Optimize proc sql statements in SAS - sas

I'm very new to SAS and trying to learn it. I have a problem statement where I need to extract two files from a location and then perform joins. Below is a detailed explanation of what I'm trying to achieve in a single proc sql statement:
There are two tables, table a (columns - account#, sales, transaction, store#) and table b (columns - account#, account zipcode) and an excel file (columns - store# and store zipcode). I need to first join these two tables on column account#.
Next step is to join their resulting values with the excel file on column store# and also add a column called as 'distance', which calculates the distance between account zipcode and store zipcode with the help of zipcitydistance(account zipcode, store zipcode) function. Let the resulting table be called "F".
Next I want to use case statement to create a column of distance bucket based on the distance from above query, for e.g.,
select
case
when distance<=5 then "<=5"
when distance between 5 and 10 then "5-10"
when distance between 10 and 15 then "10-15"
else ">=15"
end as distance_bucket,
sum(transactions) as total_txn,
sum(sales) as total_sales,
from F
group by 1
So far, below is the code that I have written:
data table_a
set xyzstore.filea;
run;
data table_b
set xyzstore.fileb;
run;
proc import datafile="/location/file.xlsx"
out=filec dbms=xlsx replace;
run;
proc sql;
create table d as
select a.store_number, b.account_number, sum(a.sales) as sales, sum(a.transactions) as transactions, b.account_zipcode
from table_a left join table_b
on a.account_number=b.account_number
group by a.store_number, b.account_number, b.account_zipcode;
quit;
proc sql;
create table e as
select d.*, c.store_zipcode, zipcitydistance(table_d.account_zipcode, c.store_zipcode) as distance
from d inner join filec as c
on d.store_number=c.store_number;
quit;
proc sql;
create table final as
select
case
when distance<=5 then "<=5"
when distance between 5 and 10 then "5-10"
when distance between 10 and 15 then "10-15"
else ">=15"
end as distance_bucket,
sum(transactions) as total_txn,
sum(sales) as total_sales,
from e
group by 1;
quit;
How can I write the above lines of code in a single proc sql statement?

The way you are currently doing it is more readable and the preferred way to do it. Turning it into a single SQL statement will not yield any significant performance gains and will make it harder to troubleshoot in the future.
To do a little cleanup, you can remove the two data step set statements and join directly on those files themselves:
create table d as
...
from xyzstore.filea left join xystore.fileb
...
quit;
You could also use a format instead to clean up the CASE statement.
proc format;
value storedistance
low - 5 = '<=5'
5< - 10 = '5-10'
10< - 15 = '10-15'
15 - high = '>=15'
other = ' '
;
run;
...
proc sql;
create table final as
select put(distance, storedistance.) as distance_bucket
, sum(transactions) as total_txn
, sum(sales) as total_sales
from e
group by calculated distance_bucket
;
quit;
If you did want to turn your existing code into one big SQL statement, it would look like this:
proc sql;
create table final as
select CASE
when(distance <= 5) then '<=5'
when(distance between 5 and 10) then '5-10'
when(distance between 10 and 15) then '10-15'
else '>=15'
END as distance_bucket
, sum(transactions) as total_txn
, sum(sales) as total_sales
/* Join 'table d' with c */
from (select d.*
, c.store_zipocde
, zipcitydistance(d.account_zipcode, c.store_zipcode) as distance
/* Create 'table d' */
from (select a.store_number
, b.account_number
, sum(a.sales) as sales
, sum(a.transactions) as transactions
, b.account_zipcode
from xyzstore.filea as a
LEFT JOIN
xyzstore.fileb as b
ON a.account_number = b.account_number
group by a.store_number
, b.account_number
, b.account_zipcode
) as d
INNER JOIN
filec as c
)
group by calculated distance_bucket
;
quit;
While more compact, it is more difficult to troubleshoot. You lose those in-between steps that can identify if there's an issue with the data. Suppose the store distances look incorrect one day: you'd need to unpack all of those SQL statements, put them into individual PROC SQL blocks and run them. Every time you run into a problem you will need to do this. If you have them separated out, you'll use a negligible amount of temporary disk space and have a much easier time troubleshooting.
When dealing with raw data, especially data that updates regularly, assume something will go wrong one day and you'll need to review it in-depth. Sometimes the wrong file gets sent. Sometimes an upstream issue occurs that sends corrupted data. Any time that happens, you'll need to dig in and find out if it's a problem with your process or their process. Making easy-to-troubleshoot code will speed up the solution for everyone.

