Search Results

Search found 8523 results on 341 pages for 'bobby tables'.

Page 137/341 | < Previous Page | 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144  | Next Page >

  • sybase - values from one table that aren't on another, on opposite ends of a 3-table join

    - by Lazy Bob
    Hypothetical situation: I work for a custom sign-making company, and some of our clients have submitted more sign designs than they're currently using. I want to know what signs have never been used. 3 tables involved: table A - signs for a company sign_pk(unique) | company_pk | sign_description 1 --------------------1 ---------------- small 2 --------------------1 ---------------- large 3 --------------------2 ---------------- medium 4 --------------------2 ---------------- jumbo 5 --------------------3 ---------------- banner table B - company locations company_pk | company_location(unique) 1 ------|------ 987 1 ------|------ 876 2 ------|------ 456 2 ------|------ 123 table C - signs at locations (it's a bit of a stretch, but each row can have 2 signs, and it's a one to many relationship from company location to signs at locations) company_location | front_sign | back_sign 987 ------------ 1 ------------ 2 987 ------------ 2 ------------ 1 876 ------------ 2 ------------ 1 456 ------------ 3 ------------ 4 123 ------------ 4 ------------ 3 So, a.company_pk = b.company_pk and b.company_location = c.company_location. What I want to try and find is how to query and get back that sign_pk 5 isn't at any location. Querying each sign_pk against all of the front_sign and back_sign values is a little impractical, since all the tables have millions of rows. Table a is indexed on sign_pk and company_pk, table b on both fields, and table c only on company locations. The way I'm trying to write it is along the lines of "each sign belongs to a company, so find the signs that are not the front or back sign at any of the locations that belong to the company tied to that sign." My original plan was: Select a.sign_pk from a, b, c where a.company_pk = b.company_pk and b.company_location = c.company_location and a.sign_pk *= c.front_sign group by a.sign_pk having count(c.front_sign) = 0 just to do the front sign, and then repeat for the back, but that won't run because c is an inner member of an outer join, and also in an inner join. This whole thing is fairly convoluted, but if anyone can make sense of it, I'll be your best friend.

    Read the article

  • Database localization

    - by Don
    Hi, I have a number of database tables that contain name and description columns which need to be localized. My initial attempt at designing a DB schema that would support this was something like: product ------- id name description local_product ------- id product_id local_name local_description locale_id locale ------ id locale However, this solution requires a new local_ table for every table that contains name and description columns that require localization. In an attempt to avoid this overhead I redesigned the schema so that only a single localization table is needed product ------- id localization_id localization ------- id local_name local_description locale_id locale ------ id locale Here's an example of the data which would be stored in this schema when there are 2 tables (product and country) requiring localization: country id, localization_id ----------------------- 1, 5 product id, localization_id ----------------------- 1, 2 localization id, local_name, local_description, locale_id ------------------------------------------------------ 2, apple, a delicious fruit, 2 2, pomme, un fruit délicieux, 3 2, apfel, ein köstliches Obst, 4 5, ireland, a small country, 2 5, irlande, un petite pay, 3 locale id, locale -------------- 2, en 3, fr 4, de Notice that the compound primary key of the localization table is (id, locale_id), but the foreign key in the product table only refers to the first element of this compound PK. This seems like 'a bad thing' from the POV of normalization. Is there any way I can fix this problem, or alternatively, is there a completely different schema that supports localization without creating a separate table for each localizable table? Update: A number of respondents have proposed a solution that requires creating a separate table for each localizable table. However, this is precisely what I'm trying to avoid. The schema I've proposed above almost solves the problem to my satisfaction, but I'm unhappy about the fact that the localization_id foreign keys only refer to part of the corresponding primary key in the localization table. Thanks, Don

    Read the article

  • Hi, how can I use the check box group in JSF to select the items of database and generate a list in

    - by Alexzzy
    I am using netbean and JSF to do my project, recently I encountered a problem that confused me. The question: There is a set of check box groups that identify the artifacts from the nature, creator, period and school. And all the artifacts are stored in a table of database. I would like to select the items by nature or creator or something like that, and generate a list for the items selected in the next page. There are some tables of database for artifacts, nature, creators and school, and the type_ID(this is the nature), creator_ID, school_ID are the foreign keys in artifacts table. I have bound the tables with respective check boxes. For example, if I want to select nature is painting, creator is Davinci, school is Italian Renaissance, and then I click Search button. It will go to next page that generate a list of artifacts about all Italian Renaissance paintings created by Davinci. How can I do that? I was confused by JSF, but I have to use JSF to do my project. Anyone can help me plz??? Thank you very very much !!!!!!!

