Today I was helping a customer with a problem that seemed quite simple on the surface. She had a data table containing historical customer sales orders (each customer has many orders on different dates). The objective was to filter this table in Power Query and just load one record for each customer – the one that was the last order date. To illustrate the problem more clearly, I have adapted the scenario using the Adventure Works database.
Adventure Works Example
The Sales table contains all the historical sales transactions by customer (identified by CustomerKey) and each transaction has an Order Date. The objective is to filter this table in Power Query so as to keep only the last entry for each customer (the last entry is the most recent order date). At the first instance, the solution seems to be simple. In Power Query, you would think that you simply:
- Sort the table by Order Date in descending order.
- Select the customer key column and then remove duplicates.
But when you do this in Power Query, it does not work as expected. As you can see in the Sales table below, each customer has many transactions with different order dates.
In Power Query, I sorted by OrderDate descending, then removed duplicates as shown below.
But the solution is not correct – the order dates for some of the customers are actually not the last orders. The table on the left below shows the original data sorted by OrderDate for each customer. The table on the right below shows the results from power query. If you compare the full data on the left with the Power Query results on the right, you can see that PQ has returned the wrong order date for some customers.
Why Doesn’t it Work?
I can’t say that I have a deep technical understanding of the problem, but I do have a conceptual understanding. When you select “sort column”, it is reasonable to expect that the entire table is sorted before proceeding to the next step. In reality, it is only the data that is loaded in memory that is sorted. The remaining data on disk is not included in the sort. Power Query also uses a concept called “lazy evaluation”. In short this means that if you add a step in the code, and that step is not technically needed to produce the final result, then that step is actually never executed (even though it is there in the instructions) – weird I know, but very efficient.
Table.Buffer to the Rescue
Before I share this solution, let me point out there are other ways to solve the problem, specifically using group by. However the purpose of this article is to broaden readers understanding of Power Query and introduce the table.buffer function.
I am pretty sure I learnt this tip from Imke Feldman at The BIccountant (or possibly Chris Webb). Both are absolute wizes at this stuff. To solve the problem you will need to get in and make some manual changes to the M code. To do this, first make sure you turn on the formula bar. Go to the View menu and select “formula bar”.
When I click on the step that sorts the table (desc) by OrderDate, the M code was as follows:
To solve the problem, I need to force Power Query to load all the data into memory, forcing the sort to be completed now before proceeding. All I did was to wrap the line of code above inside the Table.Buffer( ) function as shown below.
The rest of the steps remain the same. The Table.Buffer( ) function forces the entire set of data to be loaded into memory after sorting and the hence the next step of removing duplicates works correctly on the entire data set.
The resulting table looks as follows:
These results are now correct as you can see in the table below. The OrderDate (Incorrect Solution) column is the result without using Table.Buffer( ) and the OrderDate (Correct Solution) column is the result of using Table.Buffer( ). You can see several customers have different results. The correct result can be manually validated against the raw data.
Here is the sample workbook and the source data that I used in this blog post.
This was really great. Thanks for the good explanation .
You are amazing, no one had this answer in spanish, thank you so much!
I had this exact problem and you just saved me hours and hours of frustration. Thank you!
Thank you so much for this article…this has been a problem for me for some time…problem solved…I was removing duplicates manually because I was not getting the expected results…You have saved me so much time going forward. Very much appreciated!!!
Best case for Table. Buffer. Thank you so much.
I thought I had the problem solved, until I recently performed an audit and discovered otherwise. Wrapping the Table.Sort function in the Table.Buffer function worked like a charm! Can’t thank you enough! 🙂
Thank You so much, Mr. Matt Allington First sorted data in descending order then applied to remove duplicate so removed old record data instead of a new one as per modified date. So once again thank you so much.
Thank you so much! This article is so helpful to me. I have been working so hard months and this solution helps me to finish my work.
This is an excellent solution.
Thanks
Thank you very much!!! Brilliant your explanation it saved my life. Good to know that even the computer is lazy sometimes.
Matt,
Colin Bandfield from Msft came to the rescue some time ago with a very elegant solution:
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/0cc2a3fe-38ec-4e0b-9dcc-abb9b5cd9f9b/group-data-and-sort-rows-inside-group?forum=powerquery
regards,
I’ve also found that adding an index column between the sort and remove duplicates steps also produces the correct result.
You are the best
Hi Matt,
Thank you for this article and for this trick.
In this example, if we have more than 1 article bought in the same date, I think it’s better to use the “Group By” method.