Related

I am trying to figure out how to sort this Dataset. SAS Beginner

How do i start this??
I have two data sets.
For the output you will deliver:
It should be an excel or XML format
Each query logic/programmed check should be on each tab
Columns should be
Subject #,
Visit Date (You will need the Visit Date Listing also attached)
Visit Name (Visit date from the file_34422 must match Visit name in the Blood Pressure File)
Date of Assessment (From the BP Log), VSBPDT_RAW, VSTPT, BP results.
A column for SYBP1. SYBP2, SYBP3, DIABP1, DIABP2, DIABP3
Findings/query text.
Below are Specification for BP:
For same SUBJECT and same FOLDERNAME, where VSTPT is Blood Pressure 1.
if VSBPYN is No, then all must be null or =0 (VSBPDT_RAW, VSBPTM1, SYSBP1, DIABP1, VSBPND2, VSBPTM2, SYSBP2, DIABP2, VSBPND3, VSBPTM3, SYSBP3, DIABP3)
This is what i have started with and
proc sql;
select
f.subject,
f.SVSTDT_RAW, f.FolderName,
b.FolderName,
VSBPDT_RAW, VSTPT,
SYSBP1, SYSBP2, SYSBP3,
DIABP1, DIABP2, DIABP3
FROM first_data as f, bp_data as b
group by subject, foldername
where f.subject = b.subject
having VSTPT is Blood Pressure set 1,
VSBPYN is No;
quit;
I just need to be pointed towards the right direction. I know this can't be right.
I do not know the exact structure of your data, so the solution below may need to be modified by you to select the right columns.
From the descritpion, this looks like it might be a good situation for SQL and a data step. You have a lot of columns to merge with the bp table. It will be easy to do merge all of these columns with first_data in SQL.
When you have lots of by-row conditionals, a data step will be easier to work with and read than many CASE statements in SQL. We'll do a two-stage approach in which we use SQL and a data step.
Step 1: Merge the data
proc sql noprint;
create table stage as
select t1.*
, t2.VSBPYN
from bp_data as t1
INNER JOIN
first_data as t2
ON t1.subject = t2.subject
AND foldername = t2.foldername
where t1.VSTPT = 1
;
quit;
Step 2: Conditionally set values to missing
Next, we'll do a data step for our conditional logic. call missing() is a useful function that will let you set the value of many variables to missing all in a single statement.
data want;
set stage;
if(upcase(VSBPYN) = 'NO') then call missing(VSBPDT_RAW, VSBPTM1, SYSBP1, DIABP1,
VSBPND2, VSBPTM2, SYSBP2, DIABP2,
VSBPND3, VSBPTM3, SYSBP3, DIABP3
);
run;
Step 3: Output to Excel
Finally, we sent the output to Excel.
proc export
data=want
file='/my/location/want.xlsx'
dbms=xlsx
replace;
run;

