Search Results

Search found 6276 results on 252 pages for 'join'.

Page 14/252 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

  • why this left join query failed to load all the data in left table ?

    - by lzyy
    users table +-----+-----------+ | id | username | +-----+-----------+ | 1 | tom | | 2 | jelly | | 3 | foo | | 4 | bar | +-----+-----------+ groups table +----+---------+-----------------------------+ | id | user_id | title | +----+---------+-----------------------------+ | 2 | 1 | title 1 | | 4 | 1 | title 2 | +----+---------+-----------------------------+ the query SELECT users.username,users.id,count(groups.title) as group_count FROM users LEFT JOIN groups ON users.id = groups.user_id result +----------+----+-------------+ | username | id | group_count | +----------+----+-------------+ | tom | 1 | 2 | +----------+----+-------------+ where is the rest users' info? the result is the same as inner join , shouldn't left join return all left table's data? PS:I'm using mysql

    Read the article

  • Is it a Good Practice to Add two Conditions when using a JOIN keyword?

    - by Raúl Roa
    I'd like to know if having to conditionals when using a JOIN keyword is a good practice. I'm trying to filter this resultset by date but I'm unable to get all the branches listed even if there's no expense or income for a date using a WHERE clause. Is there a better way of doing this, if so how? SELECT Branches.Name ,SUM(Expenses.Amount) AS Expenses ,SUM(Incomes.Amount) AS Incomes FROM Branches LEFT JOIN Expenses ON Branches.Id = Expenses.BranchId AND Expenses.Date = '3/11/2010' LEFT JOIN Incomes ON Branches.Id = Incomes.BranchId AND Incomes.Date = '3/11/2010' GROUP BY Branches.Name

    Read the article

  • In SQL / MySQL, what is the difference between "On" and "Where" in a join statement?

    - by Jian Lin
    The following statements give the same result (one is using "on", and the other using "where"): mysql> select * from gifts INNER JOIN sentGifts on gifts.giftID = sentGifts.giftID; mysql> select * from gifts INNER JOIN sentGifts where gifts.giftID = sentGifts.giftID; I can only see in a case of a Left Outer Join finding the "unmatched" cases: (to find out the gifts that were never sent by anybody) mysql> select name from gifts LEFT OUTER JOIN sentgifts on gifts.giftID = sentgifts.giftID where sentgifts.giftID IS NULL; In this case, it is first using "on", and then "where". Does the "on" first do the matching, and then "where" does the "secondary" filtering? Or is there a more general rule of using "on" versus "where"? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Does it make sense to replace sub-queries by join?

    - by Roman
    For example I have a query like that. select col1 from t1 where col2>0 and col1 in (select col1 from t2 where col2>0) As far as I understand, I can replace it by the following query: select t1.col1 from t1 join (select col1 from t2 where col2>0) as t2 on t1.col1=t2.col1 where t1.col2>0 ADDED In some answers I see join in other inner join. Are both right? Or they are even identical?

    Read the article

  • Limitations of the SharePoint join using CAML

    - by ybbest
    Limitation One In SharePoint 2010, you can join the primary list to a foreign list and include more than one field from the foreign list. However, the limitation is that the included fields from foreign list have to be the following type: Calculated (treated as plain text) ContentTypeId Counter Currency DateTime Guid Integer Note (one-line only) Number Text The above limitation also explains why you cannot include some types of the fields from the remote list when creating a lookup. Limitation Two When using CAML query to join SharePoint lists, there can be joins to multiple lists, multiple joins to the same list, and chains of joins. However, the limitations are only inner and left outer joins are permitted and the field in the primary list must be a Lookup type field that looks up to the field in the foreign list. Limitation Three The support for writing the JOIN query in CAML is very limited.I have to hand-code the CAML query to join the lists,not fun at all.Although some blogs post mentioned about using LINQ to SharePoint and get the CAML code from there , but I never get it to work.You can check this blog post  for this.Let me know if it works for you. References: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee535502.aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/microsoft.sharepoint.spquery.joins.aspx

    Read the article

  • SQL Outer Join on a bunch of Inner Joined results

    - by Matthew Frederick
    I received some great help on joining a table to itself and am trying to take it to the next level. The SQL below is from the help but with my addition of the select line beginning with COUNT, the inner join to the Recipient table, and the Group By. SELECT Event.EventID AS EventID, Event.EventDate AS EventDateUTC, Participant2.ParticipantID AS AwayID, Participant1.ParticipantID AS HostID, COUNT(Recipient.ChallengeID) AS AllChallenges FROM Event INNER JOIN Matchup Matchup1 ON (Event.EventID = Matchup1.EventID) INNER JOIN Matchup Matchup2 ON (Event.EventID = Matchup2.EventID) INNER JOIN Participant Participant1 ON (Matchup1.Host = 1 AND Matchup1.ParticipantID = Participant1.ParticipantID) INNER JOIN Participant Participant2 ON (Matchup2.Host != 1 AND Matchup2.ParticipantID = Participant2.ParticipantID) INNER JOIN Recipient ON (Event.EventID = Recipient.EventID) WHERE Event.CategoryID = 1 AND Event.Resolved = 0 AND Event.Type = 1 GROUP BY Recipient.ChallengeID ORDER BY EventDateUTC ASC My goal is to get a count of how many rows in the Recipient table match the EventID in Event. This code works fine except that I also want to get results where there are 0 matching rows in Recipient. I want 15 rows (= the number of events) but I get 2 rows, one with a count of 1 and one with a count of 2 (which is appropriate for an inner join as there are 3 rows in the sample Recipient table, one for one EventID and two for another EventID). I thought that either a LEFT join or an OUTER join was what I was looking for, but I know that I'm not quite getting how the tables are actually joined. A LEFT join there gives me one more row with 0, which happens to be EventID 1 (first thing in the table), but that's all. Errors advise me that I can't just change that INNER join to an OUTER. I tried some parenthesizing and some subselects and such but can't seem to make it work.

