Search Results

Search found 40870 results on 1635 pages for 'database design'.

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

Page 145/1635 | < Previous Page | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >

  • Data Modeling Help - Do I add another table, change existing table's usage, or something else?

    - by StackOverflowNewbie
    Assume I have the following tables and relationships: Person - Id (PK) - Name A Person can have 0 or more pets: Pet - Id (PK) - PersonId (FK) - Name A person can have 0 or more attributes (e.g. age, height, weight): PersonAttribute _ Id (PK) - PersonId (FK) - Name - Value PROBLEM: I need to represent pet attributes, too. As it turns out, these pet attributes are, in most cases, identical to the attributes of a person (e.g. a pet can have an age, height, and weight too). How do I represent pet attributes? Do I create a PetAttribute table? PetAttribute Id (PK) PetId (FK) Name Value Do I change PersonAttribute to GenericAttribute and have 2 foreign keys in it - one connecting to Person, the other connecting to Pet? GenericAttribute Id (PK) PersonId (FK) PetId (FK) Name Value NOTE: if PersonId is set, then PetId is not set. If PetId is set, PersonId is not set. Do something else?

    Read the article

  • Is the set of data always normalized in one form or the other in Databases

    - by manugupt1
    Suppose I have a set of data, given the data and the relation schemas can I assume that the set of data is normalized in one form or the other. In my opinion raw data given, has to be normalized into some form. However a discussion with a friend has led to ask me this question here. To expound more on the question, I would say given a set of functional dependencies for a relation or table, is it guaranteed that the table would atleast be in 1NF if not others

    Read the article

  • What does ER_WARN_FIELD_RESOLVED mean?

    - by VolkerK
    When SHOW WARNINGS after a EXPLAIN EXTENDED shows a Note 1276 Field or reference 'test.foo.bar' of SELECT #2 was resolved in SELECT #1 what exactly does that mean and what impact does it have? In my case it prevents mysql from using what seems to be a perfectly good index. But it's not about fixing that specific query (as it is an irrelevant test). I found http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/error-messages-server.html butError: 1276 SQLSTATE: HY000 (ER_WARN_FIELD_RESOLVED) Message: Field or reference '%s%s%s%s%s' of SELECT #%d was resolved in SELECT #%d isn't much of an explaination.

    Read the article

  • Strategy in storing ad-hoc numbers/constants?

    - by Jiho Han
    I have a need to store a number of ad-hoc figures and constants for calculation. These numbers change periodically but they are different type of values. One might be a balance, a money amount, another might be an interest rate, and yet another might be a ratio of some kind. These numbers are then used in a calculation that involve other more structured figures. I'm not certain what the best way to store these in a relational DB is - that's the choice of storage for the app. One way, I've done before, is to create a very generic table that stores the values as text. I might store the data type along with it but the consumer knows what type it is so, in situations I didn't even need to store the data type. This kind of works fine but I am not very fond of the solution. Should I break down each of the numbers into specific categories and create tables that way? For example, create Rates table, and Balances table, etc.?

    Read the article

  • Low cost way to host a large table yet keep the performance scalable?

    - by Leo Liang
    I have a growing table storing time series data, 500M entries now, and 200K new records every day. The total size is around 15GB for now. My clients are querying the table via a PHP script mostly, and the size of the result set is around 10K records (not very large). select * from T where timestamp > X and timestamp < Y and additionFilters And I want this operation cheap. Currently my table is hosting in Postgres 7, on a single 16G memory Box, and I would love to see some good suggestion for me to host this in low cost and also allow me to scale up for performance if needed. The table serves: 1. Query: 90% 2. Insert: 9.9% 2. Update: 0.1% <-- very rare.

    Read the article

  • I want define tables from a part of my ER Diagram.

    - by M R Jafari
    I have a ER-Diagram (Show in http://www.4freeimagehost.com/show.php?i=f82997ca4d5d.png). In the diagram you see 2 entities and a 1:N relataion together. Project has 2 columns as ProjectID, ProjectName. Employee has 3 colums as EmployeeID, EmployeeName and ProjectID. A project has ONLY 1 project-manager and project-manager is a employee. What columns add them?

    Read the article

  • Define tables from a part of my ER Diagram.

