What about using the MAX() function? Wouldn't that work?
--- On Sun, 2/1/09, Ken Kixmoeller/fh <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Ken Kixmoeller/fh <[email protected]> > Subject: Conversion Cleverness? -- resolving duplicates > To: "Profox" <[email protected]> > Date: Sunday, February 1, 2009, 12:15 PM > Hey - -- --- > > Anybody else working this AM? > > I am working on some data conversion, and I'm looking > to see if > anyone has a more clever technique than mine for resolving > > differences among duplicate records. What I mean is this: I > have a > lot of records where obviously-same people (for example) > have > different values populated. So I have 2, 3, 4, 5 records > variously > populated: > > person phone fax email > (many > more fields..) > Sally Jones 222-333-4444 222-333-4445 > Sally Jones 222-333-4445 > Sally Jones 222-333-4444 > [email protected] > > Of course, I want them all to end up: > Sally Jones 222-333-4444 222-333-4445 > [email protected] > > > My technique essentially has always been: > - scan the "like" ones > - scatter the first one > - apply a bunch of if !empty() statements to populate the > variables > - use SQL or "replaces" to repopulate them with > the populated values. > > This is one of those situations where I keep thinking > "there *has* to > be a more clever way to do this." The problem is that > I use the time- > tested (or shop-worn) technique of flattening out the data, > so there > are a *lot* of fields that could be variously populated and > some not > to be evaluated like this, where the data in multiple rows > are > supposed to be different. > > Anybody do it differently? > > I am actually running the conversion in VFP9, so On-Topic! > > Ken > > _______________________________________________ > Post Messages to: [email protected] > Subscription Maintenance: > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox > OT-free version of this list: > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech > Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox > This message: > http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/b0d89658-3eac-4e96-9811-ccae5b3ef...@information-architecture.com > ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are > the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or > medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for > those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious. _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