    Read the article

  • How to simulate inner join on very large files in java (without running out of memory)

    - by Constantin
    I am trying to simulate SQL joins using java and very large text files (INNER, RIGHT OUTER and LEFT OUTER). The files have already been sorted using an external sort routine. The issue I have is I am trying to find the most efficient way to deal with the INNER join part of the algorithm. Right now I am using two Lists to store the lines that have the same key and iterate through the set of lines in the right file once for every line in the left file (provided the keys still match). In other words, the join key is not unique in each file so would need to account for the Cartesian product situations ... left_01, 1 left_02, 1 right_01, 1 right_02, 1 right_03, 1 left_01 joins to right_01 using key 1 left_01 joins to right_02 using key 1 left_01 joins to right_03 using key 1 left_02 joins to right_01 using key 1 left_02 joins to right_02 using key 1 left_02 joins to right_03 using key 1 My concern is one of memory. I will run out of memory if i use the approach below but still want the inner join part to work fairly quickly. What is the best approach to deal with the INNER join part keeping in mind that these files may potentially be huge public class Joiner { private void join(BufferedReader left, BufferedReader right, BufferedWriter output) throws Throwable { BufferedReader _left = left; BufferedReader _right = right; BufferedWriter _output = output; Record _leftRecord; Record _rightRecord; _leftRecord = read(_left); _rightRecord = read(_right); while( _leftRecord != null && _rightRecord != null ) { if( _leftRecord.getKey() < _rightRecord.getKey() ) { write(_output, _leftRecord, null); _leftRecord = read(_left); } else if( _leftRecord.getKey() > _rightRecord.getKey() ) { write(_output, null, _rightRecord); _rightRecord = read(_right); } else { List<Record> leftList = new ArrayList<Record>(); List<Record> rightList = new ArrayList<Record>(); _leftRecord = readRecords(leftList, _leftRecord, _left); _rightRecord = readRecords(rightList, _rightRecord, _right); for( Record equalKeyLeftRecord : leftList ){ for( Record equalKeyRightRecord : rightList ){ write(_output, equalKeyLeftRecord, equalKeyRightRecord); } } } } if( _leftRecord != null ) { write(_output, _leftRecord, null); _leftRecord = read(_left); while(_leftRecord != null) { write(_output, _leftRecord, null); _leftRecord = read(_left); } } else { if( _rightRecord != null ) { write(_output, null, _rightRecord); _rightRecord = read(_right); while(_rightRecord != null) { write(_output, null, _rightRecord); _rightRecord = read(_right); } } } _left.close(); _right.close(); _output.flush(); _output.close(); } private Record read(BufferedReader reader) throws Throwable { Record record = null; String data = reader.readLine(); if( data != null ) { record = new Record(data.split("\t")); } return record; } private Record readRecords(List<Record> list, Record record, BufferedReader reader) throws Throwable { int key = record.getKey(); list.add(record); record = read(reader); while( record != null && record.getKey() == key) { list.add(record); record = read(reader); } return record; } private void write(BufferedWriter writer, Record left, Record right) throws Throwable { String leftKey = (left == null ? "null" : Integer.toString(left.getKey())); String leftData = (left == null ? "null" : left.getData()); String rightKey = (right == null ? "null" : Integer.toString(right.getKey())); String rightData = (right == null ? "null" : right.getData()); writer.write("[" + leftKey + "][" + leftData + "][" + rightKey + "][" + rightData + "]\n"); } public static void main(String[] args) { try { BufferedReader leftReader = new BufferedReader(new FileReader("LEFT.DAT")); BufferedReader rightReader = new BufferedReader(new FileReader("RIGHT.DAT")); BufferedWriter output = new BufferedWriter(new FileWriter("OUTPUT.DAT")); Joiner joiner = new Joiner(); joiner.join(leftReader, rightReader, output); } catch (Throwable e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } After applying the ideas from the proposed answer, I changed the loop to this private void join(RandomAccessFile left, RandomAccessFile right, BufferedWriter output) throws Throwable { long _pointer = 0; RandomAccessFile _left = left; RandomAccessFile _right = right; BufferedWriter _output = output; Record _leftRecord; Record _rightRecord; _leftRecord = read(_left); _rightRecord = read(_right); while( _leftRecord != null && _rightRecord != null ) { if( _leftRecord.getKey() < _rightRecord.getKey() ) { write(_output, _leftRecord, null); _leftRecord = read(_left); } else if( _leftRecord.getKey() > _rightRecord.getKey() ) { write(_output, null, _rightRecord); _pointer = _right.getFilePointer(); _rightRecord = read(_right); } else { long _tempPointer = 0; int key = _leftRecord.getKey(); while( _leftRecord != null && _leftRecord.getKey() == key ) { _right.seek(_pointer); _rightRecord = read(_right); while( _rightRecord != null && _rightRecord.getKey() == key ) { write(_output, _leftRecord, _rightRecord ); _tempPointer = _right.getFilePointer(); _rightRecord = read(_right); } _leftRecord = read(_left); } _pointer = _tempPointer; } } if( _leftRecord != null ) { write(_output, _leftRecord, null); _leftRecord = read(_left); while(_leftRecord != null) { write(_output, _leftRecord, null); _leftRecord = read(_left); } } else { if( _rightRecord != null ) { write(_output, null, _rightRecord); _rightRecord = read(_right); while(_rightRecord != null) { write(_output, null, _rightRecord); _rightRecord = read(_right); } } } _left.close(); _right.close(); _output.flush(); _output.close(); } UPDATE While this approach worked, it was terribly slow and so I have modified this to create files as buffers and this works very well. Here is the update ... private long getMaxBufferedLines(File file) throws Throwable { long freeBytes = Runtime.getRuntime().freeMemory() / 2; return (freeBytes / (file.length() / getLineCount(file))); } private void join(File left, File right, File output, JoinType joinType) throws Throwable { BufferedReader leftFile = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(left)); BufferedReader rightFile = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(right)); BufferedWriter outputFile = new BufferedWriter(new FileWriter(output)); long maxBufferedLines = getMaxBufferedLines(right); Record leftRecord; Record rightRecord; leftRecord = read(leftFile); rightRecord = read(rightFile); while( leftRecord != null && rightRecord != null ) { if( leftRecord.getKey().compareTo(rightRecord.getKey()) < 0) { if( joinType == JoinType.LeftOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.LeftExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullOuterJoin ) { write(outputFile, leftRecord, null); } leftRecord = read(leftFile); } else if( leftRecord.getKey().compareTo(rightRecord.getKey()) > 0 ) { if( joinType == JoinType.RightOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.RightExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullOuterJoin ) { write(outputFile, null, rightRecord); } rightRecord = read(rightFile); } else if( leftRecord.getKey().compareTo(rightRecord.getKey()) == 0 ) { String key = leftRecord.getKey(); List<File> rightRecordFileList = new ArrayList<File>(); List<Record> rightRecordList = new ArrayList<Record>(); rightRecordList.add(rightRecord); rightRecord = consume(key, rightFile, rightRecordList, rightRecordFileList, maxBufferedLines); while( leftRecord != null && leftRecord.getKey().compareTo(key) == 0 ) { processRightRecords(outputFile, leftRecord, rightRecordFileList, rightRecordList, joinType); leftRecord = read(leftFile); } // need a dispose for deleting files in list } else { throw new Exception("DATA IS NOT SORTED"); } } if( leftRecord != null ) { if( joinType == JoinType.LeftOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.LeftExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullOuterJoin ) { write(outputFile, leftRecord, null); } leftRecord = read(leftFile); while(leftRecord != null) { if( joinType == JoinType.LeftOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.LeftExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullOuterJoin ) { write(outputFile, leftRecord, null); } leftRecord = read(leftFile); } } else { if( rightRecord != null ) { if( joinType == JoinType.RightOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.RightExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullOuterJoin ) { write(outputFile, null, rightRecord); } rightRecord = read(rightFile); while(rightRecord != null) { if( joinType == JoinType.RightOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.RightExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullExclusiveJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullOuterJoin ) { write(outputFile, null, rightRecord); } rightRecord = read(rightFile); } } } leftFile.close(); rightFile.close(); outputFile.flush(); outputFile.close(); } public void processRightRecords(BufferedWriter outputFile, Record leftRecord, List<File> rightFiles, List<Record> rightRecords, JoinType joinType) throws Throwable { for(File rightFile : rightFiles) { BufferedReader rightReader = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(rightFile)); Record rightRecord = read(rightReader); while(rightRecord != null){ if( joinType == JoinType.LeftOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.RightOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.InnerJoin ) { write(outputFile, leftRecord, rightRecord); } rightRecord = read(rightReader); } rightReader.close(); } for(Record rightRecord : rightRecords) { if( joinType == JoinType.LeftOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.RightOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.FullOuterJoin || joinType == JoinType.InnerJoin ) { write(outputFile, leftRecord, rightRecord); } } } /** * consume all records having key (either to a single list or multiple files) each file will * store a buffer full of data. The right record returned represents the outside flow (key is * already positioned to next one or null) so we can't use this record in below while loop or * within this block in general when comparing current key. The trick is to keep consuming * from a List. When it becomes empty, re-fill it from the next file until all files have * been consumed (and the last node in the list is read). The next outside iteration will be * ready to be processed (either it will be null or it points to the next biggest key * @throws Throwable * */ private Record consume(String key, BufferedReader reader, List<Record> records, List<File> files, long bufferMaxRecordLines ) throws Throwable { boolean processComplete = false; Record record = records.get(records.size() - 1); while(!processComplete){ long recordCount = records.size(); if( record.getKey().compareTo(key) == 0 ){ record = read(reader); while( record != null && record.getKey().compareTo(key) == 0 && recordCount < bufferMaxRecordLines ) { records.add(record); recordCount++; record = read(reader); } } processComplete = true; // if record is null, we are done if( record != null ) { // if the key has changed, we are done if( record.getKey().compareTo(key) == 0 ) { // Same key means we have exhausted the buffer. // Dump entire buffer into a file. The list of file // pointers will keep track of the files ... processComplete = false; dumpBufferToFile(records, files); records.clear(); records.add(record); } } } return record; } /** * Dump all records in List of Record objects to a file. Then, add that * file to List of File objects * * NEED TO PLACE A LIMIT ON NUMBER OF FILE POINTERS (check size of file list) * * @param records * @param files * @throws Throwable */ private void dumpBufferToFile(List<Record> records, List<File> files) throws Throwable { String prefix = "joiner_" + files.size() + 1; String suffix = ".dat"; File file = File.createTempFile(prefix, suffix, new File("cache")); BufferedWriter writer = new BufferedWriter(new FileWriter(file)); for( Record record : records ) { writer.write( record.dump() ); } files.add(file); writer.flush(); writer.close(); }

