Search Results

Search found 20031 results on 802 pages for 'full outer join'.

Page 11/802 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • Linq join with an inner collection

    - by bronze
    Hi, I am trying a LINQ to Object query on 2 collections Customer.Orders Branches.Pending.Orders (Collection within a collection) I want to output each branch which is yet to deliver any order of the customer. var match = from order in customer.Orders join branch in Branches on order equals branch.Pending.Orders select branch; This does not work, I get : The type of one of the expressions in the join clause is incorrect. Type inference failed in the call to 'GroupJoin'. From my search, I think this is because Order or collection of Orders does not implement equals. If this query worked, it will still be wrong, as it will return a branch if the customer's and pending orders match exactly. I want a result if any of the order matches. I am learning Linq, and looking for a approach to address such issues, rather than the solution itself. I would have done this in SQL like this; SELECT b.branch_name from Customers c, Branches b, Orders o WHERE c.customer_id = o.customer_id AND o.branch_id = b.branch_id AND c.customer_id = 'my customer' AND o.order_status = 'pending'

    Read the article

  • using a JOIN in an UPDATE in SQL

    - by SDLFunTimes
    Hi, I'm having trouble formulating a legal statement to double the statuses of the suppliers (s) who have shipped (sp) more than 500 units. I've been trying: update s set s.status = s.status * 2 from s join sp on (sp.sno = s.sno) group by sno having sum(qty) > 500; however I'm getting this error from Mysql: ERROR 1064 (42000): You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'from s join sp on (sp.sno = s.sno) group by sno having sum(qty) > 500' at line 1 Does anyone have any ideas about what is wrong with this query? Here's my schema: create table s ( sno char(5) not null, sname char(20) not null, status smallint, city char(15), primary key (sno) ); create table p ( pno char(6) not null, pname char(20) not null, color char(6), weight smallint, city char(15), primary key (pno) ); create table sp ( sno char(5) not null, pno char(6) not null, qty integer not null, primary key (sno, pno) );

    Read the article

  • SQL statement to split a table based on a join

    - by williamjones
    I have a primary table for Articles that is linked by a join table Info to a table Tags that has only a small number of entries. I want to split the Articles table, by either deleting rows or creating a new table with only the entries I want, based on the absence of a link to a certain tag. There are a few million articles. How can I do this? Not all of the articles have any tag at all, and some have many tags. Example: table Articles primary_key id table Info foreign_key article_id foreign_key tag_id table Tags primary_key id It was easy for me to segregate the articles that do have the match right off the bat, so I thought maybe I could do that and then use a NOT IN statement but that is so slow running it's unclear if it's ever going to finish. I did that with these commands: INSERT INTO matched_articles SELECT * FROM articles a LEFT JOIN info i ON a.id = i.article_id WHERE i.tag_id = 5; INSERT INTO unmatched_articles SELECT * FROM articles a WHERE a.id NOT IN (SELECT m.id FROM matched_articles m); If it makes a difference, I'm on Postgres.

    Read the article

  • JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT [..] substitute

    - by FRKT
    Hello, I'd like to find a substitute for using SELECT DISTINCT in a derived table. Let's say I have three tables: CREATE TABLE `trades` ( `tradeID` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `employeeID` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL, `corporationID` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL, `profit` int(11) NOT NULL, KEY `tradeID` (`tradeID`), KEY `employeeID` (`employeeID`), KEY `corporationID` (`corporationID`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 CREATE TABLE `corporations` ( `corporationID` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `name` varchar(255) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`corporationID`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 CREATE TABLE `employees` ( `employeeID` int(11) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `name` varchar(255) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`employeeID`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 Let's say I'd like to find out how much profit a specific employee has generated. Simple: SELECT SUM(profit) FROM trades JOIN employees ON trades.employeeID = employees.employeeID AND employees.employeeID = 1; It gets trickier if I'd like to query how much revenue a specific corporation has, however. I cannot simply replicate the aforementioned query, because two or more employees from the same company might be involved in the same trade. This query should do the trick: SELECT SUM(profit) FROM trades JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT tradeID FROM trades WHERE trades.corporationID = 1) ... unfortunately, DISTINCT JOINs seem crazy ineffective. Is there any alternative I can use to determine how much revenue a corporation has, taking into account that a corporation might be listed several times with the same tradeID?