Iteratively adding to merged SAS dataset

I have 18 separate datasets that contain similar information: patient ID, number of 30-day equivalents, and total day supply of those 30-day equivalents. I've output these from a dataset that contains those 3 variables plus the medication class (VA_CLASS) and the quarter it was captured in (a total of 6 quarters).
Here's how I've created the 18 separate datasets from the snip of the dataset shown above:
%macro rx(class,num);
proc sql;
create table dm_sum&clas._qtr&num as select PatID,
sum(equiv_30) as equiv_30_&class._&num
from dm_qtrs
where va_class = "HS&class" and dm_qtr = &qtr
group by 1;
quit;
%mend;
%rx(500,1);
%rx(500,2);
%rx(500,3);
%rx(500,4);
%rx(500,5);
%rx(500,6);
%rx(501,1);
and so on...
I then need to merge all 18 datasets back together by PatID and what I'd like to do is iteratively add the next dataset created to the previous, as in, add dataset dm_sum_500_qtr3 to a file that already contains the results of dm_sum_500_qtr1 & dm_sum_500_qtr1.
Thanks for looking, Brian
In the macro append the created data set to it an accumulator data set. Be sure to delete it before starting so there is a fresh accumulation. If the process is run at different times (like weekly or monthly) you may want to incorporate a unique index to prevent repeated appendings. If you are stacking all these sums, the create table should also select va_class and dm_qtr
%macro (class, num, stack=perm.allClassNumSums);
proc sql; create table dm_sum&clas._qtr&num as … ;
proc append force base=perm.allClassNumSums data=dm_sum&clas._qtr&num;
run;
%mend;
proc sql;
drop table perm.allClassNumSums;
%rx(500,1)
%rx(500,2)
%rx(500,3)
%rx(500,4)
%rx(500,5)
…
A better approach might be a single query with an larger where, and leave the class and qtr as categorical variables. Your current approach is moving data (class and qtr) into metadata (column names). Such a transformation makes additional downstream processing more difficult.
Proc TABULATE or REPORT can be use a CLASS statement to assist the creation of output having category based columns. These procedures might even be able to work directly with the original data set and not require a preparatory SQL query.
proc sql;
create table want as
select
PatID, va_class, dm_qtr,
sum(equiv_30) as equiv_30_sum
from dm_qtrs
where catx(':', va_class, dm_sqt) in
(
'HS500:1'
'HS500:2'
'HS500:3'
…
'HS501:1'
)
group by PatID, va_class, dm_qtr;
quit;

Multiple left join with same columns

I have 3 Data sets A,B,C which contains the following variables
A:
period region city
B:
period city Sales
C:
period region Sales
My goal is to do a left join on A using B and C to get the Sales information based on the geographic location. I tried to in the sequence of steps:
/* Left joining B to A based on period and region */
proc sql;
Create table merge1 as
select l.* , r.* from
A as l left join B as r
on l.period = r.period and l.city=r.city;
quit;
/* Renaming Sales variable*/
data merged2;
set merge1;
rename Sales= s1;
run;
/*Doing another left join again, this time using C*/
proc sql;
create table merge3 as
select l.*,r.* from
A as l left join C as r
on l.period= r.period and l.region=r.region;
quit;
/*Replacing some of the values*/
data merge4;
set merge3;
Sales1= IFN(s1=., Sales, s1);
drop s1 Sales;
run;
My question would be if there are much better/ efficient ways to go about this? Especially on the multiple left joins since the process will get really tedious as the number of datasets and varaibles to be matched increases, thanks!
You could do it in a single SQL procedure. Since you have multiple tables, you will have to join them one by one.
proc sql;
Create table merge1 as select
A.* ,
B.sales as s1,
C.sales as s2,
coalesce(B.sales, C.sales) as Sales /*takes first non missing value*/
from A
left join B on (A.period = B.period and A.city = B.city)
left join C on (A.period = C.period and A.region = C.region);
quit;

including a max statement inner join with proc sql

I'm trying to get all of all of a series of variables while pulling off of the most recent possible update date (PD_LAST_UPDATE) some fields were updated yesterday, some fields might have been a year ago, so I can't just do PD_LAST_UPDATE = (variable encoded to a specific time) and if I do any set time I'll get way too much data.
Here's my code
(SELECT N1.PD_PROP_NUM, N1.PD_START_DATE, N1.PD_END_DATE, N1.PD_DOW_FREQ,
N1.PD_RATE_PGM, N1.PD_ROOM_POOL, N1.PD_QUOTE_SERIES,
N1.PD_RPGM_SEQ_NUM, N1.PD_LAST_UPDATE
FROM OMP.OMT_PR_SSTRAT_DTL N1
INNER JOIN OMP.OMT_PROP_SSTRAT AS N2 ON (N1.PD_PROP_NUM=N2.PS_PROP_NUM AND
N1.PD_START_DATE=N2.PS_START_DATE AND
N1.PD_DOW_FREQ=N2.PS_DOW_FREQ AND
N1.PD_ROOM_POOL=N2.PS_ROOM_POOL)
WHERE N2.PS_PROP_NUM in (11612) AND **n1.PD_LAST_UPDATE = (MAX)**
);
quit;
The portion of particular interest is bolded, and the prop num ahead of it will be done away with once I can figure out how to select the max value so I can pull down all prob nums. Thanks in advance.
You have two ways to filter on the max value of a variable.
One is to group by everything you want to calculate the maximum by, and then use having (which is the after-group-by version of where), like so:
proc sql;
select origin, make, model
from sashelp.cars
group by origin, make
having mpg_city = max(mpg_city);
quit;
This is allowed in SAS, but not in most other SQL flavors. It's a shortcut to the other method below, largely, and it only works in some particular data structures.
The more traditional approach, then, is to do a correlated subquery:
proc sql;
select origin, make, model
from sashelp.cars C
where mpg_city = (
select max(mpg_city)
from sashelp.cars R
where C.origin=R.origin
and C.make=R.make
group by make, origin
);
quit;
In this case, we're getting to the same place, and more or less getting there the same way - SAS does this on the back end anyway.
In the case of a join, you can either perform this subquery or similar on the dataset prior to the join (or in a subquery whose result is then joined), or you can do so on the result of the join, depending on which is more efficient and whether you need rows from both tables to determine the maximum value.

