Search Results

Search found 1124 results on 45 pages for 'indexing'.

Page 17/45 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

  • List of all index & index columns in SQL Server DB

    - by Anton Gogolev
    How do I get a list of all index & index columns in SQL Server 2005+? The closest I could get is: select s.name, t.name, i.name, c.name from sys.tables t inner join sys.schemas s on t.schema_id = s.schema_id inner join sys.indexes i on i.object_id = t.object_id inner join sys.index_columns ic on ic.object_id = t.object_id inner join sys.columns c on c.object_id = t.object_id and ic.column_id = c.column_id where i.index_id > 0 and i.type in (1, 2) -- clustered & nonclustered only and i.is_primary_key = 0 -- do not include PK indexes and i.is_unique_constraint = 0 -- do not include UQ and i.is_disabled = 0 and i.is_hypothetical = 0 and ic.key_ordinal > 0 order by ic.key_ordinal which is not exactly what I want. What I want is to list all user-defined indexes (which means no indexes which support unique constraints & primary keys) with all columns (ordered by how do they apper in index definition) plus as much metadata as possible.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER - Detecting non-indexed columns but used in WHERE clause

    - by Vadi
    How to detect a column included in WHERE clause but used in indexed? Little Background: Until the time the table has few number of records things will be okay, once it started having millions of records then index should be created for a column which is used in WHERE clauses in stored procs, inline queries etc., Since we have hundreds of stored procs and queries that often gets changed by the devs I wanted to have a automated way of identifying those columns that are used in WHERE clauses but not an index is created. How to do that in SQL SERVER 2008?

    Read the article

  • jQuery - Finding the element index relative to its container

    - by Hary
    Here's my HTMl structure: <div id="main"> <div id="inner-1"> <img /> <img /> <img /> </div> <div id="inner-2"> <img /> <img class="selected" /> <img /> </div> <div id="inner-3"> <img /> <img /> <img /> </div> </div> What I'm trying to do is get the index of the img.selected element relative to the #main div. So in this example, the index should be 4 (assuming 0 based index) and not 1. My usual way to go about getting indexes is using $element.prevAll().length but, obviously, that will return the index relative to the #inner-2 div. I've tried using $('img.selected').prevAll('#main').length but that's returning 0 :/

    Read the article

  • Multi-variable indexes in postgres

    - by Jackson Davis
    Im looking at an application where I will be doing quite a few SELECTs where I am trying to find column_a = x AND column_b = y. Is the correct to create that index that something like the following? CREATE INDEX index_name ON table (column_a, column_b)

    Read the article

  • How to refer to items in Dictionary<string, string> by integer index?

    - by Edward Tanguay
    I made a Dictionary<string, string> collection so that I can quickly reference the items by their string identifier. But I now also need to access this collective by index counter (foreach won't work in my real example). What do I have to do to the collection below so that I can access its items via integer index as well? using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Text; namespace TestDict92929 { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Dictionary<string, string> events = new Dictionary<string, string>(); events.Add("first", "this is the first one"); events.Add("second", "this is the second one"); events.Add("third", "this is the third one"); string description = events["second"]; Console.WriteLine(description); string description = events[1]; //error Console.WriteLine(description); } } }

    Read the article

  • compare two following values in numpy array

    - by Billy Mitchell
    What is the best way to touch two following values in an numpy array? example: npdata = np.array([13,15,20,25]) for i in range( len(npdata) ): print npdata[i] - npdata[i+1] this looks really messed up and additionally needs exception code for the last iteration of the loop. any ideas? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Full-text search in C++

    - by Jen
    I have a database of many (though relatively short) HTML documents. I want users to be able to search this database by entering one or more search words in a C++ desktop application. Hence, I’m looking for a fast full-text search solution. Ideally, it should: Skip common words, such as the, of, and, etc. Support stemming, i.e. search for run also finds documents containing runner, running and ran. Be able to update its index in the background as new documents are added to the database. Be able to provide search word suggestions (like Google Suggest) To illustrate, assume the database has just two documents: Document 1: This is a test of text search. Document 2: Testing is fun. The following words should be in the index: fun, search, test, testing, text. If the user types t in the search box, I want the application to be able to suggest test, testing and text (Ideally, the application should be able to query the search engine for the 10 most common search words starting with t). A search for testing should return both documents. Can you suggest a C or C++ based solution? (I’ve briefly reviewed CLucene and Xapian, but I’m not sure if either will address my needs, especially querying the search word indexes for the suggest feature).

