Search Results

Search found 8362 results on 335 pages for 'rainbow tables'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 109/335 | < Previous Page | 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116  | Next Page >

  • How to create schema that have an access as that of dbo and can be accessed by sa user

    - by Shantanu Gupta
    I am new to schema, roles and user management part in sql server. Till now I used to work with simple dbo schema but now after reading few articles I am intrested in creating schema for managing my tables in a folder fashion. At present, I want to create a schema where i want to keep my tables that have same kind of functionality. When I tries to create a schema then I faces a problem while using query, permissions etc. First of all i want to get used to of using schemas then only I want to explore it. But due to initial stages and work pressure as well i m not able to implement it yet. What can i do to start using schema with default permissions as that of dbo. Also let me know about creating roles and assigning roles on these schema. I want all this to be accessible by sa user itself at present. What is the concept behind all these things

    Read the article

  • Whats the Best Practice for a Search SQL Query?

    - by Marc V
    I have a SQL 2008 Express database, which have following tables: CREATE TABLE Videos (VideoID bigint not null, Title varchar(100) NULL, Description varchar(MAX) NULL, isActive bit NULL ) CREATE TABLE Tags (TagID bigint not null, Tag varchar(100) NULL ) CREATE TABLE VideoTags (VideoID bigint not null, TagID bigint not null ) Now I need SQL query to search for word (i.e. Beyonce Halo Music Video) against these tables. Which videos have: For Title exact phrase will get 0.5 points For Description exact phrase will get 0.4 points For tags exact phrase will get 0.3 points For title all words will get 0.2 points For description all words will get 0.2 points For title one or more words will get 0.1 points For description one or more words will get 0.1 points And I will show these videos on basis of points. What will be the SQL Query for this? A LINQ query will be more better. If you know a better way to achieve this, please help.

    Read the article

  • Adding a Third Table to a Two-Table Join Query

    - by John
    Hello, The query below works just fine. It pulls fields from two MySQL tables, "comment" and "login". It does this for rows where "username" in the table "login" equals the variable "$profile." It also pulls fields for rows where "loginid" in the table "comment" equals the "loginid" that is also being pulled from "login." I would like to pull data from a third table called "submission," which has the following fields: submissionid loginid title url displayurl datesubmitted I would like to pull fields from rows in "submission" where "loginid" equals the "loginid" that is already being pulled from the other two tables, "login" and "comment." How can I do this? Thanks in advance, John Query: $sqlStrc = "SELECT l.username, l.loginid, c.loginid, c.commentid, c.submissionid, c.comment, c.datecommented FROM comment AS c INNER JOIN login AS l ON c.loginid = l.loginid WHERE l.username = '$profile' ORDER BY c.datecommented DESC LIMIT 10";

    Read the article

  • How can I (both) create a row and accessing that row in the same 'Stored Procedure'?

    - by Richard77
    Hello, I'd like to get the value of the id column for an object just after I've created it. But I don't want to run another query for that. My book for beginner (SQL Server 2008 for Dummies) says that there are 2 tables (inserted and deleted) that hold the last row(s) that have been inserted, updated, or deleted. Unfortunately, only Triggers (says the book) can access those tables. But, if I use triggers, they will go off each time I "insert" a row even when I don't need them that functionality. Can I obtain the same effect with a Store Procedure (without having to run a separate query?) This is what I'm trying to do CREATE PROCEDURE myProcedure DECLARE @OrganizationName @ColumnID OUTPUT AS INSERT INTO Organization (OrganizationName) VALUES (@OrganizationName) SET @ColumnID = (// Please, I need Help here ...) Thanks for helping

    Read the article

  • Fulltext for innoDB? or a good solution for php app

    - by Joshua
    I have a table I want to run a fulltext search on, but it is currently innoDB and is using a lot of foreign keys for other kinds of queries. Should I make like a 1:1 "meta-data" table that is myisam for fulltext? Also I am reading some things that say that fulltext corrupts MySQL tables pretty randomly? I dunno, the articles are a couple years old, maybe they've fixed that in 5+? If not what's a good solution for searching? Zend_Lucene seems cool but slow, even with caching, for the client's large tables and autocomplete functionality et al.

