things1xthings2
SELECT t1.id, t2.id
FROM things1 t1
JOIN things2 t2 ON t2.parentgroup = t1.parentgroup
AND t2.sequence = t1.sequence


The problem is I also don't know how to build the values of that sequence column. I just know the data would look like this when I'm done:



SELECT * FROM things1
id parentgroup datecreated sequence
-- ----------- ----------- --------
1 A 2018-10-01 01:00:00.000 1
2 A 2018-10-01 01:00:02.000 2
3 A 2018-10-01 01:00:02.345 3
4 B 2018-10-01 01:00:01.000 1
5 B 2018-10-01 01:00:03.000 2

SELECT * FROM things2
id parentgroup datecreated sequence
-- ----------- ----------- --------
1 A 2018-10-01 01:04:00.000 1
2 A 2018-10-01 01:05:02.345 2
3 A 2018-10-01 01:05:12.000 3
4 A 2018-10-01 01:06:01.000 4
5 A 2018-10-01 01:07:03.000 5
6 B 2018-10-01 01:04:08.000 1


Thanks for any help!



(Edit: My 'f' and 'd' keys were sticking!)










share|improve this question
















So I'm sure this is probably a duplicate question, but I haven't been able to find the right post with an answer. Looking for a solution that works in T-SQL.



The problem I am trying to solve is relating two tables with loosely coupled data. For example:



CREATE TABLE things1 (
id INT NOT NULL,
parentgroup CHAR(1),
datecreated DATETIME NOT NULL)
GO

INSERT INTO things1
SELECT 1, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:00:00.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'A' '2018-10-01 01:00:02.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:00:02.345'
UNION ALL
SELECT 4, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:00:01.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 5, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:00:03.000'
GO

CREATE TABLE things2 (
id INT NOT NULL,
parentgroup CHAR(1),
datecreated DATETIME NOT NULL)
GO

INSERT INTO things2
SELECT 1, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:04:00.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 'A' '2018-10-01 01:05:12.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:05:02.345'
UNION ALL
SELECT 4, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:06:01.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 5, 'A', '2018-10-01 01:07:03.000'
UNION ALL
SELECT 6, 'B', '2018-10-01 01:04:08.000'
GO


And what I am trying to populate is:



CREATE TABLE things1xthings2 (thing1id INT, thing2id INT)
GO


The rules for how rows from these two tables need to be coupled is by sequencing their datecreated values for a given parentgroup (thus the title of this post). With the example data above, the rule would play out like:



thing1id    thing2id
-------- --------
1 1 (matching lowest datecreated for group A)
2 3 (matching next lowest)
3 2 (matching next lowest)
4 6 (matching lowest datecreated for group B)


Important point: it is possible for there to be more rows for a given group in either table. The "extras" just wouldn't have a mate or a row in the cross table.



I don't know of a way to accomplish this in a single set-based JOIN operation, but if there is a way to do that, I would love to see it.



My approach was to add a column to each table:



ALTER TABLE things1 ADD sequence INT
GO

ALTER TABLE things2 ADD sequence INT
GO


This column would essentially turn the datecreated value into an enumerated sequence that could then be matched in a set-based JOIN operation to populate the cross table:



INSERT INTO things1xthings2
SELECT t1.id, t2.id
FROM things1 t1
JOIN things2 t2 ON t2.parentgroup = t1.parentgroup
AND t2.sequence = t1.sequence


The problem is I also don't know how to build the values of that sequence column. I just know the data would look like this when I'm done:



SELECT * FROM things1
id parentgroup datecreated sequence
-- ----------- ----------- --------
1 A 2018-10-01 01:00:00.000 1
2 A 2018-10-01 01:00:02.000 2
3 A 2018-10-01 01:00:02.345 3
4 B 2018-10-01 01:00:01.000 1
5 B 2018-10-01 01:00:03.000 2

SELECT * FROM things2
id parentgroup datecreated sequence
-- ----------- ----------- --------
1 A 2018-10-01 01:04:00.000 1
2 A 2018-10-01 01:05:02.345 2
3 A 2018-10-01 01:05:12.000 3
4 A 2018-10-01 01:06:01.000 4
5 A 2018-10-01 01:07:03.000 5
6 B 2018-10-01 01:04:08.000 1


Thanks for any help!



(Edit: My 'f' and 'd' keys were sticking!)







tsql






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 14 '18 at 0:20







Jason

















asked Nov 13 '18 at 16:10









JasonJason

57210




57210













  • What database are you working with?

    – GGadde
    Nov 13 '18 at 16:13








  • 1





    This is a very elaborated question! +1 from my side. You might read about ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER()-clause. This allows for (partitioned) numbered sequences...

    – Shnugo
    Nov 13 '18 at 16:23











  • @GGadde This is for SQL Server 2012

    – Jason
    Nov 13 '18 at 23:31











  • Thanks @Shnugo! I was suspecting those might be part of the solution. I'll take a closer look with your suggested clauses and see if I can make something work.

    – Jason
    Nov 13 '18 at 23:32



















  • What database are you working with?