    Read the article

  • A question about indexes regarding to the gain of inserts & updates in database

    - by Mestika
    Hi, I’m having a question about the fine line between the gain of an index to a table there is growing steadily in size every month and the gain of queries with an index. The situation is, that I’ve two tables, Table1 and Table2. Each table grows slowly but regularly each month (with about 100 new rows for Table1 and a couple of rows for Table2). My concrete question is whether to have an index or to drop it. I’ve made some measurement that an covering index on Table2 improve my SELECT queries and some rather much but again, I’ve to consider the pros and cons but having a really hard time to decide. For Table1 it might not be necessary to have an index because the SELECT queries there is not that common. I would appreciate any suggestion, tips or just good advice to what is a good solution. By the way, I’m using IBM DB2 version 9.7 as my Database system Sincerely Mestika

    Read the article

  • How to index a date column with null values?

    - by Heinz Z.
    How should I index a date column when some rows has null values? We have to select rows between a date range and rows with null dates. We use Oracle 9.2 and higher. Options I found Using a bitmap index on the date column Using an index on date column and an index on a state field which value is 1 when the date is null Using an index on date column and an other granted not null column My thoughts to the options are: to 1: the table have to many different values to use an bitmap index to 2: I have to add an field only for this purpose and to change the query when I want to retrieve the null date rows to 3: locks tricky to add an field to an index which is not really needed What is the best practice for this case? Thanks in advance Some infos I have read: Oracle Date Index When does Oracle index null column values?

    Read the article

  • Creating an appropriate index for a frequently used query in SQL Server

    - by Slauma
    In my application I have two queries which will be quite frequently used. The Where clauses of these queries are the following: WHERE FieldA = @P1 AND (FieldB = @P2 OR FieldC = @P2) and WHERE FieldA = @P1 AND FieldB = @P2 P1 and P2 are parameters entered in the UI or coming from external datasources. FieldA is an int and highly on-unique, means: only two, three, four different values in a table with say 20000 rows FieldB is a varchar(20) and is "almost" unique, there will be only very few rows where FieldB might have the same value FieldC is a varchar(15) and also highly distinct, but not as much as FieldB FieldA and FieldB together are unique (but do not form my primary key, which is a simple auto-incrementing identity column with a clustered index) I'm wondering now what's the best way to define an index to speed up specifically these two queries. Shall I define one index with... FieldB (or better FieldC here?) FieldC (or better FieldB here?) FieldA ... or better two indices: FieldB FieldA and FieldC FieldA Or are there even other and better options? What's the best way and why? Thank you for suggestions in advance!

    Read the article

  • SOLR not searching on certain fields

    - by andy
    hey guys, just installed solr, edited the schema.xml, and am now trying to index it and search on it with some test data. In the XML file I'm sending to SOLR, one of my fields look like this: <field name="PageContent"><![CDATA[<p>some text in a paragrah tag</p>]]></field> There's HTML there, so I've wrapped it in CDATA. In my SOLR schema.xml, the definition for that field looks like this: <field name="PageContent" type="text" indexed="true" stored="true"/> When I ran the POSTing tool, everything went ok, but when I search for content which I know is inside the PageContent field, I get no results. However, when I set the node to PageContent, it works. But if I set it to any other field, it doesn't search in PageContent. Am I doing something wrong? what's the issue? thanks very much for any help cheers! UPDATE Just to clarify on the error. I've uploaded a "doc" with the following data: <field name="PageID">928</field> <field name="PageName">some name</field> <field name="PageContent"><![CDATA[<p>html content</p>]]></field> In my schema I've defined the fields as such: <field name="PageID" type="integer" indexed="true" stored="true" required="true"/> <field name="PageName" type="text" indexed="true" stored="true"/> <field name="PageContent" type="text" indexed="true" stored="true"/> And: <uniqueKey>PageID</uniqueKey> <defaultSearchField>PageName</defaultSearchField> Now, when I use the Solr admin tool and search for "some name" I get a result. But, if I search for "html content", or "html", or "content", or "928", I get no results why? cool, thanks!

    Read the article

  • mysql query and index

    - by parm.95
    Does this query will be faster with a index on "t.type1" and "x.type1" or only index on "x.type1" is enought? SELECT t.id, x.id FROM t INNER JOIN x ON x.type1=t.type1 WHERE t.id=1

    Read the article

  • MySQL forgot about automatically creating an index for a foreign key?

