Re: Interpolatioin problem - pg 12.4

From: Pól Ua Laoínecháin <linehanp(at)tcd(dot)ie>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Interpolatioin problem - pg 12.4
Date: 2020-08-19 18:46:07
Message-ID: CAF4RT5TBAUhCcxLEGHPO8Nzmk4v9oP363nOgwJEy+zOpBbQJPA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

HI all,

Sorry - posted the wrong URL for my problem - Doh...

Here is the correct one!

https://dbfiddle.uk/?rdbms=postgres_12&fiddle=428aa76d49b37961088d3dfef190757f

Again, apologies and rgs,

Pól...

On Wed, 19 Aug 2020 at 19:16, Pól Ua Laoínecháin <linehanp(at)tcd(dot)ie> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have an interpolation problem as follows - fiddle available here:
>
> https://dbfiddle.uk/?rdbms=postgres_12&fiddle=8d23925146ea11a904c454709b0026fd
>
> A table:
>
> CREATE TABLE data
> (
> s SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
> t TIMESTAMP,
> lat NUMERIC
> );
>
> and data:
>
>
> INSERT INTO data (t, lat)
> VALUES
> ('2019-01-01 00:00:00', 5.07),
> ('2019-01-01 01:00:00', 4.60),
> ('2019-01-01 02:00:00', NULL),
> ('2019-01-01 03:00:00', NULL),
> ('2019-01-01 04:00:00', 4.7),
> ('2019-01-01 05:00:00', 4.20),
> ('2019-01-01 06:00:00', NULL),
> ('2019-01-01 07:00:00', 4.98),
> ('2019-01-01 08:00:00', 4.50),
> ('2019-01-01 09:00:00', 4.7),
> ('2019-01-01 10:00:00', NULL),
> ('2019-01-01 11:00:00', NULL),
> ('2019-01-01 12:00:00', NULL),
> ('2019-01-01 13:00:00', 6.45),
> ('2019-01-01 14:00:00', 3.50);
>
>
> There are gaps in the data as you can see - I'm trying to fill them
> using the algorithm:
>
> - a sequence of 1 NULL - take the average of the reading above and
> the reading below
>
> - a sequence of 2 NULLs - the top assigned value is the average of the
> two records above it and the bottom assigned one is the average of the
> two records below.
>
> So far, so good - I'm able to do this (but see discussion below)
>
> - a sequence of 3 NULLs - the middle one is assigned a value equal to
> average of the non-NULL record above and the non-null record below,
> and then the remaining NULLs above and below the average of the middle
> one and the non-NULL ones above and below.
>
> This is where it gets tricky - I'm getting answers, but I don't think
> they're correct. The result of the massive SQL shown below are here
> (also on fiddle):
>
> s lat final_val
> 1 5.07 5.07
> 2 4.60 4.60
> 3 NULL 4.84
> 4 NULL 4.45
> 5 4.7 4.7
> 6 4.20 4.20
> 7 NULL 4.59
> 8 4.98 4.98
> 9 4.50 4.50
> 10 4.7 4.7
> 11 NULL 4.60
> 12 NULL 5.58
> 13 NULL 4.98
> 14 6.45 6.45
> 15 3.50 3.50
>
> The value for record 12 is correct, ,but not those above and below it.
>
> I think my *MAJOR* problem is that I've developed what is,
> essentially, a totally brute force approach - and this simply won't
> work at the scenario becomes more complex - take a look at the CASE
> statement - it's horrible and would only become exponentially worse as
> the number NULLs rises.
>
> So, my question is: Is there a recognised technique (using SQL only,
> not PL/pgSQL - soutions based on the latter are easy to find) whereby
> I can do a basic Linear Interpolation?
>
> Should you require any further information, please don't hesitate to contact me.
>
> TIA and rgs,
>
>
> Pól...
>
>
> =========================================================
>
> My mega SQL:
>
> WITH cte1 AS
> (
> SELECT d1.s,
> d1.t AS t1, d1.lat AS l1,
> LAG(d1.lat, 2) OVER (ORDER BY t ASC) AS lag_t1_2,
> LAG(d1.lat, 1) OVER (ORDER BY t ASC) AS lag_t1,
> LEAD(d1.lat, 1) OVER (ORDER BY t ASC) AS lead_t1,
> LEAD(d1.lat, 2) OVER (ORDER BY t ASC) AS lead_t1_2
> FROM data d1
> ),
> cte2 AS
> (
> SELECT
> d2.t AS t2, d2.lat AS l2,
> LAG(d2.lat, 1) OVER(ORDER BY t DESC) AS lag_t2,
> LEAD(d2.lat, 1) OVER(ORDER BY t DESC) AS lead_t2
> FROM data d2
> ),
> cte3 AS
> (
> SELECT t1.s,
> t1.t1, t1.lag_t1_2, t1.lag_t1, t2.lag_t2, t1.l1, t2.l2,
> t1.lead_t1, t2.lead_t2, t1.lead_t1_2
> FROM cte1 t1
> JOIN cte2 t2
> ON t1.t1 = t2.t2
> ),
> cte4 AS
> (
> SELECT t1.s,
> t1.l1 AS lat,
> CASE
>
> -- The WHEN for the middle of 3 NULLs has to be at the beginning
> -- of the CASE - if at the end, it remains NULL - why?
>
> WHEN (t1.lag_t1 IS NULL) AND (t1.lag_t2 IS NULL) AND (t1.l1 IS NULL)
> AND (t1.lead_t1 IS NULL) AND (t1.lead_t2 IS NULL)
> THEN ROUND((t1.lag_t1_2 + t1.lead_t1_2)/2, 2)
>
> WHEN (t1.l1 IS NOT NULL) THEN t1.l1
> WHEN (t1.l1 IS NULL) AND (t1.l2) IS NULL AND (t1.lag_t1 IS NOT NULL)
> AND (t1.lag_t2 IS NOT NULL) THEN ROUND((t1.lag_t1 + t1.lag_t2)/2, 2)
> WHEN (t1.lag_t2 IS NULL) AND (t1.l1 IS NULL) AND (t1.l2 IS NULL)
> AND (t1.lead_t1 IS NULL) THEN ROUND((t1.lag_t1 + t1.lag_t1_2)/2, 2)
> WHEN (t1.l1 IS NULL) AND (t1.l2 IS NULL) AND (t1.lag_t1 IS NULL)
> AND (t1.lead_t2 IS NULL) THEN ROUND((t1.lead_t1 + t1.lead_t1_2)/2, 2)
> ELSE 0
> END AS final_val
> FROM cte3 t1
> )
> SELECT s, lat, final_val FROM cte4;

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pól Ua Laoínecháin 2020-08-19 18:50:15 Interpolation problem - pg 12.4 - full correct version!
Previous Message Pól Ua Laoínecháin 2020-08-19 18:16:50 Interpolatioin problem - pg 12.4