    Read the article

  • How would you implement a hashtable in language x?

    - by mk
    The point of this question is to collect a list of examples of hashtable implementations using arrays in different languages. It would also be nice if someone could throw in a pretty detailed overview of how they work, and what is happening with each example. Edit: Why not just use the built in hash functions in your specific language? Because we should know how hash tables work and be able to implement them. This may not seem like a super important topic, but knowing how one of the most used data structures works seems pretty important to me. If this is to become the wikipedia of programming, then these are some of the types of questions that I will come here for. I'm not looking for a CS book to be written here. I could go pull Intro to Algorithms off the shelf and read up on the chapter on hash tables and get that type of info. More specifically what I am looking for are code examples. Not only for me in particular, but also for others who would maybe one day be searching for similar info and stumble across this page. To be more specific: If you had to implement them, and could not use built-in functions, how would you do it? You don't need to put the code here. Put it in pastebin and just link it.

    Read the article

  • How to test if a doctrine records has any relations that are used

    - by murze
    Hi, I'm using a doctrine table that has several optional relations (of types Doctrine_Relation_Association and Doctrine_Relation_ForeignKey) with other tables. How can I test if a record from that table has connections with records from the related table. Here is an example to make my question more clear. Assume that you have a User and a user has a many to many relation with Usergroups and a User can have one Userrole How can I test if a give user is part of any Usergroups or has a role. The solution starts I believe with $relations = Doctrine_Core::getTable('User')->getRelations(); $user = Doctrine_Core::getTable('User')->findOne(1); foreach($relations as $relation) { //here should go a test if the user has a related record for this relation if ($relation instanceof Doctrine_Relation_Association) { //here the related table probably has more then one foreign key (ex. user_id and group_id) } if ($relation instanceof Doctrine_Relation_ForeignKey) { //here the related table probably has the primary key of this table (id) as a foreign key (user_id) } } //true or false echo $result I'm looking for a general solution that will work no matter how many relations there are between user and other tables. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Heavy Mysql operation & Time Constraints [closed]

    - by Rahul Jha
    There is a performance issue where that I have stuck with my application which is based on PHP & MySql. The application is for Data Migration where data has to be uploaded and after various processes (Cleaning from foreign characters, duplicate check, id generation) it has to be inserted into one central table and then to 5 different tables. There, an id is generated and that id has to be updated to central table. There are different sets of records and validation rules. The problem I am facing is that when I insert say(4K) rows file (containing 20 columns) it is working fine within 15 min it gets inserted everywhere. But, when I insert the same records again then at this time it is taking one hour to insert (ideally it should get inserted by marking earlier inserted data as duplicate). After going through the log file, I noticed is that there is a Mysql select statement where I am checking the duplicates and getting ID which are duplicates. Then I am calling a function inside for loop which is basically inserting records into 5 tables and updates id to central table. This Calling function is major time of whole process. P.S. The records has to be inserted record by record.. Kindly Suggest some solution.. //This is that sample code $query=mysql_query("SELECT DISTINCT p1.ID FROM table1 p1, table2 p2, table3 a WHERE p2.datatype =0 AND (p1.datatype =1 || p1.datatype=2) AND p2.ID =0 AND p1.ID = a.ID AND p1.coulmn1 = p2.column1 AND p1.coulmn2 = p2.coulmn2 AND a.coulmn3 = p2.column3"); $num=mysql_num_rows($query); for($i=0;$i<$num;$i++) { $f=mysql_result($query,$i,"ID"); //calling function RecordInsert($f); }