select only a few columns from a large table in SAS

I have to join 2 tables on a key (say XYZ). I have to update one single column in table A using a coalesce function. Coalesce(a.status_cd, b.status_cd).
TABLE A:
contains some 100 columns. KEY Columns ABC.
TABLE B:
Contains just 2 columns. KEY Column ABC and status_cd
TABLE A, which I use in this left join query is having more than 100 columns. Is there a way to use a.* followed by this coalesce function in my PROC SQL without creating a new column from the PROC SQL; CREATE TABLE AS ... step?
Thanks in advance.
You can take advantage of dataset options to make it so you can use wildcards in the select statement. Note that the order of the columns could change doing this.
proc sql ;
create table want as
select a.*
, coalesce(a.old_status,b.status_cd) as status_cd
from tableA(rename=(status_cd=old_status)) a
left join tableB b
on a.abc = b.abc
;
quit;
I eventually found a fairly simple way of doing this in proc sql after working through several more complex approaches:
proc sql noprint;
update master a
set status_cd= coalesce(status_cd,
(select status_cd
from transaction b
where a.key= b.key))
where exists (select 1
from transaction b
where a.ABC = b.ABC);
quit;
This will update just the one column you're interested in and will only update it for rows with key values that match in the transaction dataset.
Earlier attempts:
The most obvious bit of more general SQL syntax would seem to be the update...set...from...where pattern as used in the top few answers to this question. However, this syntax is not currently supported - the documentation for the SQL update statement only allows for a where clause, not a from clause.
If you are running a pass-through query to another database that does support this syntax, it might still be a viable option.
Alternatively, there is a way to do this within SAS via a data step, provided that the master dataset is indexed on your key variable:
/*Create indexed master dataset with some missing values*/
data master(index = (name));
set sashelp.class;
if _n_ <= 5 then call missing(weight);
run;
/*Create transaction dataset with some missing values*/
data transaction;
set sashelp.class(obs = 10 keep = name weight);
if _n_ > 5 then call missing(weight);
run;
data master;
set transaction;
t_weight = weight;
modify master key = name;
if _IORC_ = 0 then do;
weight = coalesce(weight, t_weight);
replace;
end;
/*Suppress log messages if there are key values in transaction but not master*/
else _ERROR_ = 0;
run;
A standard warning relating to the the modify statement: if this data step is interrupted then the master dataset may be irreparably damaged, so make sure you have a backup first.
In this case I've assumed that the key variable is unique - a slightly more complex data step is needed if it isn't.
Another way to work around the lack of a from clause in the proc sql update statement would be to set up a format merge, e.g.
data v_format_def /view = v_format_def;
set transaction(rename = (name = start weight = label));
retain fmtname 'key' type 'i';
end = start;
run;
proc format cntlin = v_format_def; run;
proc sql noprint;
update master
set weight = coalesce(weight,input(name,key.))
where master.name in (select name from transaction);
run;
In this scenario I've used type = 'i' in the format definition to create a numeric informat, which proc sql uses convert the character variable name to the numeric variable weight. Depending on whether your key and status_cd columns are character or numeric you may need to do this slightly differently.
This approach effectively loads the entire transaction dataset into memory when using the format, which might be a problem if you have a very large transaction dataset. The data step approach should hardly use any memory as it only has to load 1 row at a time.