    Read the article

  • User has many computers, computers have many attributes in different tables, best way to JOIN?

    - by krismeld
    I have a table for users: USERS: ID | NAME | ---------------- 1 | JOHN | 2 | STEVE | a table for computers: COMPUTERS: ID | USER_ID | ------------------ 13 | 1 | 14 | 1 | a table for processors: PROCESSORS: ID | NAME | --------------------------- 27 | PROCESSOR TYPE 1 | 28 | PROCESSOR TYPE 2 | and a table for harddrives: HARDDRIVES: ID | NAME | ---------------------------| 35 | HARDDRIVE TYPE 25 | 36 | HARDDRIVE TYPE 90 | Each computer can have many attributes from the different attributes tables (processors, harddrives etc), so I have intersection tables like this, to link the attributes to the computers: COMPUTER_PROCESSORS: C_ID | P_ID | --------------| 13 | 27 | 13 | 28 | 14 | 27 | COMPUTER_HARDDRIVES: C_ID | H_ID | --------------| 13 | 35 | So user JOHN, with id 1 owns computer 13 and 14. Computer 13 has processor 27 and 28, and computer 13 has harddrive 35. Computer 14 has processor 27 and no harddrive. Given a user's id, I would like to retrieve a list of that user's computers with each computers attributes. I have figured out a query that gives me a somewhat of a result: SELECT computers.id, processors.id AS p_id, processors.name AS p_name, harddrives.id AS h_id, harddrives.name AS h_name, FROM computers JOIN computer_processors ON (computer_processors.c_id = computers.id) JOIN processors ON (processors.id = computer_processors.p_id) JOIN computer_harddrives ON (computer_harddrives.c_id = computers.id) JOIN harddrives ON (harddrives.id = computer_harddrives.h_id) WHERE computers.user_id = 1 Result: ID | P_ID | P_NAME | H_ID | H_NAME | ----------------------------------------------------------- 13 | 27 | PROCESSOR TYPE 1 | 35 | HARDDRIVE TYPE 25 | 13 | 28 | PROCESSOR TYPE 2 | 35 | HARDDRIVE TYPE 25 | But this has several problems... Computer 14 doesnt show up, because it has no harddrive. Can I somehow make an OUTER JOIN to make sure that all computers show up, even if there a some attributes they don't have? Computer 13 shows up twice, with the same harddrive listet for both. When more attributes are added to a computer (like 3 blocks of ram), the number of rows returned for that computer gets pretty big, and it makes it had to sort the result out in application code. Can I somehow make a query, that groups the two returned rows together? Or a query that returns NULL in the h_name column in the second row, so that all values returned are unique? EDIT: What I would like to return is something like this: ID | P_ID | P_NAME | H_ID | H_NAME | ----------------------------------------------------------- 13 | 27 | PROCESSOR TYPE 1 | 35 | HARDDRIVE TYPE 25 | 13 | 28 | PROCESSOR TYPE 2 | 35 | NULL | 14 | 27 | PROCESSOR TYPE 1 | NULL | NULL | Or whatever result that make it easy to turn it into an array like this [13] => [P_NAME] => [0] => PROCESSOR TYPE 1 [1] => PROCESSOR TYPE 2 [H_NAME] => [0] => HARDDRIVE TYPE 25 [14] => [P_NAME] => [0] => PROCESSOR TYPE 1