    Read the article

  • Improving performance in this query

    - by Luiz Gustavo F. Gama
    I have 3 tables with user logins: sis_login = administrators tb_rb_estrutura = coordinators tb_usuario = clients I created a VIEW to unite all these users by separating them by levels, as follows: create view `login_names` as select `n1`.`cod_login` as `id`, '1' as `level`, `n1`.`nom_user` as `name` from `dados`.`sis_login` `n1` union all select `n2`.`id` as `id`, '2' as `level`, `n2`.`nom_funcionario` as `name` from `tb_rb_estrutura` `n2` union all select `n3`.`cod_usuario` as `id`, '3' as `level`, `n3`.`dsc_nome` as `name` from `tb_usuario` `n3`; So, can occur up to three ids repeated for different users, which is why I separated by levels. This VIEW is just to return me user name, according to his id and level. considering it has about 500,000 registered users, this view takes about 1 second to load. too much time, but is becomes very small when I need to return the latest posts on the forum of my website. The tables of the forums return the user id and level, then look for a name in this VIEW. I have registered 18 forums. When I run the query, it takes one second for each forum = 18 seconds. OMG. This page loads every time somebody enter my website. This is my query: select `x`.`forum_id`, `x`.`topic_id`, `l`.`nome` from ( select `t`.`forum_id`, `t`.`topic_id`, `t`.`data`, `t`.`user_id`, `t`.`user_level` from `tb_forum_topics` `t` union all select `a`.`forum_id`, `a`.`topic_id`, `a`.`data`, `a`.`user_id`, `a`.`user_level` from `tb_forum_answers` `a` ) `x` left outer join `login_names` `l` on `l`.`id` = `x`.`user_id` and `l`.`level` = `x`.`user_level` group by `x`.`forum_id` asc USING EXPLAIN: id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 PRIMARY <derived2> ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 6 Using temporary; Using filesort 1 PRIMARY <derived4> ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 530415 4 DERIVED n1 ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 114 5 UNION n2 ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 2 6 UNION n3 ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 530299 NULL UNION RESULT ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL 2 DERIVED t ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 3 3 UNION r ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 3 NULL UNION RESULT ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL Somebody can help me or give a suggestion?

    Read the article

  • Cannot send HTML Emails

    - by Zen Savona
    Well I'm trying to send a HTML email using gmail smtp from CI, and it seems to reject my emails when they have any amount of tables. No error is given, they just do not appear in my inbox. If I send an email with light HTML and no tables, they go through. Anyone have any insight? $config = Array( 'protocol' => 'smtp', 'smtp_host' => 'ssl://smtp.googlemail.com', 'smtp_port' => 465, 'smtp_user' => '[email protected]', 'smtp_pass' => '--------', 'mailtype' => 'html', 'charset' => 'iso-8859-1' ); $this->load->library('email', $config); $this->email->set_newline("\r\n"); $this->email->from('myEmail', 'myName'); $this->email->to($this->input->post('email')); $this->email->subject('mySubject'); $msg = $this->load->view('partials/email', '', true); $this->email->message($msg); $this->email->send();`

    Read the article

  • What are the advantages of a query using a derived table(s) over a query not using them?

    - by AspOnMyNet
    I know how derived tables are used, but I still can’t really see any real advantages of using them. For example, in the following article http://techahead.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/sql-derived-tables/ the author tried to show benefits of a query using derived table over a query without one with an example, where we want to generate a report that shows off the total number of orders each customer placed in 1996, and we want this result set to include all customers, including those that didn’t place any orders that year and those that have never placed any orders at all( he’s using Northwind database ). But when I compare the two queries, I fail to see any advantages of a query using a derived table ( if nothing else, use of a derived table doesn't appear to simplify our code, at least not in this example): Regular query: SELECT C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName, COUNT(O.OrderID) AS TotalOrders FROM Customers C LEFT OUTER JOIN Orders O ON C.CustomerID = O.CustomerID AND YEAR(O.OrderDate) = 1996 GROUP BY C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName Query using a derived table: SELECT C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName, COUNT(dOrders.OrderID) AS TotalOrders FROM Customers C LEFT OUTER JOIN (SELECT * FROM Orders WHERE YEAR(Orders.OrderDate) = 1996) AS dOrders ON C.CustomerID = dOrders.CustomerID GROUP BY C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName Perhaps this just wasn’t a good example, so could you show me an example where benefits of derived table are more obvious? thanx