    - by M R Jafari
    I have a ER-Diagram (Show in http://www.4freeimagehost.com/show.php?i=f82997ca4d5d.png). In the diagram you see 2 entities and a 1:N relataion together. Project has 2 columns as ProjectID, ProjectName. Employee has 3 colums as EmployeeID, EmployeeName and ProjectID. A project has ONLY 1 project-manager and project-manager is a employee. What columns add them?

    Read the article

  • MySQL triggers cannot update rows in same table the trigger is assigned to. Suggested workaround?

    - by Cory House
    MySQL doesn't currently support updating rows in the same table the trigger is assigned to since the call could become recursive. Does anyone have suggestions on a good workaround/alternative? Right now my plan is to call a stored procedure that performs the logic I really wanted in a trigger, but I'd love to hear how others have gotten around this limitation. Edit: A little more background as requested. I have a table that stores product attribute assignments. When a new parent product record is inserted, I'd like the trigger to perform a corresponding insert in the same table for each child record. This denormalization is necessary for performance. MySQL doesn't support this and throws: Can't update table 'mytable' in stored function/trigger because it is already used by statement which invoked this stored function/trigger. A long discussion on the issue on the MySQL forums basically lead to: Use a stored proc, which is what I went with for now. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • How to store data in mysql, to get the fastest performance?

    - by Oden
    Hey, I'm thinking about it, witch of the following two query types would give me the fastest performance for a user messaging module inside my site: The first one i thought about is a multi table setup, witch has a connection table, and a main table. The connection table holds the connection between accounts, and the messaging table. In this case a query would look like following, to get some data of the author, and the messages he has sent: SELECT m.*, a.username FROM messages AS m LEFT JOIN connection_table ON (message_id = m.id) LEFT JOIN accounts AS a ON (account_id = a.id) WHERE m.id = '32341' Inserting into it is a little bit more "complicated". My other idea, and in my thought the better solution of this problem is that i store the data i would use in a connection table in the same table where is store the data of the mail. Sounds like i would get lots of duplicated entries, but no, because i have a field witch has text type and holds user ids like this: *24*32*249* If I want to query them, i use the mysql LIKE method. Deleting is an other problem, but for this i have one more field where i store who has deleted the post. Sad about that i don't know how to join this. So what would you recommend? Are there other ways?

    Read the article

  • How to maintain an ordered table with Core Data (or SQL) with insertions/deletions?

    - by Jean-Denis Muys
    This question is in the context of Core Data, but if I am not mistaken, it applies equally well to a more general SQL case. I want to maintain an ordered table using Core Data, with the possibility for the user to: reorder rows insert new lines anywhere delete any existing line What's the best data model to do that? I can see two ways: 1) Model it as an array: I add an int position property to my entity 2) Model it as a linked list: I add two one-to-one relations, next and previous from my entity to itself 1) makes it easy to sort, but painful to insert or delete as you then have to update the position of all objects that come after 2) makes it easy to insert or delete, but very difficult to sort. In fact, I don't think I know how to express a Sort Descriptor (SQL ORDER BY clause) for that case. Now I can imagine a variation on 1): 3) add an int ordering property to the entity, but instead of having it count one-by-one, have it count 100 by 100 (for example). Then inserting is as simple as finding any number between the ordering of the previous and next existing objects. The expensive renumbering only has to occur when the 100 holes have been filled. Making that property a float rather than an int makes it even better: it's almost always possible to find a new float midway between two floats. Am I on the right track with solution 3), or is there something smarter?

    Read the article

  • InnoDB or MyISAM - Why not both?

    - by Skoder
    Hey. I'm new to databases, and I've read various threads about which is better between InnoDB and MyISAM. It seems that the debates are to use or the other. Is it not possible to use both, depending on the table? What would be the disadvantages in doing this? As far as I can tell, the engine can be set during the CREATE TABLE command. Therefore, certain tables which are often read can be set to MyISAM, but tables that need transaction support can use InnoDB. I'm sure there must be a problem, otherwise this would be the ultimate answer :).

    Read the article

  • How do you store sets in Cassandra?