    Read the article

  • Hibernate HQL m:n join problem

    - by smallufo
    I am very unfamiliar with SQL/HQL , and am currently stuck with this 'maybe' simple problem : I have two many-to-many Entities , with a relation table : Car , CarProblem , and Problem . One Car may have many Problems , One Problem may appear in many Cars, CarProblem is the association table with other properties . Now , I want to find Car(s) with specified Problem , how do I write such HQL ? All ids are Long type . I've tried a lot of join / inner-join combinations , but all in vain.. -- updated : Sorry , forget to mention : Car has many CarProblem Problem has many CarProblem Car and Problem are not directly connected in Java Object. -- update , java code below -- @Entity public class Car extends Model{ @OneToMany(mappedBy="car" , cascade=CascadeType.ALL) public Set<CarProblem> carProblems; } @Entity public class CarProblem extends Model{ @ManyToOne public Car car; @ManyToOne public Problem problem; ... other properties } @Entity public class Problem extends Model { other properties ... // not link to CarProblem , It seems not related to this problem // **This is a very stupid query , I want to get rid of it ...** public List<Car> findCars() { List<CarProblem> list = CarProblem.find("from CarProblem as cp where cp.problem.id = ? ", id).fetch(); Set<Car> result = new HashSet<Car>(); for(CarProblem cp : list) result.add(cp.car); return new ArrayList<Car>(result); } } The Model is from Play! framework , so these properties are all public .

    Read the article

  • Left Join only returning one row

    - by Adam
    I am trying to join two tables. I would like all the columns from the product_category table (there are a total of 6 now) and count the number of products, CatCount, that are in each category from the products_has_product_category table. My query result is 1 row with the first category and a total count of 68, when I am looking for 6 rows with each individual category's count. <?php $result = mysql_query(" SELECT a.*, COUNT(b.category_id) AS CatCount FROM `product_category` a LEFT JOIN `products_has_product_category` b ON a.product_category_id = b.category_id "); while($row = mysql_fetch_array($result)) { echo ' <li class="ui-shadow" data-count-theme="d"> <a href="' . $row['product_category_ref_page'] . '.php" data-icon="arrow-r" data-iconpos="right">' . $row['product_category_name'] . '</a><span class="ui-li-count">' . $row['CatCount'] . '</span></li>'; } ?> I have been working on this for a couple of hours and would really appreciate any help on what I am doing wrong.

    Read the article

  • Yet another use of OUTER APPLY in defensive programming

    - by Alexander Kuznetsov
    When a SELECT is used to populate variables from a subquery, it fails to change them if the subquery returns nothing - and that can lead to subtle bugs. We shall use OUTER APPLY to eliminate this problem. Prerequisites All we need is the following mock function that imitates a subquery: CREATE FUNCTION dbo.BoxById ( @BoxId INT ) RETURNS TABLE AS RETURN ( SELECT CAST ( 1 AS INT ) AS [Length] , CAST ( 2 AS INT ) AS [Width] , CAST ( 3 AS INT ) AS [Height] WHERE @BoxId = 1 ) ; Let us assume that this...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Fun with Outer Joins

    Learn how an outer join works and how you can use it in your applications to find the results you need when matching data isn't in all your tables. Keep your database and application development in syncSQL Connect is a Visual Studio add-in that brings your databases into your solution. It then makes it easy to keep your database in sync, and commit to your existing source control system. Find out more.

    Read the article

  • Strange problem with MySQL full text query

    - by Manish
    This probably has something to do with my understanding of full text search or perhaps a known issue. My Java code creates search term for full text search on MySQL like this - +word* This works fine if the value in the DB column contains more text than the word itself. However, if the value is exact - no result are returned. I expected it to return results when value is an exact match. Let me give an example - Assume that DB has column name with value "Manish", now if I search with this - +Manis* It does return the result correctly, but if I try this - +Manish* It doesn't return any result, though exact match exists in DB column - Name. How can I obtain the desired behaviour in both these cases? Removing + sign works, but it returns far too many results when there are two or more words. Any help, pointers would be highly appreciated! I am using MySQL 5.0 TIA, - Manish

    Read the article

  • Multiple synonym dictionary matches in PostgreSQL full text searching

    - by Ryan VanMiddlesworth
    I am trying to do full text searching in PostgreSQL 8.3. It worked splendidly, so I added in synonym matching (e.g. 'bob' == 'robert') using a synonym dictionary. That works great too. But I've noticed that it apparently only allows a word to have one synonym. That is, 'al' cannot be 'albert' and 'allen'. Is this correct? Is there any way to have multiple dictionary matches in a PostgreSQL synonym dictionary? For reference, here is my sample dictionary file: bob robert bobby robert al alan al albert al allen And the SQL that creates the full text search config: CREATE TEXT SEARCH DICTIONARY nickname (TEMPLATE = synonym, SYNONYMS = nickname); CREATE TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION dxp_name (COPY = simple); ALTER TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION dxp_name ALTER MAPPING FOR asciiword WITH nickname, simple; What am I doing wrong? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • In SQL / MySQL, can a Left Outer Join be used to find out the duplicates when there is no Primary ID