    Read the article

  • best command line tool to join videos

    - by user1079002
    I have used ffmpeg, but with it you have to first make mpg videos then do cat video1.mpg video2.mpg > joined.mpg and then convert to joined.mpg to joined.mp4 with ffmpeg to be able to upload on youtube. I heard there's mencoder which can join avi files without converting to mpg and using cat command. I'm making videos to upload on youtube so it needs to be avi mp4 or flv format. Which tool is the best to join videos from command line?

    Read the article

  • How to Plug a Small Hole in NetBeans JSF (Join Table) Code Generation

    - by MarkH
    I was asked recently to provide an assist with designing and building a small-but-vital application that had at its heart some basic CRUD (Create, Read, Update, & Delete) functionality, built upon an Oracle database, to be accessible from various locations. Working from the stated requirements, I fleshed out the basic application and database designs and, once validated, set out to complete the first iteration for review. Using SQL Developer, I created the requisite tables, indices, and sequences for our first run. One of the tables was a many-to-many join table with three fields: one a primary key for that table, the other two being primary keys for the other tables, represented as foreign keys in the join table. Here is a simplified example of the trio of tables: Once the database was in decent shape, I fired up NetBeans to let it have first shot at the code. NetBeans does a great job of generating a mountain of essential code, saving developers what must be millions of hours of effort each year by building a basic foundation with a few clicks and keystrokes. Lest you think it (or any tool) can do everything for you, however, occasionally something tosses a paper clip into the delicate machinery and makes you open things up to fix them. Join tables apparently qualify.  :-) In the case above, the entity class generated for the join table (New Entity Classes from Database) included an embedded object consisting solely of the two foreign key fields as attributes, in addition to an object referencing each one of the "component" tables. The Create page generated (New JSF Pages from Entity Classes) worked well to a point, but when trying to save, we were greeted with an error: Transaction aborted. Hmm. A quick debugger session later and I'd identified the issue: when trying to persist the new join-table object, the embedded "foreign-keys-only" object still had null values for its two (required value) attributes...even though the embedded table objects had populated key attributes. Here's the simple fix: In the join-table controller class, find the public String create() method. It will look something like this:     public String create() {        try {            getFacade().create(current);            JsfUtil.addSuccessMessage(ResourceBundle.getBundle("/Bundle").getString("JoinEntityCreated"));            return prepareCreate();        } catch (Exception e) {            JsfUtil.addErrorMessage(e, ResourceBundle.getBundle("/Bundle").getString("PersistenceErrorOccured"));            return null;        }    } To restore balance to the force, modify the create() method as follows (changes in red):     public String create() {         try {            // Add the next two lines to resolve:            current.getJoinEntityPK().setTbl1id(current.getTbl1().getId().toBigInteger());            current.getJoinEntityPK().setTbl2id(current.getTbl2().getId().toBigInteger());            getFacade().create(current);            JsfUtil.addSuccessMessage(ResourceBundle.getBundle("/Bundle").getString("JoinEntityCreated"));            return prepareCreate();        } catch (Exception e) {            JsfUtil.addErrorMessage(e, ResourceBundle.getBundle("/Bundle").getString("PersistenceErrorOccured"));            return null;        }    } I'll be refactoring this code shortly, but for now, it works. Iteration one is complete and being reviewed, and we've met the milestone. Here's to happy endings (and customers)! All the best,Mark

    Read the article

  • Is there limit of "join" or the "where" or length of SQL query ?