    Read the article

  • Zend Framework Relations vs. Table Select

    - by rtmilker
    Hey! I just want to know your guys opinion on using join tables within the zend framework. Of course you can use relations by defining a referenceMap and dependentTables and stuff, or using setIntegrityCheck(false) within a db select(). The setIntegrityCheck version seems a little bit dirty to me, but the other version is not very suitable for big querys and joining many tables... I'm a PHP developer for 5 years now and new to the zend framework and just want get a direction for my first project. Thanks!!!

    Read the article

  • mySQL & Relational databases: How to handle sharding/splitting on application level?

    - by Industrial
    Hi everybody, I have thought a bit about sharding tables, since partitioning cannot be done with foreign keys in a mySQL table. Maybe there's an option to switch to a different relational database that features both, but I don't see that as an option right now. So, the sharding idea seems like a pretty decent thing. But, what's a good approach to do this on a application level? I am guessing that a take-off point would be to prefix tables with a max value for the primary key in each table. Something like products_4000000 , products_8000000 and products_12000000. Then the application would have to check with a simple if-statement the size of the id (PK) that will be requested is smaller then four, eight or twelve million before doing any actual database calls. So, is this a step in the right direction or are we doing something really stupid?

    Read the article

  • mysql join with a "bounce" off a third table

    - by Enkay
    I have 3 mysql tables. companies with company_id and company_name products with product_id and company_id names with product_id, product_name and other info about the product I'm trying to output the product_name and the company_name in one query for a given product_id. Basically I need information from the names and companies tables and the link between them is the products table. How do I do a join that needs to "bounce" off a third table? Something like this but this obviously doesn't work : SELECT product_name, company_name FROM names LEFT OUTER JOIN companies ON (names.product_id = products.product_id and products.company_id = companies.company_id) WHERE product_id = '12345' Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Calculate actual time from different timezones in php

    - by Thinker
    Hai, I would like to calculate actual time from different timezones. I have two mysql tables 1.Timezone table: This table contians two fields (offset value, country name) values are ( -12:00, Eniwetok, Kwajalein) (-11:00, Midway Island, Samoa).... so on 2.My employee table This table contains the employees details with two field names (created_on, timezone) and the values are (current timestamp, -11:00) (current timestamp, -12:00)..... so on Now, If my employee logged in to my system, i want to display the time according to their timezones values from tables. Basically if my Current timestamp is :2010-05-10 15:41:39 offset values is: +5:30 my result should be : 10 May 2010 3:41pm the same for different offset values for the same current timestamp. I believe i explained the issue correctly, if you want any information, please ask me.

    Read the article

  • iPad UiTableView concatenate question

    - by rasputin
    Hi! I need make a application for iPad. The App need a control seem to Twitter iPad App that show tables and when you push a cell open other table and put the table over. You can make horizontal scroll with these tables. In this link can see the App Twitter and tableviews function: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIJTXNfGHuM I don't know how make a similar functionality. Can you help me or you know how can make that functionality? Thank you very much!!

    Read the article

  • Get the identity value from an insert via a .net dataset update call

    - by DeveloperMCT
    Here is some sample code that inserts a record into a db table: Dim ds As DataSet = New DataSet() da.Fill(ds, "Shippers") Dim RowDatos As DataRow RowDatos = ds.Tables("Shippers").NewRow RowDatos.Item("CompanyName") = "Serpost Peru" RowDatos.Item("Phone") = "(511) 555-5555" ds.Tables("Shippers").Rows.Add(RowDatos) Dim custCB As SqlCommandBuilder = New SqlCommandBuilder(da) da.Update(ds, "Shippers") It inserts a row in the Shippers Table, the ShippersID is a Indentity value. My question is how can i retrieve the Identity value generated when the new row is inserted in the Shippers table. I have done several web searches and the sources I've seen on the net don't answer it speccifically or go on to talk about stored procedures. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • help with generating models from database for many to many in doctrine