    - by Jian Lin
    I would like to try using Outer Join to find out duplicates in a table: If a table has Primary Index ID, then the following outer join can find out the duplicate names: mysql> select * from gifts; +--------+------------+-----------------+---------------------+ | giftID | name | filename | effectiveTime | +--------+------------+-----------------+---------------------+ | 2 | teddy bear | bear.jpg | 2010-04-24 04:36:03 | | 3 | coffee | coffee123.jpg | 2010-04-24 05:10:43 | | 6 | beer | beer_glass.png | 2010-04-24 05:18:12 | | 10 | heart | heart_shape.jpg | 2010-04-24 05:11:29 | | 11 | ice tea | icetea.jpg | 2010-04-24 05:19:53 | | 12 | cash | cash.png | 2010-04-24 05:27:44 | | 13 | chocolate | choco.jpg | 2010-04-25 04:04:31 | | 14 | coffee | latte.jpg | 2010-04-27 05:49:52 | | 15 | coffee | espresso.jpg | 2010-04-27 06:03:03 | +--------+------------+-----------------+---------------------+ 9 rows in set (0.00 sec) mysql> select * from gifts g1 LEFT JOIN (select * from gifts group by name) g2 on g1.giftID = g2.giftID where g2.giftID IS NULL; +--------+--------+--------------+---------------------+--------+------+----------+---------------+ | giftID | name | filename | effectiveTime | giftID | name | filename | effectiveTime | +--------+--------+--------------+---------------------+--------+------+----------+---------------+ | 14 | coffee | latte.jpg | 2010-04-27 05:49:52 | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | | 15 | coffee | espresso.jpg | 2010-04-27 06:03:03 | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | +--------+--------+--------------+---------------------+--------+------+----------+---------------+ 2 rows in set (0.00 sec) But what if the table doesn't have a Primary Index ID, then can an outer join still be used to find out duplicates?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Full Text Search Leading Wildcard

    - by aherrick
    After taking a look at this SO question and doing my own research, it appears that you cannot have a leading wildcard while using full text search. So in the most simple example, if I have a Table with 1 column like below: TABLE1 coin coinage undercoin select COLUMN1 from TABLE1 where COLUMN1 LIKE '%coin%' Would get me the results I want. How can I get the exact same results with FULL TEXT SEARCH enabled on the column? The following two queries return the exact same data, which is not exactly what I want. SELECT COLUMN1 FROM TABLE1 WHERE CONTAINS(COLUMN1, '"coin*"') SELECT COLUMN1 FROM TABLE1 WHERE CONTAINS(COLUMN1, '"*coin*"')

    Read the article

  • Get all related products based on their full-text search relationship

    - by MikeJ
    I have a Product table with the fields Id, Title, Description, Keywords (just comma separated list of keywords). Table is full-text indexed. When I view one product, I do a query and search the full-text catalog for any related products based on the Keywords field. select * from Products where Contains(Products.*, @keywordsFromOneProduct) Works like a charm. Now I would like to list all products and all their related products in a big list and I want to avoid calling this method for each item. Any ideas how could I do it? I was thinking about a job that would go through products one by one and build a one-many mapping table (fields ProductId, RelatedProductId), but I wonder is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • iPhone Full and Lite version without StoreKit

    - by beryllium
    Hi there! I have a Full and Lite applications that were built from the same code. Lite version has a button Upgrade. What code I should place in button's handler for checking users payment and update application to Full version?? I know StoreKit framework that allow to unblock some features, but I need just 2 different applications. Maybe there is tutorial on this topic, but I found nothing. If anyone has reference link pls provide None of those applications has not yet uploaded to Appstore. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MySQL Full Text Search Boolean Mode Partial Match

    - by Rob
    I've found boolean mode of MySQL full text search useful, however there are a couple of things I can't seem to figure out how to achieve. For instance imagine I have a full text column containing the words "Steve's Javascript Tutorial - Part One". I would like to match this for each of the following searches: "tutorials", "javascript tutorials", "java", "java script", "script" Imagine that each of those searches is simply assigned to a variable in whatever language may be being used (I always use PHP). How could I modify this to make sure that Steve's article is returned on each of those searches? MATCH (article_title) AGAINST ('"+$variable+"*' IN BOOLEAN MODE)