    - by Chetan sharma
    Actually i was trying to get data from elgg database based on multiple joins. It generated very big query with lots of JOIN statements and query never respond back. SELECT distinct e.* from test_entities e JOIN test_metadata m1 on e.guid = m1.entity_guid JOIN test_metastrings ms1 on ms1.id = m1.name_id JOIN test_metastrings mv1 on mv1.id = m1.value_id JOIN test_objects_entity obj on e.guid = obj.guid JOIN test_metadata m2 on e.guid = m2.entity_guid JOIN test_metastrings ms2 on ms2.id = m2.name_id JOIN test_metastrings mv2 on mv2.id = m2.value_id JOIN test_metadata m3 on e.guid = m3.entity_guid JOIN test_metastrings ms3 on ms3.id = m3.name_id JOIN test_metastrings mv3 on mv3.id = m3.value_id JOIN test_metadata m4 on e.guid = m4.entity_guid JOIN test_metastrings ms4 on ms4.id = m4.name_id JOIN test_metastrings mv4 on mv4.id = m4.value_id JOIN test_metadata m5 on e.guid = m5.entity_guid JOIN test_metastrings ms5 on ms5.id = m5.name_id JOIN test_metastrings mv5 on mv5.id = m5.value_id JOIN test_metadata m6 on e.guid = m6.entity_guid JOIN test_metastrings ms6 on ms6.id = m6.name_id JOIN test_metastrings mv6 on mv6.id = m6.value_id where ms1.string='expire_date' and mv1.string <= 1272565800 and ms2.string='homecity' and mv2.string LIKE "%dasf%" and ms3.string='schoolname' and mv3.string LIKE "%asdf%" and ms4.string='award_amount' and mv4.string <= 123 and ms5.string='no_of_awards' and mv5.string <= 7 and ms6.string='avg_rating' and mv6.string <= 2 and e.type = 'object' and e.subtype = 5 and e.site_guid = 1 and (obj.title like '%asdf%') OR (obj.description like '%asdf%') and ( (e.access_id = -2 AND e.owner_guid IN ( SELECT guid_one FROM test_entity_relationships WHERE relationship='friend' AND guid_two=5 )) OR (e.access_id IN (2,1) OR (e.owner_guid = 5) OR ( e.access_id = 0 AND e.owner_guid = 5 ) ) and e.enabled='yes') and ( (m1.access_id = -2 AND m1.owner_guid IN ( SELECT guid_one FROM test_entity_relationships WHERE relationship='friend' AND guid_two=5 )) OR (m1.access_id IN (2,1) OR (m1.owner_guid = 5) OR ( m1.access_id = 0 AND m1.owner_guid = 5 ) ) and m1.enabled='yes') and ( (m2.access_id = -2 AND m2.owner_guid IN ( SELECT guid_one FROM test_entity_relationships WHERE relationship='friend' AND guid_two=5 )) OR (m2.access_id IN (2,1) OR (m2.owner_guid = 5) OR ( m2.access_id = 0 AND m2.owner_guid = 5 ) ) and m2.enabled='yes') and ( (m3.access_id = -2 AND m3.owner_guid IN ( SELECT guid_one FROM test_entity_relationships WHERE relationship='friend' AND guid_two=5 )) OR (m3.access_id IN (2,1) OR (m3.owner_guid = 5) OR ( m3.access_id = 0 AND m3.owner_guid = 5 ) ) and m3.enabled='yes') and ( (m4.access_id = -2 AND m4.owner_guid IN ( SELECT guid_one FROM test_entity_relationships WHERE relationship='friend' AND guid_two=5 )) OR (m4.access_id IN (2,1) OR (m4.owner_guid = 5) OR ( m4.access_id = 0 AND m4.owner_guid = 5 ) ) and m4.enabled='yes') and ( (m5.access_id = -2 AND m5.owner_guid IN ( SELECT guid_one FROM test_entity_relationships WHERE relationship='friend' AND guid_two=5 )) OR (m5.access_id IN (2,1) OR (m5.owner_guid = 5) OR ( m5.access_id = 0 AND m5.owner_guid = 5 ) ) and m5.enabled='yes') and ( (m6.access_id = -2 AND m6.owner_guid IN ( SELECT guid_one FROM test_entity_relationships WHERE relationship='friend' AND guid_two=5 )) OR (m6.access_id IN (2,1) OR (m6.owner_guid = 5) OR ( m6.access_id = 0 AND m6.owner_guid = 5 ) ) and m6.enabled='yes') order by obj.title limit 0, 10 this is the query that i am running.

    Read the article

  • Can I expect a performance gain from removing this JOIN?

    - by makeee
    I have a "items" table with 1 million rows and a "users" table with 20,000 rows. When I select from the "items" table I do a join on the "users" table (items.user_id = user.id), so that I can grab the "username" from the users table. I'm considering adding a username column to the items table and removing the join. Can I expect a decent performance increase from this? It's already quite fast, but it would be nice to decrease my load (which is pretty high). The downside is that if the user changes their username, items will still reflect their old username, but this is okay with me if I can expect a decent performance increase. I'm asking stackoverflow because benchmarks aren't telling me too much. Both queries finish very quickly. Regardless, I'm wondering if removing the join would lighten load on the database to any significant degree.

    Read the article

  • python sqlite3 won't execute a join, but sqlite3 alone will

    - by Francis Davey
    Using the sqlite3 standard library in python 2.6.4, the following query works fine on sqlite3 command line: select segmentid, node_t, start, number,title from ((segments inner join position using (segmentid)) left outer join titles using (legid, segmentid)) left outer join numbers using (start, legid, version); But If I execute it via the sqlite3 library in python I get an error: >>> conn=sqlite3.connect('data/test.db') >>> conn.execute('''select segmentid, node_t, start, number,title from ((segments inner join position using (segmentid)) left outer join titles using (legid, segmentid)) left outer join numbers using (start, legid, version)''') Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> sqlite3.OperationalError: cannot join using column start - column not present in both tables The (computed) table on the left hand side of the join appears to have the relevant column because if I check it by itself I get: >>> conn.execute('''select * from ((segments inner join position using (segmentid)) left outer join titles using (legid, segmentid)) limit 20''').description (('segmentid', None, None, None, None, None, None), ('html', None, None, None, None, None, None), ('node_t', None, None, None, None, None, None), ('legid', None, None, None, None, None, None), ('version', None, None, None, None, None, None), ('start', None, None, None, None, None, None), ('title', None, None, None, None, None, None)) My schema is: CREATE TABLE leg (legid integer primary key, t char(16), year char(16), no char(16)); CREATE TABLE numbers ( number char(16), legid integer, version integer, start integer, end integer, prev integer, prev_number char(16), next integer, next_number char(16), primary key (number, legid, version)); CREATE TABLE position ( segmentid integer, legid integer, version integer, start integer, primary key (segmentid, legid, version)); CREATE TABLE 'segments' (segmentid integer primary key, html text, node_t integer); CREATE TABLE titles (legid integer, segmentid integer, title text, primary key (legid, segmentid)); CREATE TABLE versions (legid integer, version integer, primary key (legid, version)); CREATE INDEX idx_numbers_start on numbers (legid, version, start); I am baffled as to what I am doing wrong. I have tried quitting/restarting both the python and sqlite command lines and can't see what I'm doing wrong. It may be completely obvious.