    Read the article

  • Database design - table relationship question

    - by iama
    I am designing schema for a simple quiz application. It has 2 tables - "Question" and "Answer Choices". Question table has 'question ID', 'question text' and 'answer id' columns. "Answer Choices" table has 'question ID', 'answer ID' and 'answer text' columns. With this simple schema it is obvious that a question can have multiple answer choices & hence the need for the answer choices table. However, a question can have only one correct answer and hence the need for the 'answer ID' in the question table. However, this 'answer ID' column in the question table provides a illusion as though there can be multiple questions for a single answer which is not correct. The other alternative to eliminate this illusion is to have another table just for correct answer that will have just 2 columns namely the question ID and the answer ID with a 1-1 relationship between the two tables. However, I think this is redundant. Any recommendation on how best to design this thereby enforcing the rules that a question can have multiple answer choices but only one correct answer? Many Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Auto increment with a Unit Of Work

    - by Derick
    Context I'm building a persistence layer to abstract different types of databases that I'll be needing. On the relational part I have mySQL, Oracle and PostgreSQL. Let's take the following simplified MySQL tables: CREATE TABLE Contact ( ID varchar(15), NAME varchar(30) ); CREATE TABLE Address ( ID varchar(15), CONTACT_ID varchar(15), NAME varchar(50) ); I use code to generate system specific alpha numeric unique ID's fitting 15 chars in this case. Thus, if I insert a Contact record with it's Addresses I have my generated Contact.ID and Address.CONTACT_IDs before committing. I've created a Unit of Work (amongst others) as per Martin Fowler's patterns to add transaction support. I'm using a key based Identity Map in the UoW to track the changed records in memory. It works like a charm for the scenario above, all pretty standard stuff so far. The question scenario comes in when I have a database that is not under my control and the ID fields are auto-increment (or in Oracle sequences). In this case I do not have the db generated Contact.ID beforehand, so when I create my Address I do not have a value for Address.CONTACT_ID. The transaction has not been started on the DB session since all is kept in the Identity Map in memory. Question: What is a good approach to address this? (Avoiding unnecessary db round trips) Some ideas: Retrieve the last ID: I can do a call to the database to retrieve the last Id like: SELECT Auto_increment FROM information_schema.tables WHERE table_name='Contact'; But this is MySQL specific and probably something similar can be done for the other databases. If do this then would need to do the 1st insert, get the ID and then update the children (Address.CONTACT_IDs) – all in the current transaction context.

    Read the article

  • Where do objects merge/join data in a 3-tier model?

    - by BerggreenDK
    Its probarbly a simple 3-tier problem. I just want to make sure we use the best practice for this and I am not that familiary with the structures yet. We have the 3 tiers: GUI: ASP.NET for Presentation-layer (first platform) BAL: Business-layer will be handling the logic on a webserver in C#, so we both can use it for webforms/MVC + webservices DAL: LINQ to SQL in the Data-layer, returning BusinessObjects not LINQ. DB: The SQL will be Microsoft SQL-server/Express (havent decided yet). Lets think of setup where we have a database of [Persons]. They can all have multiple [Address]es and we have a complete list of all [PostalCode] and corresponding citynames etc. The deal is that we have joined a lot of details from other tables. {Relations}/[tables] [Person]:1 --- N:{PersonAddress}:M --- 1:[Address] [Address]:N --- 1:[PostalCode] Now we want to build the DAL for Person. How should the PersonBO look and when does the joins occure? Is it a business-layer problem to fetch all citynames and possible addressses pr. Person? or should the DAL complete all this before returning the PersonBO to the BAL ? Class PersonBO { public int ID {get;set;} public string Name {get;set;} public List<AddressBO> {get;set;} // Question #1 } // Q1: do we retrieve the objects before returning the PersonBO and should it be an Array instead? or is this totally wrong for n-tier/3-tier?? Class AddressBO { public int ID {get;set;} public string StreetName {get;set;} public int PostalCode {get;set;} // Question #2 } // Q2: do we make the lookup or just leave the PostalCode for later lookup? Can anyone explain in what order to pull which objects? Constructive criticism is very welcome. :o)

