× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Most systems recommending a box size do so by knowing
- the physical size of the item
- volume available for each box size.

Charles

On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 7:16 AM Greg Wilburn <
gwilburn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thank you all for the responses... Charles hit the nail on the head. This
is certainly non-trivial.

Our "Box Contents File" contains shipments for many years (11 million
rows). My thinking was that (smaller) orders would repeat - people tend to
buy the same widgets together.
Rather than trying to figure out what box the items will fit into (based
on their dimensions), I was considering finding an order that matched the
contents.

Our file contains a row for each widget and quantity inside a box AS WELL
AS the box "code" it was actually packed/shipped in. So I would almost
need to find a box that contained the exact item & quantity combinations
and nothing else.
We also ran into some other issues with this process that makes it even
more complicated.

So for right now, we're going to rely on the "human" computer (i.e. the
picker) to know what box to use.


-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of
Charles Wilt
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2022 5:56 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: SQL Question

I'm not sure the structure of the data you have is enough to answer your
question...

How do you know that
boxB, 1, widget2
boxB, 1, widget3

Held both types of widgets at the same time? Seems just as likely that at
some point boxB was used to ship 1xwidget2 and at another time was used for
1xwidget3.

It's an interesting challenge, certainly seems set based. So I'd think SQL
should be able to provide an answer.
But I'd definitely call the solution non-trivial...

Possible paths,
using the INTERSECT of two results sets, this would give you all boxes
that had contained at least the desired objects. But you'd have to then
discard the boxes with extras.

Using LISTAGG, to build a string 'widget2@1|wudget3@1' that you could
search for directly. You'd have to be careful about how you combined qty &
sku. But this might be the best performance as you could pre-calculate and
store the historical data.

Charles

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate
link: https://amazon.midrange.com


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2023 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.