    Read the article

  • Hibernate noob fetch join problem

    - by Bruce
    Hi all I have two classes, Test2 and Test3. Test2 has an attribute test3 that is an instance of Test3. In other words, I have a unidirectional OneToOne association, with test2 having a reference to test3. When I select Test2 from the db, I can see that a separate select is being made to get the details of the associated test3 class. This is the famous 1+N selects problem. To fix this to use a single select, I am trying to use the fetch=join annotation, which I understand to be @Fetch(FetchMode.JOIN) However, with fetch set to join, I still see separate selects. Here are the relevant portions of my setup.. hibernate.cfg.xml: <property name="max_fetch_depth">2</property> Test2: public class Test2 { @OneToOne (cascade=CascadeType.ALL , fetch=FetchType.EAGER) @JoinColumn (name="test3_id") @Fetch(FetchMode.JOIN) public Test3 getTest3() { return test3; } NB I set the FetchType to EAGER out of desperation, even though it defaults to EAGER anyway for OneToOne mappings, but it made no difference. Thanks for any help! Edit: I've pretty much given up on trying to use FetchMode.JOIN - can anyone confirm that they have got it to work ie produce a left outer join? In the docs I see that "Usually, the mapping document is not used to customize fetching. Instead, we keep the default behavior, and override it for a particular transaction, using left join fetch in HQL" If I do a left join fetch instead: query = session.createQuery("from Test2 t2 left join fetch t2.test3"); then I do indeed get the results I want - ie a left outer join in the query.

    Read the article

  • Need help in SQL and Sequel involving inner join and where/filter

    - by mhd
    Need help transfer sql to sequel: SQL: SELECT table_t.curr_id FROM table_t INNER JOIN table_c ON table_c.curr_id = table_t.curr_id INNER JOIN table_b ON table_b.bic = table_t.bic WHERE table_c.alpha_id = 'XXX' AND table_b.name='Foo'; I'm stuck in the sequel, I don't know how to filter, so far like this: cid= table_t.select(:curr_id). join(:table_c, :curr_id=>:curr_id). join(:table_b, :bic=>:bic). filter( ????? ) Answer with better idiom than above is appreciated as well.Tnx. UPDATE: I have to modify a little to make it works cid = DB[:table_t].select(:table_t__curr_id). join(:table_c, :curr_id=>:curr_id). join(:table_b, :bic=>:table_t__bic). #add table_t or else ERROR: column table_c.bic does not exist filter(:table_c__alpha_id => 'XXX', :table_b__name => 'Foo') without filter, cid = DB[:table_t].select(:table_t__curr_id). join(:table_c, :curr_id=>:curr_id, :alpha_id=>'XXX'). join(:table_b, :bic=>:table_t__bic, :name=>'Foo') btw I use pgsql 9.0

    Read the article

  • Change query to use a LEFT join

    - by Craig
    I have a query which is failing, as it needs to be using LEFT JOIN, as opposed to the default INNER JOIN used by the 'join' syntax: var users = (from u in this._context.Users join p in this._context.Profiles on u.ProfileID equals p.ID join vw in this._context.vw_Contacts on u.ContactID equals vw.ID orderby u.Code select new { ID = u.ID, profileId = p.ID, u.ContactID, u.Code, u.UserName, vw.FileAs, p.Name, u.LastLogout, u.Inactive, u.Disabled }).ToList(); How would i re-write this so that is utilises a LEFT join?

    Read the article

  • How can you access two identically-named columns in a MySQL LEFT JOIN query?

    - by George Edison
    I have two tables. table_x: id INT(11) tag INT(11) table_tags: id INT(11) name VARCHAR(255) Then I use PHP to perform the following query: SELECT * FROM table_x LEFT JOIN table_tags ON table_x.tag = table_tags.id The only problem is: how do I access table_x.id and table_tags.id in the results? Here is the PHP code: $query = "SELECT * FROM table_x LEFT JOIN table_tags ON table_x.tag = table_tags.id"; $results = mysql_query($query); while($row = mysql_fetch_array($results)) { // how do I now access table_x.id and table_tags.id ??? }

    Read the article

  • Inequality joins, Asynchronous transformations and Lookups : SSIS

    - by jamiet
    It is pretty much accepted by SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) developers that synchronous transformations are generally quicker than asynchronous transformations (for a description of synchronous and asynchronous transformations go read Asynchronous and synchronous data flow components). Notice I said “generally” and not “always”; there are circumstances where using asynchronous transformations can be beneficial and in this blog post I’ll demonstrate such a scenario, one that is pretty common when building data warehouses. Imagine I have a [Customer] dimension table that manages information about all of my customers as a slowly-changing dimension. If that is a type 2 slowly changing dimension then you will likely have multiple rows per customer in that table. Furthermore you might also have datetime fields that indicate the effective time period of each member record. Here is such a table that contains data for four dimension members {Terry, Max, Henry, Horace}: Notice that we have multiple records per customer and that the [SCDStartDate] of a record is equivalent to the [SCDEndDate] of the record that preceded it (if there was one). (Note that I am on record as saying I am not a fan of this technique of storing an [SCDEndDate] but for the purposes of clarity I have included it here.) Anyway, the idea here is that we will have some incoming data containing [CustomerName] & [EffectiveDate] and we need to use those values to lookup [Customer].[CustomerId]. The logic will be: Lookup a [CustomerId] WHERE [CustomerName]=[CustomerName] AND [SCDStartDate] <= [EffectiveDate] AND [EffectiveDate] <= [SCDEndDate] The conventional approach to this would be to use a full cached lookup but that isn’t an option here because we are using inequality conditions. The obvious next step then is to use a non-cached lookup which enables us to change the SQL statement to use inequality operators: Let’s take a look at the dataflow: Notice these are all synchronous components. This approach works just fine however it does have the limitation that it has to issue a SQL statement against your lookup set for every row thus we can expect the execution time of our dataflow to increase linearly in line with the number of rows in our dataflow; that’s not good. OK, that’s the obvious method. Let’s now look at a different way of achieving this using an asynchronous Merge Join transform coupled with a Conditional Split. I’ve shown it post-execution so that I can include the row counts which help to illustrate what is going on here: Notice that there are more rows output from our Merge Join component than on the input. That is because we are joining on [CustomerName] and, as we know, we have multiple records per [CustomerName] in our lookup set. Notice also that there are two asynchronous components in here (the Sort and the Merge Join). I have embedded a video below that compares the execution times for each of these two methods. The video is just over 8minutes long. View on Vimeo  For those that can’t be bothered watching the video I’ll tell you the results here. The dataflow that used the Lookup transform took 36 seconds whereas the dataflow that used the Merge Join took less than two seconds. An illustration in case it is needed: Pretty conclusive proof that in some scenarios it may be quicker to use an asynchronous component than a synchronous one. Your mileage may of course vary. The scenario outlined here is analogous to performance tuning procedural SQL that uses cursors. It is common to eliminate cursors by converting them to set-based operations and that is effectively what we have done here. Our non-cached lookup is performing a discrete operation for every single row of data, exactly like a cursor does. By eliminating this cursor-in-disguise we have dramatically sped up our dataflow. I hope all of that proves useful. You can download the package that I demonstrated in the video from my SkyDrive at http://cid-550f681dad532637.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/Public/BlogShare/20100514/20100514%20Lookups%20and%20Merge%20Joins.zip Comments are welcome as always. @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008: Comparing similar records - Need to still display an ID for a record when the JOIN has no matches