    Read the article

  • edmx - The operation could not be completed - When adding Inheritance

    - by vdh_ant
    Hey guys I have an edmx model which I have draged 2 tables onto - One called 'File' and the other 'ApplicaitonFile'. These two tables have a 1 to 1 relationship in the database. If I stop here everything works fine. But in my model, I want 'ApplicaitonFile' to inherit from 'File'. So I delete the 1 to 1 relationship then configure 'ApplicaitonFile' from 'File' and then remove the FileId from 'ApplicaitonFile' which was the primary key. (Note I am following the instructions from here). If I leave the model open at this point everything is fine, but as soon as I close it, if I try and reopen it again I get the following error "The operation could not be completed". I have been searching for a solution and found this - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/944050/entity-model-does-not-load but as far as I can tell I don't have a duplicate InheritanceConnectors (although I don't know exactly what I'm looking for but I can't see anything out of the ordinary - like 2 connectors with the same name) and the relationship I originally have is a 1 to 1 not a 1 to 0..1 Any ideas??? this is driving me crazy...

    Read the article

  • Mysql many to many problem (leaderborad/scoreboard)

    - by zoko2902
    Hi all! I'm working on a small project in regards of the upcoming World Cup. I'm building a roster/leaderboard/scoredboard based on groups with national teams. The idea is to have information on all upcoming matches within the group or in the knockout phase (scores, time of the match, match stats etc.). Currently I'm stuck with the DB in that I can't come up with a query that would return paired teams in a row. I have these 3 tables: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `wc_team` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `name` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `description` VARCHAR(250) NULL , `flag` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `image` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `added` TIMESTAMP NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `wc_match` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `score` VARCHAR(6) NULL , `date` DATE NULL , `time` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `added` TIMESTAMP NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `wc_team_has_match` ( `wc_team_id` INT NOT NULL , `wc_match_id` INT NOT NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`wc_team_id`, `wc_match_id`) , I've simplified the tables so we don't go in the wrong direction. Now I've tried al kinds of joins and groupings I could think of, but I never seem to get. Example guery: SELECT t.wc_team_id,t.wc_match_id,c.id.c.name,d.id,d.name FROM wc_team_has_match AS t LEFT JOIN wc_match AS s ON t.wc_match_id = s.id LEFT JOIN wc_team AS c ON t.wc_team_id = c.id LEFT JOIN wc_team AS d ON t.wc_team_id = d.id Which returns: wc_team_id wc_match_id id name id name 16 5 16 Brazil 16 Brazil 18 5 18 Argentina 18 Argentina But what I really want is: wc_team_id wc_match_id id name id name 16 5 16 Brazil 18 Argentina Keep in mind that a group has more matches I want to see all those matches not only one. Any pointer or suggestion would be extremly appreciated since I'm stuck like a duck on this one :).

    Read the article

  • What database strategy to choose for a large web application

    - by Snoopy
    I have to rewrite a large database application, running on 32 servers. The hardware is up to date, each machine has two quad core Xeon and 32 GByte RAM. The database is multi-tenant, each customer has his own file, around 5 to 10 GByte each. I run around 50 databases on this hardware. The app is open to the web, so I have no control on the load. There are no really complex queries, so SQL is not required if there is a better solution. The databases get updated via FTP every day at midnight. The database is read-only. C# is my favourite language and I want to use ASP.NET MVC. I thought about the following options: Use two big SQL servers running SQL Server 2012 to serve the 32 servers with data. On the 32 servers running IIS hosting providing REST services. Denormalize the database and use Redis on each webserver. Use booksleeve as a Redis client. Use a combination of SQL Server and Redis Use SQL Server 2012 together with Hadoop Use Hadoop without SQL Server What is the best way for a read-only database, to get the best performance without loosing maintainability? Does Map-Reduce make sense at all in such a scenario? The reason for the rewrite is, the old app written in C++ with ISAM technology is too slow, the interfaces are old fashioned and not nice to use from an website, especially when using ajax. The app uses a relational datamodel with many tables, but it is possible to write one accerlerator table where all queries can be performed on, and all other information from the other tables are possible by a simple key lookup.