    – GGadde
    Nov 13 '18 at 16:13








  • 1





    This is a very elaborated question! +1 from my side. You might read about ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER()-clause. This allows for (partitioned) numbered sequences...

    – Shnugo
    Nov 13 '18 at 16:23











  • @GGadde This is for SQL Server 2012

    – Jason
    Nov 13 '18 at 23:31











  • Thanks @Shnugo! I was suspecting those might be part of the solution. I'll take a closer look with your suggested clauses and see if I can make something work.

    – Jason
    Nov 13 '18 at 23:32

















What database are you working with?

– GGadde
Nov 13 '18 at 16:13







What database are you working with?

– GGadde
Nov 13 '18 at 16:13






1




1





This is a very elaborated question! +1 from my side. You might read about ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER()-clause. This allows for (partitioned) numbered sequences...

– Shnugo
Nov 13 '18 at 16:23





This is a very elaborated question! +1 from my side. You might read about ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER()-clause. This allows for (partitioned) numbered sequences...

– Shnugo
Nov 13 '18 at 16:23













@GGadde This is for SQL Server 2012

– Jason
Nov 13 '18 at 23:31





@GGadde This is for SQL Server 2012

– Jason
Nov 13 '18 at 23:31













Thanks @Shnugo! I was suspecting those might be part of the solution. I'll take a closer look with your suggested clauses and see if I can make something work.

– Jason
Nov 13 '18 at 23:32





Thanks @Shnugo! I was suspecting those might be part of the solution. I'll take a closer look with your suggested clauses and see if I can make something work.

– Jason
Nov 13 '18 at 23:32












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1














Many thanks to user @Shnugo for pointing me in the right direction. Using ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER clause, I was able to make the desired associations in a single set operation, like so:



SELECT a.id, b.id
FROM (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things1) a
JOIN (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things2) b ON b.parentgroup = a.parentgroup
AND b.seq = a.seq


Which, when run against the sample data above, produces exactly the associations desired:



1<->1
2<->3
3<->2
4<->6


Just add a simple INSERT and the table is populated exactly as needed.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Great, happy coding!

    – Shnugo
    Nov 14 '18 at 12:43











Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53285070%2fsql-relating-rows-base-on-relative-sequence-of-non-matching-data%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









1














Many thanks to user @Shnugo for pointing me in the right direction. Using ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER clause, I was able to make the desired associations in a single set operation, like so:



SELECT a.id, b.id
FROM (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things1) a
JOIN (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things2) b ON b.parentgroup = a.parentgroup
AND b.seq = a.seq


Which, when run against the sample data above, produces exactly the associations desired:



1<->1
2<->3
3<->2
4<->6


Just add a simple INSERT and the table is populated exactly as needed.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Great, happy coding!

    – Shnugo
    Nov 14 '18 at 12:43
















1














Many thanks to user @Shnugo for pointing me in the right direction. Using ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER clause, I was able to make the desired associations in a single set operation, like so:



SELECT a.id, b.id
FROM (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things1) a
JOIN (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things2) b ON b.parentgroup = a.parentgroup
AND b.seq = a.seq


Which, when run against the sample data above, produces exactly the associations desired:



1<->1
2<->3
3<->2
4<->6


Just add a simple INSERT and the table is populated exactly as needed.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    Great, happy coding!

    – Shnugo
    Nov 14 '18 at 12:43














1












1








1







Many thanks to user @Shnugo for pointing me in the right direction. Using ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER clause, I was able to make the desired associations in a single set operation, like so:



SELECT a.id, b.id
FROM (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things1) a
JOIN (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things2) b ON b.parentgroup = a.parentgroup
AND b.seq = a.seq


Which, when run against the sample data above, produces exactly the associations desired:



1<->1
2<->3
3<->2
4<->6


Just add a simple INSERT and the table is populated exactly as needed.






share|improve this answer













Many thanks to user @Shnugo for pointing me in the right direction. Using ROW_NUMBER() with a PARTITION BY and an ORDER BY in the OVER clause, I was able to make the desired associations in a single set operation, like so:



SELECT a.id, b.id
FROM (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things1) a
JOIN (
SELECT id, parentgroup, datecreated,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(
PARTITION BY parentgroup
ORDER BY datecreated) AS seq
FROM things2) b ON b.parentgroup = a.parentgroup
AND b.seq = a.seq


Which, when run against the sample data above, produces exactly the associations desired:



1<->1
2<->3
3<->2
4<->6


Just add a simple INSERT and the table is populated exactly as needed.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 14 '18 at 0:28









JasonJason

57210




57210








  • 1





    Great, happy coding!

    – Shnugo
    Nov 14 '18 at 12:43














  • 1





    Great, happy coding!

    – Shnugo
    Nov 14 '18 at 12:43








1




1





Great, happy coding!

– Shnugo
Nov 14 '18 at 12:43





Great, happy coding!

– Shnugo
Nov 14 '18 at 12:43


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53285070%2fsql-relating-rows-base-on-relative-sequence-of-non-matching-data%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Full-time equivalent

さくらももこ

13 indicted, 8 arrested in Calif. drug cartel investigation