    - by ajsie
    im using doctrine and i have set up some test tables to be generated into models: I want a many-to-many relationship models (3 tables converted into 3 models) (things are simplified to make the point clear) mysql tables: user: id INT // primary key name VARCHAR group: id INT // primary key name VARCHAR user_group: user_id INT // primary and foreign key to user.id group_id INT // primary and foreign key to group.id i thought that it would generate these models (from the documentation): // User.php class User extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->hasColumn('id'); $this->hasColumn('name); } public function setUp() { $this->hasMany('Group as Groups', array( 'refClass' => 'UserGroup', 'local' => 'user_id', 'foreign' => 'group_id' ) ); } } // Group.php class Group extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->hasColumn('id'); $this->hasColumn('name); } public function setUp() { $this->hasMany('User as Users', array( 'refClass' => 'UserGroup', 'local' => 'group_id', 'foreign' => 'user_id' ) ); } } // UserGroup.php class UserGroup extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->hasColumn('user_id') ); $this->hasColumn('group_id') ); } } but it generated this: // User.php abstract class BaseUser extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->hasColumn('id'); $this->hasColumn('name'); } public function setUp() { $this->hasMany('UserGroup', array( 'local' => 'id', 'foreign' => 'user_id')); } } // Group.php abstract class BaseGroup extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->hasColumn('id'); $this->hasColumn('name'); } public function setUp() { $this->hasMany('UserGroup', array( 'local' => 'id', 'foreign' => 'group_id')); } } // UserGroup.php abstract class BaseUserGroup extends Doctrine_Record { public function setTableDefinition() { $this->hasColumn('user_id'); $this->hasColumn('group_id'); } public function setUp() { $this->hasOne('User', array( 'local' => 'user_id', 'foreign' => 'id')); $this->hasOne('Group', array( 'local' => 'group_id', 'foreign' => 'id')); } } as you can see, there is no 'refClass' in the 'User' and 'Group' models pointing to the 'UserGroup'. the 'UserGroup' table in this case is just another table from Doctrine's perspective not a reference table. I've checked my table definitions in mysql. They are correct. user_group has 2 columns (primary keys and foreign keys), each one pointing to the primary key in either User or Group. But i want the standard many-to-many relationship models in Doctrine models. I'd appreciate some help. I have struggled to figure it out for a half day now. What is wrong? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Stop invalid data in a attribute with foreign key constraint using triggers?

    - by Eternal Learner
    How to specify a trigger which checks if the data inserted into a tables foreign key attribute, actually exists in the references table. If it exist no action should be performed , else the trigger should delete the inserted tuple. Eg: Consider have 2 tables R(A int Primary Key) and S(B int Primary Key , A int Foreign Key References R(A) ) . I have written a trigger like this : Create Trigger DelS BEFORE INSERT ON S FOR EACH ROW BEGIN Delete FROM S where New.A <> ( Select * from R;) ); End; I am sure I am making a mistake while specifying the inner sub query within the Begin and end Blocks of the trigger. My question is how do I make such a trigger ?

    Read the article

  • Database permissions and ORMs

    - by Jonn
    I've been using .NET's Entity Framework a lot lately and have absolutely no wish to go back to using Stored Procedures. Been shocked though that the company I'm building this project for had a policy where applications were only given accounts that only had permissions to access stored procedures! Apparently, they believe that there's a security risk involved in allowing applications to access the tables/views directly. I don't get this. My first question is, can someone enlighten me as to what kind of security risk applications having direct access to the database may pose? AND If that's the case, are there any other ORM solutions that can provide a workaround to this (I can't think of any logical possibility atm) that would allow me to circumvent the restrictions on the user account to be assigned to me? OR is my understanding that I'd need direct permissions for the tables and views wrong?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server JOIN with optional NULL values