    Read the article

  • LINQ Joins - Performance

    - by Meiscooldude
    I am curious on how exactly LINQ (not LINQ to SQL) is performing is joins behind the scenes in relation to how Sql Server performs joins. Sql Server before executing a query, generates an Execution Plan. The Execution Plan is basically an Expression Tree on what it believes is the best way to execute the query. Each node provides information on whether to do a Sort, Scan, Select, Join, ect. On a 'Join' node in our execution plan, we can see three possible algorithms; Hash Join, Merge Join, and Nested Loops Join. Sql Server will choose which algorithm to for each Join operation based on expected number of rows in Inner and Outer tables, what type of join we are doing (some algorithms don't support all types of joins), whether we need data ordered, and probably many other factors. Join Algorithms: Nested Loop Join: Best for small inputs, can be optimized with ordered inner table. Merge Join: Best for medium to large inputs sorted inputs, or an output that needs to be ordered. Hash Join: Best for medium to large inputs, can be parallelized to scale linearly. LINQ Query: DataTable firstTable, secondTable; ... var rows = from firstRow in firstTable.AsEnumerable () join secondRow in secondTable.AsEnumerable () on firstRow.Field<object> (randomObject.Property) equals secondRow.Field<object> (randomObject.Property) select new {firstRow, secondRow}; SQL Query: SELECT * FROM firstTable fT INNER JOIN secondTable sT ON fT.Property = sT.Property Sql Server might use a Nested Loop Join if it knows there are a small number of rows from each table, a merge join if it knows one of the tables has an index, and Hash join if it knows there are a lot of rows on either table and neither has an index. Does Linq choose its algorithm for joins? or does it always use one?

    Read the article

  • How to design data storage for partitioned tagging system?

    - by Morgan Cheng
    How to design data storage for huge tagging system (like digg or delicious)? There is already discussion about it, but it is about centralized database. Since the data is supposed to grow, we'll need to partition the data into multiple shards soon or later. So, the question turns to be: How to design data storage for partitioned tagging system? The tagging system basically has 3 tables: Item (item_id, item_content) Tag (tag_id, tag_title) TagMapping(map_id, tag_id, item_id) That works fine for finding all items for given tag and finding all tags for given item, if the table is stored in one database instance. If we need to partition the data into multiple database instances, it is not that easy. For table Item, we can partition its content with its key item_id. For table Tag, we can partition its content with its key tag_id. For example, we want to partition table Tag into K databases. We can simply choose number (tag_id % K) database to store given tag. But, how to partition table TagMapping? The TagMapping table represents the many-to-many relationship. I can only image to have duplication. That is, same content of TagMappping has two copies. One is partitioned with tag_id and the other is partitioned with item_id. In scenario to find tags for given item, we use partition with tag_id. If scenario to find items for given tag, we use partition with item_id. As a result, there is data redundancy. And, the application level should keep the consistency of all tables. It looks hard. Is there any better solution to solve this many-to-many partition problem?

    Read the article

  • Partioning with Hibernate

    - by Alex
    Hello, We have a requirement to delete data in the range of 200K from database everyday. Our application is Java/JEE based using Oracle DB and Hibernate ORM tool. We explored various options like Hibernate batch processing Stored procedure Database partitioning Our DBA suggests database partitioning is the best way to go, so we can easily recreate and drop the partitioned table everyday. Now the issue is we have 2 kinds of data, one which we want to delete everyday and the other which we want to keep it. Suppose this data is stored in table "Trade". Now with partitioning, we have 2 tables "Trade". We have already existing Hibernate based DAO layer to fetch/store trades from/to DB. When we decide to partition the database, how can we control the trades to go in which of the two tables through hibernate. Basically I want , the trades need to be deleted by end of the day, to go in partitioned table and the trades I want to keep, in main table. Please suggest how can this be possible with Hibernate. We may add an additional column to identify the trades to be deleted but how can we ensure these trades should go to partitioned trade table using hibernate. I would appreciate if someone can suggest any better approach in case we are on wrong path.

    Read the article

  • Is it better to use a relational database or document-based database for an app like Wufoo?