    - by Ben W
    I'd like to convert this JSON to a data model in Cassandra, where each of the arrays is a set with no duplicates: var data = { "data1": { "100": [1, 2, 3], "200": [3, 4] }, "data2": { "k1", [1], "k2", [4, 5] } } I'd like to query like this: data["data1"]["100"] to retrieve the sets. Anyone know how you might model this in Cassandra? (The only thing I came up with was columns whose name was a set value and the value of the column was an empty string, but that felt wrong.) It's not OK to serialize the sets as JSON or some other string, which would make this much easier. Also, I should note that it's OK to split data1 and data2 into separate ColumnFamilies, it's not necessary that they're keys in the same one.

    Read the article

  • How to use Unique Composite Key

    - by LifeH2O
    I have a table Item(ItemName*, ItemSize*, Price, Notes) I was making composite key of (ItemName,ItemSize) to uniquely identify item. And now after reading some answers on stackoverflow suggesting the use of UNIQUE i revised it as Item(ItemID*, ItemName, ItemSize, Price, Notes) But How to apply UNIQUE constraint on ItemName and ItemSize please correct if there is something wrong in question

    Read the article

  • which is better, creating a materialized view or a new table?

    - by Carson
    I have some demanding mysql queries that are needed to grap same up-to-date datasets from 5-7 mysql tables. I am thinking of creating a table or materialized view to gather all demanding columns from other tables, so as to increase performance. If I create that table, I may need to do extra insert / update / delete operation each time other tables updated. if I create materialized view, I am worrying if the performance can be greatly improved. Because data from other tables are changing very frequently. Most likely, the view may need to be created first everytime before selecting it. Any ideas? e.g. how to cache? other extra measures I can do?

    Read the article

  • How can i implement the NULL Object Design Pattern in a generic form?

    - by Colour Blend
    Is there a way to implement the null object design pattern in a generic form so that i don't need to implement it for every buisness object. For me, there are two high level classes you'll need for every business class. One for a single record and another for a list. So i think there should be a way to implement the NULL Object design pattern at a high level and not have to implement it for every class. Is there a way and how please?

    Read the article

  • Fastest way to perform subset test operation on a large collection of sets with same domain

    - by niktech
    Assume we have trillions of sets stored somewhere. The domain for each of these sets is the same. It is also finite and discrete. So each set may be stored as a bit field (eg: 0000100111...) of a relatively short length (eg: 1024). That is, bit X in the bitfield indicates whether item X (of 1024 possible items) is included in the given set or not. Now, I want to devise a storage structure and an algorithm to efficiently answer the query: what sets in the data store have set Y as a subset. Set Y itself is not present in the data store and is specified at run time. Now the simplest way to solve this would be to AND the bitfield for set Y with bit fields of every set in the data store one by one, picking the ones whose AND result matches Y's bitfield. How can I speed this up? Is there a tree structure (index) or some smart algorithm that would allow me to perform this query without having to AND every stored set's bitfield? Are there databases that already support such operations on large collections of sets?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server (2008) Creating link tables with unique rows

    - by peteski22
    Hi guys, I'm having trouble getting in touch with SQL Server Managemen Studio 2008! I want to create a link-table that will link an Event to many Audiences (EventAudience). An example of the data that could be contained: EventId | AudienceId 4 1 5 1 4 2 However, I don't want this: EventId | AudienceId 4 1 4 1 I've been looking at relationships and constraints.. but no joy so far! As a sneaky second part to the question, I would like to set up the Audience table such that if a row is deleted from Audience, it will clear down the EventAudience link table in a cascading manner. As always, ANY help/advice appreciated! Thanks Pete

    Read the article

  • What would be the best schema to store the 'address' for different entities?

    - by Cesar
    Suppose we're making a system where we have to store the addrees for buildings, persons, cars, etc. The address 'format' should be something like: State (From a State list) County (From a County List) Street (free text, like '5th Avenue') Number (free text, like 'Chrysler Building, Floor 10, Office No. 10') (Yes I don't live in U.S.A) What would be the best way to store that info: Should I have a Person_Address, Car_Address, ... Or the address info should be in columns on each entity, Could we have just one address table and try to link each row to a different entity? Or are there another 'better' way to handle this type of scenario? How would yo do it?

    Read the article

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

< Previous Page | 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152  | Next Page >