    - by aleppke
    I'm writing a SQL Server 2008 report that will compare genetic test results for animals. A genetic test consists of an animalId, a gene and a result. Not all animals will have the same genes tested but I need to be able to display the results side-by-side for a given set of animals and only include the genes that are present for at least one of the selected animals. My TestResult table has the following data in it: animalId gene result 1 a CC 1 b CT 1 d TT 2 a CT 2 b CT 2 c TT 3 a CT 3 b TT 3 c CC 3 d CC 3 e TT I need to generate a result set that looks like the following. Note that Animal 3 is not being displayed (user doesn't want to see its results) and neither are results for Gene "e" since neither Animal 1 nor Animal 2 have a result for that gene: SireID SireResult CalfID CalfResult Gene 1 CC 2 CT a 1 CT 2 CT b 1 NULL 2 TT c 1 TT 2 NULL d But I can only manage to get this: SireID SireResult CalfID CalfResult Gene 1 CC 2 CT a 1 CT 2 CT b NULL NULL 2 TT c 1 TT NULL NULL d This is the query I'm using. SELECT sire.animalId AS 'SireID' ,sire.result AS 'SireResult' ,calf.animalId AS 'CalfID' ,calf.result AS 'CalfResult' ,sire.gene AS 'Gene' FROM (SELECT s.animalId ,s.result ,m1.gene FROM (SELECT [animalId ] ,result ,gene FROM TestResult WHERE animalId IN (1)) s FULL JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT gene FROM TestResult WHERE animalId IN (1, 2)) m1 ON s.marker = m1.marker) sire FULL JOIN (SELECT c.animalId ,c.result ,m2.gene FROM (SELECT animalId ,result ,gene FROM TestResult WHERE animalId IN (2)) c FULL JOIN (SELECT DISTINCT gene FROM TestResult WHERE animalId IN (1, 2)) m2 ON c.gene = m2.gene) calf ON sire.gene = calf.gene How do I get the SireIDs and CalfIDs to display their values when they don't have a record associated with a particular Gene? I was thinking of using COALESCE but I can't figure out how to specify the correct animalId to pass in. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Can I join two tables whereby the joined table is sorted by a certain column?

    - by Ferdy
    I'm not much of a database guru so I need some help on a query I'm working on. In my photo community project I want to richly visualize tags by not only showing the tag name and counter (# of images inside them), I also want to show a thumb of the most popular image inside the tag (most karma). The table setup is as follow: Image table holds basic image metadata, important is the karma field Imagefile table holds multiple entries per image, one for each format Tag table holds tag definitions Tag_map table maps tags to images In my usual trial and error query authoring I have come this far: SELECT * FROM (SELECT tag.name, tag.id, COUNT(tag_map.tag_id) as cnt FROM tag INNER JOIN tag_map ON (tag.id = tag_map.tag_id) INNER JOIN image ON tag_map.image_id = image.id INNER JOIN imagefile on image.id = imagefile.image_id WHERE imagefile.type = 'smallthumb' GROUP BY tag.name ORDER BY cnt DESC) as T1 WHERE cnt > 0 ORDER BY cnt DESC [column clause of inner query snipped for the sake of simplicity] This query gives me somewhat what I need. The outer query makes sure that only tags are returned for which there is at least 1 image. The inner query returns the tag details, such as its name, count (# of images) and the thumb. In addition, I can sort the inner query as I want (by most images, alphabetically, most recent, etc) So far so good. The problem however is that this query does not match the most popular image (most karma) of the tag, it seems to always take the most recent one in the tag. How can I make sure that the most popular image is matched with the tag?

    Read the article

  • How to join multiple tables using LINQ-to-SQL?

    - by user603245
    Hi! I'm quite new to linq, so please bear with me. I'm working on a asp.net webpage and I want to add a "search function" (textbox where user inputs name or surname or both or just parts of it and gets back all related information). I have two tables ("Person" and "Application") and I want to display some columns from Person (name and surname) and some from Application (score, position,...). I know how I could do it using sql, but I want to learn more about linq and thus I want to do it using linq. For now I got two main ideas: 1.) var person = dataContext.GetTable<Person>(); var application = dataContext.GetTable<Application>(); var p1 = from p in Person where(p.Name.Contains(tokens[0]) || p.Surname.Contains(tokens[1])) select new {Id = p.Id, Name = p.Name, Surname = p.Surname}; //or maybe without this line //I don't know how to do the following properly var result = from a in Application where a.FK_Application.Equals(index) //just to get the "right" type of application //this is not right, but I don't know how to do it better join p1 on p1.Id == a.FK_Person 2.) The other idea is just to go through "Application" and instead of "join p1 ..." to use var result = from a in Application where a.FK_Application.Equals(index) //just to get the "right" type of application join p from Person on p.Id == a.FK_Person where p.Name.Contains(tokens[0]) || p.Surname.Contains(tokens[1]) I think that first idea is better for queries without the first "where" condition, which I also intended to use. Regardless of what is better (faster), I still don't know how to do it using linq. Also in the end I wanted to display / select just some parts (columns) of the result (joined tables + filtering conditions). I really want to know how to do such things using linq as I'll be dealing also with some similar problems with local data, where I can use only linq. Could somebody please explain me how to do it, I spent days trying to figure it out and searching on the internet for answers. Thank you for your time.

    Read the article

  • How can I join 3 tables with mysql & php?