    - by mboyle
    I'm working on an application that's similar to Wufoo in that it allows our users to create their own databases and collect/present records with auto generated forms and views. Since every user is creating a different schema (one user might have a database of their baseball card collection, another might have a database of their recipes) our current approach is using MySQL to create separate databases for every user with its own tables. So in other words, the databases our MySQL server contains look like: main-web-app-db (our web app containing tables for users account info, billing, etc) user_1_db (baseball_cards_table) user_2_db (recipes_table) .... And so on. If a user wants to set up a new database to keep track of their DVD collection, we'd do a "create database ..." with "create table ...". If they enter some data in and then decide they want to change a column we'd do an "alter table ....". Now, the further along I get with building this out the more it seems like MySQL is poorly suited to handling this. 1) My first concern is that switching databases every request, first to our main app's database for authentication etc, and then to the user's personal database, is going to be inefficient. 2) The second concern I have is that there's going to be a limit to the number of databases a single MySQL server can host. Pretending for a moment this application had 500,000 user databases, is MySQL designed to operate this way? What if it were a million, or more? 3) Lastly, is this method going to be a nightmare to support and scale? I've never heard of MySQL being used in this way so I do worry about how this affects things like replication and other methods of scaling. To me, it seems like MySQL wasn't built to be used in this way but what do I know. I've been looking at document-based databases like MongoDB, CouchDB, and Redis as alternatives because it seems like a schema-less approach to this particular problem makes a lot of sense. Can anyone offer some advice on this?

    Read the article

  • Performance of Multiple Joins

    - by geeko
    Greetings Overflowers, I need to query against objects with many/complex spacial conditions. In relational databases that is translated to many joins (possibly 10+). I'm new to this business and wondering whether to go with MS SQL Server 2008 R2 or Oracle 11g or document-based solutions such as RavenDB or simply go with some spacial database (GIS)... Any thoughts ? Regards UPDATE: Thank you all for your answers. Would anybody opt for document/spatial databases ? My database would consist of tens of millions to few billion records. Mostly read-only. Almost no updates unless in case of mistakes in input. Overnight inserts and not that frequent. The join tables are predicted beforehand but the number of self joins (tables joining themselves multiple times) is not. Small pages of results from such queries are going to be viewed on an highly interactive website so response time is critical. Any predictions on how this can perform on MS SQL Server 2008 R2 or Oracle 11g ? I'm also concerned about boosting performance by adding more servers, which one scales better ? How about PostgresQL ?

    Read the article

  • C# Dataset Dynamically Add DataColumn

    - by Wesley
    I am trying to add a extra column to a dataset after a query has completed. I have a database relationship of the following: Employees / \ Groups EmployeeGroups Empoyees holds all the data for that individual, I'll name the unique key the UserID. Groups holds all the groups that a employee can be a part of, i.e. Super User, Admin, User; etc. I will name the unique key GroupID EmployeeGroups holds all the associations of which groups each employee belongs too. (UserID | GroupID) What I am trying to accomplish is after querying for a all users I want to loop though each user and add what groups that user is a part of by adding a new column to the dataset named 'Groups' which is a string to insert the values of the next query to get all the groups that user is a part of. Then by user of databinding populate a listview with all employees and their group associations My code is as follows; Position 5 is the new column I am trying to add to the dataset. string theQuery = "select UserID, FirstName, LastName, EmployeeID, Active from Employees"; DataSet theEmployeeSet = itsDatabase.runQuery(theQuery); DataColumn theCol = new DataColumn("Groups", typeof(string)); theEmployeeSet.Tables[0].Columns.Add(theCol); foreach (DataRow theRow in theEmployeeSet.Tables[0].Rows) { theRow.ItemArray[5] = "1234"; } At the moment, the code will create the new column but when i assign the data to that column nothing will be assigned, what am I missing? If there is any further explination or information I can provide, please let me know. Thank you all

    Read the article

  • Update Options on Existing jQuery Object

    - by Vince Kronlein
    I'm using Bootstrap and DataTables in my app and I have a default initializer for tables based on class. I can just add the class data-table to the table and it gets instantiated with the default values I want. I'd like to know how to change or update specific options based on a specific table. if ($.fn.dataTable) { $('.data-table').dataTable( { sDom: "R<'row'<'span6'l><'span6'f>r>t<'row'<'span6'i><'span6'p>>", sPaginationType: "bootstrap", oLanguage: { "sLengthMenu": "_MENU_ &nbsp; records per page" }, aoColumnDefs: [ { "bSortable": false, "aTargets": [ 0 ] } ] }); } All my data tables have a checkbox in the first column so the above removal of sorting works for all of them. But I'd like to be able to update the aoColumnDefs on a table by table basis so I can add other columns that I don't want sorted. So let's say I have a table: $('#member-list'), how do I access this object and update it's datatables options in jQuery? I can't find any reference or help anywhere. Thanks a lot! -V