    Read the article

  • Adding more OR searches with CONTAINS Brings Query to Crawl

    - by scolja
    I have a simple query that relies on two full-text indexed tables, but it runs extremely slow when I have the CONTAINS combined with any additional OR search. As seen in the execution plan, the two full text searches crush the performance. If I query with just 1 of the CONTAINS, or neither, the query is sub-second, but the moment you add OR into the mix the query becomes ill-fated. The two tables are nothing special, they're not overly wide (42 cols in one, 21 in the other; maybe 10 cols are FT indexed in each) or even contain very many records (36k recs in the biggest of the two). I was able to solve the performance by splitting the two CONTAINS searches into their own SELECT queries and then UNION the three together. Is this UNION workaround my only hope? Thanks. SELECT a.CollectionID FROM collections a INNER JOIN determinations b ON a.CollectionID = b.CollectionID WHERE a.CollrTeam_Text LIKE '%fa%' OR CONTAINS(a.*, '"*fa*"') OR CONTAINS(b.*, '"*fa*"') Execution Plan (guess I need more reputation before I can post the image):

    Read the article

  • Integrate Lucene or any other search product with SQL server 2005

    - by HBACHARYA
    Hi, I need to use full text search with SQL server 2005 and I have explored its inbuilt search approach (SQL server full text indexing) but it seems less powerful. I have also looked features of Lucene. Now my questions: Is is possible to integrate lucene and SQL server in anyway? 1. Can my T-Sql queries use Lucene index for returning results? (May be uses CLR based function internally) 2. How to update Lucene index while data in the tables are getting updated 3. What can be overall architecutre? 4. Are there any commercial products avaliable which provides this kind of support? Thanks, HB

    Read the article

  • MySQL Full-text Search Workaround for innoDB tables

    - by Rob
    I'm designing an internal web application that uses MySQL as its backend database. The integrity of the data is crucial, so I am using the innoDB engine for its foreign key constraint features. I want to do a full-text search of one type of records, and that is not supported natively with innoDB tables. I'm not willing to move to MyISAM tables due to their lack of foreign key support and due to the fact that their locking is per table, not per row. Would it be bad practice to create a mirrored table of the records I need to search using the MyISAM engine and use that for the full-text search? This way I'm just searching a copy of the data and if anything happens to that data it's not as big of a deal because it can always be re-created. Or is this an awkward way of doing this that should be avoided? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Oracle - Update statement with inner join

    - by user169743
    I have a query which works fine in MySQL, I'm trying to get it working on oracle but get the following error SQL Error: ORA-00933: SQL command not properly ended 00933. 00000 - "SQL command not properly ended" The query is: UPDATE table1 INNER JOIN table2 ON table1.value = table2.DESC SET table1.value = table2.CODE WHERE table1.UPDATETYPE='blah'; I'd be extremely grateful for any help.

    Read the article

  • SQL is this equvelent to a LEFT JoIn?

    - by Jim
    Is this equvelent to a LEFT JOIN? select distinct a.name, b.name from tableA a, (select name from tableB) as b It seems as though there is no link between the two tables. Is there an easier / more efficient way to write this?

    Read the article

  • How to do a join that removes values?

    - by Georg
    Customers Holidays id | name customer_id | start | end ---+------ ------------+--------+------ 1 | Peter 1 | 5 | 10 2 | Simon 1 | 15 | 20 3 | Mary 2 | 5 | 20 How should my SQL query look that out of start=11,end=14 I get these customers: Peter Mary Is this even manageable with a simple SQL join, or do I need to use sub-queries?

    Read the article

  • Self join to a table

    - by Mohit
    I have a table like Employee ================== name salary ================== a 10000 b 20000 c 5000 d 40000 i want to get all the employee whose salary is greater than A's salary. I don't want to use any nested or sub query. It has been asked in an interview and hint was to use self join. I really can't figure out how to achieve the same.

    Read the article

  • Mysql Left Join Null Result

    - by Ozzy
    I have this query SELECT articles.*, users.username AS `user` FROM `articles` LEFT JOIN `users` ON articles.user_id = users.id ORDER BY articles.timestamp Basically it returns the list of articles and the username that the article is associated to. Now if there is no entry in the users table for a particular user id, the users var is NULL. Is there anyway to make it that if its null it returns something like "User Not Found"? or would i have to do this using php?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >