这里有一种备选形式,使用
OBJECT_AGG
和
LATERAL FLATTEN
,避免了 Adrian White 建议的
ARRAY_AGG
与
PIVOT
存在的潜在支持问题。这应该适用于任何在
OBJ_TALL
CTE 中的初始
ARRAY_CONSTRUCT
内包含多个输入列的聚合函数。我认为使用
CASE
语句的条件聚合选项会更快,但需要在实际规模下进行测试以确认。
WITH CTE AS(
SELECT 'X1' PRODUCT_ID,'L13' PERIOD,100 SALES,10 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X1' PRODUCT_ID,'L26' PERIOD,200 SALES,20 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X1' PRODUCT_ID,'L52' PERIOD,300 SALES,30 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X2' PRODUCT_ID,'L13' PERIOD,500 SALES,110 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X2' PRODUCT_ID,'L26' PERIOD,600 SALES,120 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X2' PRODUCT_ID,'L52' PERIOD,700 SALES,130 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X2' PRODUCT_ID,'L52' PERIOD,1700 SALES,1130 PROFIT)
,OBJ_TALL AS ( SELECT PRODUCT_ID,
OBJECT_CONSTRUCT(PERIOD,
ARRAY_CONSTRUCT( SUM(SALES)
,SUM(PROFIT)
)
) S
FROM CTE
GROUP BY PRODUCT_ID, PERIOD)
SELECT * FROM OBJ_TALL;
,OBJ_WIDE AS ( SELECT PRODUCT_ID, OBJECT_AGG(KEY,VALUE) OA
FROM OBJ_TALL, LATERAL FLATTEN(INPUT => S)
GROUP BY PRODUCT_ID)
SELECT
PRODUCT_ID
,OA:L13[0] SALES_L13
,OA:L13[1] PROFIT_L13
,OA:L26[0] SALES_L26
,OA:L26[1] PROFIT_L26
,OA:L52[0] SALES_L52
,OA:L52[1] PROFIT_L52
FROM OBJ_WIDE
ORDER BY 1;
为了便于与上述内容进行比较,这里是Adrians使用CTE重新格式化的ARRAY_AGG
和PIVOT
版本。
WITH CTE AS(
SELECT 'X1' PRODUCT_ID,'L13' PERIOD,100 SALES,10 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X1' PRODUCT_ID,'L26' PERIOD,200 SALES,20 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X1' PRODUCT_ID,'L52' PERIOD,300 SALES,30 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X2' PRODUCT_ID,'L13' PERIOD,500 SALES,110 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X2' PRODUCT_ID,'L26' PERIOD,600 SALES,120 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X2' PRODUCT_ID,'L52' PERIOD,700 SALES,130 PROFIT
UNION SELECT 'X2' PRODUCT_ID,'L52' PERIOD,1700 SALES,1130 PROFIT)
,ARR_TALL AS (SELECT PRODUCT_ID,
PERIOD,
ARRAY_CONSTRUCT( SUM(SALES)
,SUM(PROFIT)
) S
FROM CTE GROUP BY 1,2)
,ARR_WIDE AS (SELECT *
FROM ARR_TALL PIVOT (ARRAY_AGG(S) FOR PERIOD IN ('L13','L26','L52') ) )
SELECT
PRODUCT_ID
,"'L13'"[0][0] SALES_L13
,"'L13'"[0][1] PROFIT_L13
,"'L26'"[0][0] SALES_L26
,"'L26'"[0][1] PROFIT_L26
,"'L52'"[0][0] SALES_L52
,"'L52'"[0][1] PROFIT_L52
FROM ARR_WIDE
ORDER BY 1;