    - by Paul McLoughlin
    Imagine that we have two tables as follows: Trades ( TradeRef INT NOT NULL, TradeStatus INT NOT NULL, Broker INT NOT NULL, Country VARCHAR(3) NOT NULL ) CTMBroker ( Broker INT NOT NULL, Country VARCHAR(3) NULL ) (These have been simplified for the purpose of this example). Now, if we wish to join these two tables on the Broker column, and if a country exists in the CTMBroker table on the Country, we have the following two choices: SELECT T.TradeRef,T.TradeStatus FROM Trades AS T JOIN CTMBroker AS B ON B.Broker=T.Broker AND ISNULL(B.Country, T.Country) = T.Country or SELECT T.TradeRef,T.TradeStatus FROM Trades AS T JOIN CTMBroker AS B ON B.Broker=T.Broker AND (B.COUNTRY=T.Country OR B.Country IS NULL) These are both logically equivalent, however in this specific circumstance for our database (SQL Server 2008, SP1) two different execution plans are produced for these two queries with the second version significantly outperforming the first version in terms of both time and logical reads. My question really is as follows: as a general rule would (2) be preferred to (1), or does this just happen to be exploiting some particular idiosyncracy of the optimiser in 2008 SP1 (that could therefore change with future versions of SQL Server).

    Read the article

  • Disable Primary Key and Re-Enable After SQL Bulk Insert

    - by Jon
    I am about to run a massive data insert into my DB. I have managed to work out how to enable and rebuild non-clustered indexes on my tables but I also want to disable/enable primary keys. You can't disable the clustered index for the primary key as the table is inaccessible when that is done and my attempt to do a ALTER TABLE for constraints does not work as I think that is only for foreign keys. Do you know of a way to Disable the Primary Key and Re-Enable After SQL Bulk Insert. NOTE: This is over numerous tables and so I don't know the exact primary key specifications eg/name etc

    Read the article

  • Is there a semantic difference <span>'s and <div>'s?

    - by DavidR
    I know when coding HTML, I'm supposed to keep semantics in mind, e.g., h1 needs to be a main header, h2 needs to be a subheader, tables need to be tables, use <em> for emphasis instead of <i>, etc. Is there a proper difference between divs and spans except one is a block and the other is in-line? When I was learning I was told that <span>'s were for styling text mid-line. If I had a small blurb of text that I needed positioned at a certain point in my webpage, one that doesn't warrent a <p> tag, would I use a span should I stick with div's? What if that text needs to cover two lines (i.e., it needs a width) if it contains nothing but text, what should I use?

    Read the article

  • Getting highest results in a JOIN

    - by Keithamus
    I've got three tables; Auctions, Auction Bids and Users. The table structure looks something like this: Auctions: id title -- ----- 1 Auction 1 2 Auction 2 Auction Bids: id user_id auction_id bid_amt -- ------- ---------- ------- 1 1 1 200.00 2 2 1 202.00 3 1 2 100.00 Users is just a standard table, with id and user name. My aim is to join these tables so I can get the highest values of these bids, as well as get the usernames related to those bids; so I have a result set like so: auction_id auction_title auctionbid_amt user_username ---------- ------------- -------------- ------------- 1 Auction 1 202.00 Bidder2 2 Auction 2 100.00 Bidder1 So far my query is as follows: SELECT a.id, a.title, ab.bid_points, u.display_name FROM auction a LEFT JOIN auctionbid ab ON a.id = ab.auction_id LEFT JOIN users u ON u.id = ab.user_id GROUP BY a.id This gets the single rows I am after, but it seems to display the lowest bid_amt, not the highest.

    Read the article

  • Help me write a nicer SQL query in Rails

    - by Sainath Mallidi
    Hi, I am trying to write an SQL query to update some of the attributes that are regularly pulled from source. the output will be a text file with the following fields: author, title, date, popularity I have two tables to update one is the author information and the other is popularity table. And the Author Active Record object has one popularity. Currently I'm doing it like this.\ arr.each { |x| x = x.split(" ") results = Author.find_by_sql("SELECT authors.id FROM authors, priorities WHERE authors.id=popularity.authors_id AND authors.author = x[0]") results[0].popularity.update_attribute("popularity", x[3]) I need two tables because the popularity keeps changing, and I need only the top 1000 popular ones, but I still need to keep the previously popular ones also. Is there any nicer way to do this, instead of one query for every new object. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • JPA Database strcture for internationalisation