    Read the article

  • SQL server 2008 trigger not working correct with multiple inserts

    - by Rob
    I've got the following trigger; CREATE TRIGGER trFLightAndDestination ON checkin_flight AFTER INSERT,UPDATE AS BEGIN IF NOT EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM Flight v INNER JOIN Inserted AS i ON i.flightnumber = v.flightnumber INNER JOIN checkin_destination AS ib ON ib.airport = v.airport INNER JOIN checkin_company AS im ON im.company = v.company WHERE i.desk = ib.desk AND i.desk = im.desk ) BEGIN RAISERROR('This combination of of flight and check-in desk is not possible',16,1) ROLLBACK TRAN END END What i want the trigger to do is to check the tables Flight, checkin_destination and checkin_company when a new record for checkin_flight is added. Every record of checkin_flight contains a flightnumber and desknumber where passengers need to check in for this destination. The tables checkin_destination and checkin_company contain information about companies and destinations restricted to certain checkin desks. When adding a record to checkin_flight i need information from the flight table to get the destination and flightcompany with the inserted flightnumber. This information needs to be checked against the available checkin combinations for flights, destinations and companies. I'm using the trigger as stated above, but when i try to insert a wrong combination the trigger allows it. What am i missing here?

    Read the article

  • SQL Structure of DB table with different types of columns

    - by Dmitry Dvornikov
    I have a problem with the optimization of the structure of the database. I'll try to explain it exactly. I create a project, where we can add different values??, but this values must have different types of the columns in the database (eg, int, double , varchar). What is the best way to store the different types of values ??in the database. In the project I'm using Propel 1.6. The point is availability to add value with 'int', 'varchar' and other columns types, to search the table was efficient. In total, I have two ideas. The first is to create a table of "value", which will have columns: "id ", "value_int", "value_double", "value_varchar", etc - with the corresponding column types. Depending on the type of values??, records will be saved with the value in the appropriate column (the rest will be NULL). The second solution is to create separate tables such as "value_int", "value_varchar" etc. There would be columns: "id", "value", which correspond to the relevant types of "value" (ie, such as int, varchar, etc). I must admit that I do not believe any of the above solutions, originally I was thinking about one table "value", where the column would be a "text" type - but this solution would probably be even worse. I would like to know your opinion on this topic, maybe something else would be better. Thanks in advance. EDIT: For example : We have three tables: USER: [table of users] * id * name FIELD: [table of profile fields - where the column 'type' is the type of field, eg int or varchar) * id * type * name VALUE : * id * User_id - ( FK user.id ) * Field_id - ( FK field.id ) * value So we have in each row an user in USER table, and the profile is stored in the VALUE table. Bit each profile field may have a different type (column 'type' in the FIELD table), and based on that I would want this value to add to the appropriate column of the appropriate type.

    Read the article

  • How can I set the tab on a webpage depending on which page you come from in ASP.Net MVC?

    - by uriDium
    I have a rather large entity. It has a parent relationship with many different child tables. Each of the child tables I have represented as a tab (luckily it makes sense and looks nice and makes things easier to navigate). If the users wants to add a new child row, they go the particular tab, and there they see a list of rows which is owned by the parent and they can do the usual CRUD. The CRUD takes them to a new controller and action and passes the ID of the parent to the action. (This is as far as I can tell what I was meant to do, any other ideas??) When they have finsihed they click save and it takes them back to the original page BUT I want it to automatically go to the right tab. How can I do this? I am using Jquery UI tabs, ASP.Net MVC 2.0. One idea I had was to just go back to the bookmark (the href part with the #, for e.g. /Parent/Details/4/#tabname). Apparently JQuery UI tabs can handle this. Or to set the tab name as part of the query string (/Parent/Details/4?tab=name) What is the best practise here?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144  | Next Page >