Hoss
Hi Matt,
If Table.Distinct finds more than one row with duplicate values in the specified column list (which just contains column CustomerKey, in this case — Table.Distinct(#”Sorted Rows”, {“CustomerKey”})), I believe it’s free to return any one of those duplicate rows, at its convenience (documentation [https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/powerquery-m/table-distinct] doesn’t promise that it will return the first or last row out of a sorted set of duplicates). This makes me think that the non-working solution is really working correctly–just not producing the desired output.
If Table.Distinct happens to respect sort order in some circumstances (like when working with a buffered input), it seems like this would be an internal implementation detail that could change and might not hold true across all platforms (PBI, ADF, etc.).
Ben
Yes, I wasn’t trying to imply it wasn’t working correctly – just that it doesn’t do what you may expect
Nice trick. One that I have used often especially with big data. What’s the hit to performance however?
Fair question, but not as Important as getting the correct answer. I suspect performance will be fine except for large data. The data has to be loaded anyway. Even if you use groupby, PQ still has to load all the data before proceeding.
Hi Matt,
Great post, thanks for sharing.
I added Conditional Formatting in the Sales_IncorrectSolution.
1 Added Column: RelCorrectDate = RELATED(Sales_CorrectSolution[OrderDate])
1 Added Column:EqualYesNo = IF(RELATED(Sales_CorrectSolution[OrderDate])=Sales_IncorrectSolution[OrderDate];1;0)
Conditional Formatting based on the column EqualYesNo
Greetings
Nice work Matt, I was working on a DiFOT report just yesterday and did the same thing you mentioned; sort by then remove duplicates. Then your email came out last night, talk about timing. Thank you.
Matt, I add an INDEX column after the sort step. Fixes the issue. Think I read that on Reza’s blog once upon a time
Like you say, a number of ways to address this. Maybe a sort should automatically trigger an index step? Things like Promote Headers triggers an automatic change type step.
Hi Matt,
Although there are multiple ways to resolve any problems, thanks for sharing this with an example, I learnt new and unique command(Table.Buffer()) today, which will be more helpful when I working in power query,
Thanks for sharing this – it’s useful to learn the quirks and potential solutions. You never know when that information might come in handy.
Sweet solution. I was not aware of Table.Buffer().
side note: There is a phrase between brackets before the last table that is not supposed to be there 🙂
regards
Thanks x 2 🙂
That’s it. That is the point of this post
I’m thinking that you should just reference the original table, group by customer key and do a max on the date field, and then use this result to inner join back to the original table on customer key and date. Seems like a straight forward solution. It probably pushes down to the database too. And no need to hack code?
Thanks,
Scott
Yes, that is a valid solution. However I like to share what I learn about these tools to expand readers understanding and capabilities.
Try this trick 🙂 … Insert “stupid step” between Table.Sort and Table.Distinct… e.g. you can change type OrderDate on the type datetime
It “freezing” table in sorted state…. and after that you can remove duplicates properly.
Polish/English version :
…
#”Posortowano wiersze” = Table.Sort(#”Zmieniono typ”,{{“OrderDate”, Order.Descending}}),
#”Zmieniono typ1″ = Table.TransformColumnTypes(#”Posortowano wiersze”,{{“OrderDate”, type datetime}}),
#”Usunięto duplikaty” = Table.Distinct(#”Zmieniono typ1″, {“CustomerKey”})
…
Maybe I’m not understanding the full extent of the problem but I found simply grouping on CustomerKey and taking the Max of OrderDate produced the same result.
let
Source = Excel.Workbook(File.Contents(“C:\Projects\Consulting\PowerBI\Removing-Duplicates-Sample\5 Tables in Excel.xlsx”), null, true),
Sales_Sheet = Source{[Item=”Sales”,Kind=”Sheet”]}[Data],
#”Promoted Headers” = Table.PromoteHeaders(Sales_Sheet, [PromoteAllScalars=true]),
#”Changed Type” = Table.TransformColumnTypes(#”Promoted Headers”,{{“ProductKey”, Int64.Type}, {“OrderDate”, type date}, {“CustomerKey”, Int64.Type}, {“SalesTerritoryKey”, Int64.Type}, {“SalesOrderNumber”, type text}, {“SalesOrderLineNumber”, Int64.Type}, {“OrderQuantity”, Int64.Type}, {“UnitPrice”, type number}, {“ExtendedAmount”, type number}, {“TotalProductCost”, type number}, {“TaxAmt”, type number}, {“Freight”, type number}, {“RegionMonthID”, type text}}),
#”Grouped Rows” = Table.Group(#”Changed Type”, {“CustomerKey”}, {{“Last Order Date”, each List.Max([OrderDate]), type date}})
in
#”Grouped Rows”
Yes, that will also work. But remember this is a simplified example to demonstrate the technique. What I didn’t say in the post was that in reality the customer need was a bit different and she wanted to keep the entire record with 15 columns. This can still be done with group by but is harder.