    - by IrishDubGuy
    I am trying to get a JPA implementation of a simple approach to internationalisation. I want to have a table of translated strings that I can reference in multiple fields in multiple tables. So all text occurrences in all tables will be replaced by a reference to the translated strings table. In combination with a language id, this would give a unique row in the translated strings table for that particular field. For example, consider a schema that has entities Course and Module as follows :- Course int course_id, int name, int description Module int module_id, int name The course.name, course.description and module.name are all referencing the id field of the translated strings table :- TranslatedString int id, String lang, String content That all seems simple enough. I get one table for all strings that could be internationalised and that table is used across all the other tables. How might I do this in JPA, using eclipselink 2.4? I've looked at embedded ElementCollection, ala this... JPA 2.0: Mapping a Map - it isn't exactly what i'm after cos it looks like it is relating the translated strings table to the pk of the owning table. This means I can only have one translatable string field per entity (unless I add new join columns into the translatable strings table, which defeats the point, its the opposite of what I am trying to do). I'm also not clear on how this would work across entites, presumably the id of each entity would have to use a database wide sequence to ensure uniqueness of the translatable strings table. BTW, I tried the example as laid out in that link and it didn't work for me - as soon as the entity had a localizedString map added, persisting it caused the client side to bomb but no obvious error on the server side and nothing persisted in the DB :S I been around the houses on this about 9 hours so far, I've looked at this Internationalization with Hibernate which appears to be trying to do the same thing as the link above (without the table definitions it hard to see what he achieved). Any help would be gratefully achieved at this point... Edit 1 - re AMS anwser below, I'm not sure that really addresses the issue. In his example it leaves the storing of the description text to some other process. The idea of this type of approach is that the entity object takes the text and locale and this (somehow!) ends up in the translatable strings table. In the first link I gave, the guy is attempting to do this by using an embedded map, which I feel is the right approach. His way though has two issues - one it doesn't seem to work! and two if it did work, it is storing the FK in the embedded table instead of the other way round (I think, I can't get it to run so I can't see exactly how it persists). I suspect the correct approach ends up with a map reference in place of each text that needs translating (the map being locale-content), but I can't see how to do this in a way that allows for multiple maps in one entity (without having corresponding multiple columns in the translatable strings table)...

    Read the article

  • In Entity framework, we can use Model first, DB first, Code first but how can we create table programmatically

    - by AukI
    In entity framework we can use 3 approaches model first , code first , database first but each one of them needs manual hand touch(means creating database or create model or write the POCO class codes or entity class codes) before proceeding to the next step ( using EF in context ). What if I want to create database and tables and table relationships programatically and still want to have to features of EntityFramework 4.3. To be more specific , from this example http://support.microsoft.com/kb/307283 we can create database , tables and everything using SQL command but we can't have the advantages of entity framework. So if we want to have that what should we do?

    Read the article

  • Qlikview joins that dosen't join on all matching column names

    - by Dev_Karl
    Hi! I'm new to Qlikview and looking for some answers regarding scripting. How can I create Qlickview joins that just join on a specific column (and not all that are having a matching name)? Let's say that I'm having the following tables: Employee Id | Person | DepartmentID | Flags 1000 , Bob , 2001 , 1000000 1001 , Sue , 2002 , 1100000 Department Id | Name | Flags 2001 , HR , 01101111 2001 , R&D , 1100000 What is the best way of joining those tables on the DepartmentID <- ID field? The data is provided by SQL selects. I'm thinking of writing SQL views using unique names would be one idea, but there must be a simpler way. Please advice Kind regards, Karl

    Read the article

  • Mysql Master Slave Replication on Large Database table (how to sync initial data)

    - by Brian Lovett
    We have a production server and a dev server. We have found that backups are nearly impossible on the production server because of the query volume we experience. So, we're looking at setting up replication with our dev server being the slave. This is ideal because we can afford to lock the tables on that server and additionally it will be nice to have up to date data for the developers. Now, the issues. The production server can't really be taken down or locked at this point, at least not easily. We have a high query volume and fairly large 30+ GB innodb tables. Both servers are running all innodb and are also both on mysql 5.1. What can we do to sync the data initially to get replication started? I've tried a few options, but so far, none have worked.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116  | Next Page >