Skip to main content
Announcements
Qlik Connect 2024! Seize endless possibilities! LEARN MORE
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
markgraham123
Specialist
Specialist

No Concatenate

Hi all,

I have a doubt to get clarified

Am i on the right track using "No Concatenate".?????

1:

Load A, B from xyz;

No Concatenate

2:

Load A, B from abc;

No Concatenate

3:

Load * Resident 1;

Outer Join

Load * Resident 2;

Drop Tables 1,2;

15 Replies
Not applicable

Data granularity point of view, you need to combine the data.

markgraham123
Specialist
Specialist
Author

Perfect dathu.

I'm trying that now.

krishna_2644
Specialist III
Specialist III

//-------------------------------------//

//if both tables has same field names and same number of fields or different field names//

1:

load * inline [

A,B

1,10

2,20

3,30

];

2:

NoConcatenate

load * inline [

A,B

4,40

5,50

6,60

];

3:

NoConcatenate

Load * Resident 1;

Outer Join

Load * Resident 2;

Drop Tables 1,2;

store 3 into 3.qvd(qvd);

drop table 3;

//-------------------------------------//

//-------------------------------------//

//if both tables has same field names and same number of fields//

1:

load * inline [

A,B

1,10

2,20

3,30

];

2:

//concatenate   //can use concatenate or just leave it alone//

load * inline [

A,B

4,40

5,50

6,60

];

store 1 into 1.qvd(qvd);

drop table 1;

//-------------------------------------//

try above.

jonas_rezende
Specialist
Specialist

Hi, Mark Graham.

Already that objective is  tables join, I would suggest make direct the outer join. For example:

Table1:

Load

A,

B

from xyz;


Outer Join (Table1)


Table2:

Load

A,

B

from abc;

I would use the NoConcatenate this example:

Table1_tmp:

Load

A,

B,

#Quantity

from xyz;


Outer Join (Table1_tmp)

Table2:

Load

A,

B,

C,

#Quantity

from abc;


NoConcatenate


Table1:


Load

A,

B,

C,

if(#Quantity < 0,0, #Quantity)      As#Quantity //Here the condition involves the entire table.

Resident Table1_tmp;

Drop table Table1_tmp;

Hope this helps!

Not applicable

If you get the answer please mark thread as answered.

alis2063
Creator III
Creator III

Yes it is but if we have different field name then it would be considered new  field in case of sql union we both both table should have no. of supplied fields would  be same