    - by steven
    check out the page [url]http://www.mujak.com/test/test3.php[/url] It pulls the users Post,username,xbc/xlk tags etc which is perfect... BUT since I am pulling information from a MyBB bulletin board system, its quite different. When replying, people are are allowed to change the "Thread Subject" by simplying replying and changing it. I dont want it to SHOW the changed subject title, just the original title of all posts in that thread. By default it repies with "RE:thread title". They can easily edit this and it will show up in the "Subject" cell & people wont know which thread it was posted in because they changed their thread to when replying to the post. So I just want to keep the orginial thread title when they are replying. Make sense~?? Tables:mybb_users Fields:uid,username Tables:mybb_userfields Fields:ufid Tables:mybb_posts Fields:pid,tid,replyto,subject,ufid,username,uid,message Tables:mybb_threads Fields:tid,fid,subject,uid,username,lastpost,lastposter,lastposteruid I haev tried multiple queries with no success: $result = mysql_query(" SELECT * FROM mybb_users LEFT JOIN (mybb_posts, mybb_userfields, mybb_threads) ON ( mybb_userfields.ufid=mybb_posts.uid AND mybb_threads.tid=mybb_posts.tid AND mybb_users.uid=mybb_userfields.ufid ) WHERE mybb_posts.fid=42"); $result = mysql_query(" SELECT * FROM mybb_users LEFT JOIN (mybb_posts, mybb_userfields, mybb_threads) ON ( mybb_userfields.ufid=mybb_posts.uid AND mybb_threads.tid=mybb_posts.tid AND mybb_users.uid=mybb_posts.uid ) WHERE mybb_threads.fid=42"); $result = mysql_query(" SELECT * FROM mybb_posts LEFT JOIN (mybb_userfields, mybb_threads) ON ( mybb_userfields.ufid=mybb_posts.uid AND mybb_threads.tid=mybb_posts.tid ) WHERE mybb_posts.fid=42");

    Read the article

  • T-SQL - Left Outer Joins - Filters in the where clause versus the on clause.

    - by Greg Potter
    I am trying to compare two tables to find rows in each table that is not in the other. Table 1 has a groupby column to create 2 sets of data within table one. groupby number ----------- ----------- 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 4 Table 2 has only one column. number ----------- 1 3 4 So Table 1 has the values 1,2,4 in group 2 and Table 2 has the values 1,3,4. I expect the following result when joining for Group 2: `Table 1 LEFT OUTER Join Table 2` T1_Groupby T1_Number T2_Number ----------- ----------- ----------- 2 2 NULL `Table 2 LEFT OUTER Join Table 1` T1_Groupby T1_Number T2_Number ----------- ----------- ----------- NULL NULL 3 The only way I can get this to work is if I put a where clause for the first join: PRINT 'Table 1 LEFT OUTER Join Table 2, with WHERE clause' select table1.groupby as [T1_Groupby], table1.number as [T1_Number], table2.number as [T2_Number] from table1 LEFT OUTER join table2 --****************************** on table1.number = table2.number --****************************** WHERE table1.groupby = 2 AND table2.number IS NULL and a filter in the ON for the second: PRINT 'Table 2 LEFT OUTER Join Table 1, with ON clause' select table1.groupby as [T1_Groupby], table1.number as [T1_Number], table2.number as [T2_Number] from table2 LEFT OUTER join table1 --****************************** on table2.number = table1.number AND table1.groupby = 2 --****************************** WHERE table1.number IS NULL Can anyone come up with a way of not using the filter in the on clause but in the where clause? The context of this is I have a staging area in a database and I want to identify new records and records that have been deleted. The groupby field is the equivalent of a batchid for an extract and I am comparing the latest extract in a temp table to a the batch from yesterday stored in a partioneds table, which also has all the previously extracted batches as well. Code to create table 1 and 2: create table table1 (number int, groupby int) create table table2 (number int) insert into table1 (number, groupby) values (1, 1) insert into table1 (number, groupby) values (2, 1) insert into table1 (number, groupby) values (1, 2) insert into table2 (number) values (1) insert into table1 (number, groupby) values (2, 2) insert into table2 (number) values (3) insert into table1 (number, groupby) values (4, 2) insert into table2 (number) values (4) EDIT: A bit more context - depending on where I put the filter I different results. As stated above the where clause gives me the correct result in one state and the ON in the other. I am looking for a consistent way of doing this. Where - select table1.groupby as [T1_Groupby], table1.number as [T1_Number], table2.number as [T2_Number] from table1 LEFT OUTER join table2 --****************************** on table1.number = table2.number --****************************** WHERE table1.groupby = 2 AND table2.number IS NULL Result: T1_Groupby T1_Number T2_Number ----------- ----------- ----------- 2 2 NULL On - select table1.groupby as [T1_Groupby], table1.number as [T1_Number], table2.number as [T2_Number] from table1 LEFT OUTER join table2 --****************************** on table1.number = table2.number AND table1.groupby = 2 --****************************** WHERE table2.number IS NULL Result: T1_Groupby T1_Number T2_Number ----------- ----------- ----------- 1 1 NULL 2 2 NULL 1 2 NULL Where (table 2 this time) - select table1.groupby as [T1_Groupby], table1.number as [T1_Number], table2.number as [T2_Number] from table2 LEFT OUTER join table1 --****************************** on table2.number = table1.number AND table1.groupby = 2 --****************************** WHERE table1.number IS NULL Result: T1_Groupby T1_Number T2_Number ----------- ----------- ----------- NULL NULL 3 On - select table1.groupby as [T1_Groupby], table1.number as [T1_Number], table2.number as [T2_Number] from table2 LEFT OUTER join table1 --****************************** on table2.number = table1.number --****************************** WHERE table1.number IS NULL AND table1.groupby = 2 Result: T1_Groupby T1_Number T2_Number ----------- ----------- ----------- (0) rows returned

    Read the article

  • Clean file separators in Ruby without File.join

    - by kerry
    I love anything that can be done to clean up source code and make it more readable.  So, when I came upon this post, I was pretty excited.  This is precisely the kind of thing I love. I have never felt good about ‘file separator’ strings b/c of their ugliness and verbosity. In Java we have: 1: String path = "lib"+File.separator+"etc"; And in Ruby a popular method is: 1: path = File.join("lib","etc") Now, by overloading the ‘/’ operator on a String in Ruby: 1: class String 2: def /(str_to_join) 3: File.join(self, str_to_join) 4: end 5: end We can now write: 1: path = 'lib'/'src'/'main' Brilliant!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >