If positive, sum all items. If negative, return each one

All we need is an easy explanation of the problem, so here it is.

I am needing to find a way to SUM() all of the positive values for num and return the SUM() of all positive numbers and an individual row for each negative number. Below is a sample DDL:

Create Table #Be
    id int
    , salesid int
    , num decimal(16,4)

Insert Into #BE Values
    (1, 1, 12.32), (2, 1, -13.00), (3, 1, 14.00)
    , (4, 2, 12.12), (5, 2, 14.00), (6, 2, 21.23)
    , (7, 3, -12.32), (8,3, -43.23), (9, 3, -2.32)

And this is my desired output (positive numbers for each salesid SUM() and negatives get an individual line returned):

salesid    num
1          26.32
1          -13.00
2          47.35
3          -12.32
3          -43.23
3          -2.32

How to solve :

I know you bored from this bug, So we are here to help you! Take a deep breath and look at the explanation of your problem. We have many solutions to this problem, But we recommend you to use the first method because it is tested & true method that will 100% work for you.

Method 1

Try this:

SELECT   salesid, sum(num) as num
FROM     #BE
WHERE    num > 0
GROUP BY salesid
SELECT   salesid, num
FROM     #BE
WHERE    num < 0;

If you want both the sum values in one row then you must create a maxValue (and minValue) function and use this as sum(maxValue(0, num)) and sum(minValue(0, num)). This is described in: Is there a Max function in SQL Server that takes two values like Math.Max in .NET?

Method 2

This works too:

SELECT salesid, SUM(num)
GROUP BY salesid, CASE WHEN num >= 0 THEN 0 ELSE id END;


  • Id starts at 1, hence it can use THEN 0. salesid ELSE salesid+id+1 would work as well
  • 0 is considered positive number, hence the >= 0 (Is zero positive or negative?). Although x+0=x seems to make the = sign unnecessary, it helps remember that this case has not been forgotten and how 0 is handled (as a SUM or as an individual row). If the SUM() of all positive numbers means SUM of strictly positive numbers (i.e. >0), then = is not needed.

It must be tested with real data and indexes, but with only 1 table scan, performances may be a little better in some cases.

The absence of an index seems to have a smaller impact with this query on test data below:

Create Table #Be(
  id int identity(0,1)
  ,salesid int,num decimal(16,4)
INSERT INTO #BE(salesid, num) 
SELECT CAST(rand()*10 as int), rand() - rand()
GO 10000 -- or 100.000

Method 3

  sum(profit) as pos_sum
  profit > 0
  sum(profit) as neg_sum
  profit < 0;

Note: Use and implement method 1 because this method fully tested our system.
Thank you 🙂

All methods was sourced from stackoverflow.com or stackexchange.com, is licensed under cc by-sa 2.5, cc by-sa 3.0 and cc by-sa 4.0

Leave a Reply