When I came to compare the results against aggregated data that I had, I noticed that the values were off and it became fairly obvious that the transactional data also contained refunds and rebates (positive values but logically reflected as negative by the Transaction_Type status) and these were not just causing inaccuracies for the SUM on Sales_Value, but were also causing the COUNT for Number_Of_Sales to be wrong. In other words, refunds and rebates must be removed from the SUM total and not aggregated in the Number_Of_Sales columns. Now at this stage, you might be thinking that we can do this by a simple WHERE clause to filter them from the aggregates, but not only is it wrong to “throw away” data, I realised that my target tables also contained aggregate columns for refunds and rebates.
I have only used the SUM(CASE) method that Mark shows. It’s interesting that COUNT(CASE) can work, but I agree that it is probably more confusing, if only because it’s so rare.