    - by bobo
    After running the following SQL statements, you will see that, MySQL has automatically created the non-unique index question_tag_tag_id_tag_id on the tag_id column for me after the first ALTER TABLE statement has run. But after the second ALTER TABLE statement has run, I think MySQL should also automatically create another non-unique index question_tag_question_id_question_id on the question_id column for me. But as you can see from the SHOW INDEXES statement output, it's not there. Why does MySQL forget about the second ALTER TABLE statement? By the way, since I have already created a unique index question_id_tag_id_idx used by both question_id and tag_id columns. Is creating a separate index for each of them redundant? mysql> DROP DATABASE mydatabase; Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec) mysql> CREATE DATABASE mydatabase; Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec) mysql> USE mydatabase; Database changed mysql> CREATE TABLE question (id BIGINT AUTO_INCREMENT, html TEXT, PRIMARY KEY(id)) ENGINE = INNODB; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.05 sec) mysql> CREATE TABLE tag (id BIGINT AUTO_INCREMENT, name VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL, UNIQUE INDEX name_idx (name), PRIMARY KEY(id)) ENGINE = INNODB; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.05 sec) mysql> CREATE TABLE question_tag (question_id BIGINT, tag_id BIGINT, UNIQUE INDEX question_id_tag_id_idx (question_id, tag_id), PRIMARY KEY(question_id, tag_id)) ENGINE = INNODB; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec) mysql> ALTER TABLE question_tag ADD CONSTRAINT question_tag_tag_id_tag_id FOREIGN KEY (tag_id) REFERENCES tag(id); Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.10 sec) Records: 0 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0 mysql> ALTER TABLE question_tag ADD CONSTRAINT question_tag_question_id_question_id FOREIGN KEY (question_id) REFERENCES question(id); Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.13 sec) Records: 0 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0 mysql> SHOW INDEXES FROM question_tag; +--------------+------------+----------------------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+ | Table | Non_unique | Key_name | Seq_in_index | Column_name | Collation | Cardinality | Sub_part | Packed | Null | Index_type | Comment | +--------------+------------+----------------------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+ | question_tag | 0 | PRIMARY | 1 | question_id | A | 0 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | | question_tag | 0 | PRIMARY | 2 | tag_id | A | 0 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | | question_tag | 0 | question_id_tag_id_idx | 1 | question_id | A | 0 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | | question_tag | 0 | question_id_tag_id_idx | 2 | tag_id | A | 0 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | | question_tag | 1 | question_tag_tag_id_tag_id | 1 | tag_id | A | 0 | NULL | NULL | | BTREE | | +--------------+------------+----------------------------+--------------+-------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------+------+------------+---------+ 5 rows in set (0.01 sec) mysql>

    Read the article

  • iphone indexed table view problem

    - by steveY
    I have a table view in which I'm using sectionIndexTitlesForTableView to display an index. However, when I scroll the table, the index scrolls with it. This also results in very slow refreshing of the table. Is there something obvious I could be doing wrong? I want the index to remain in place on the right while the table scrolls. This is the code I'm using for the index titles: - (NSArray *)sectionIndexTitlesForTableView:(UITableView *)tableView { NSMutableArray *tempArray = [[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; [tempArray addObject:@"A"]; [tempArray addObject:@"B"]; [tempArray addObject:@"C"]; [tempArray addObject:@"D"]; ... return tempArray; }

    Read the article

  • Lucene Analyzer to Use With Special Characters and Punctuation?

    - by Brandon
    I have a Lucene index that has several documents in it. Each document has multiple fields such as: Id Project Name Description The Id field will be a unique identifier such as a GUID, Project is a user's ProjectID and a user can only view documents for their project, and Name and Description contain text that can have special characters. When a user performs a search on the Name field, I want to be able to attempt to match the best I can such as: First Will return both: First.Last and First.Middle.Last Name can also be something like: Test (NameTest) Where, if a user types in 'Test', 'Name', or '(NameTest)', then they can find the result. However, if I say that Project is 'ProjectA' then that needs to be an exact match (case insensitive search). The same goes with the Id field. Which fields should I set up as Tokenized and which as Untokenized? Also, is there a good Analyzer I should consider to make this happen? I am stuck trying to decide the best route to implement the desired searching.

    Read the article

  • Approach for altering Primary Key from GUID to BigInt in SQL Server related tables

    - by Tom
    I have two tables with 10-20 million rows that have GUID primary keys and at leat 12 tables related via foreign key. The base tables have 10-20 indexes each. We are moving from GUID to BigInt primary keys. I'm wondering if anyone has any suggestions on an approach. Right now this is the approach I'm pondering: Drop all indexes and fkeys on all the tables involved. Add 'NewPrimaryKey' column to each table Make the key identity on the two base tables Script the data change "update table x, set NewPrimaryKey = y where OldPrimaryKey = z Rename the original primarykey to 'oldprimarykey' Rename the 'NewPrimaryKey' column 'PrimaryKey' Script back all the indexes and fkeys Does this seem like a good approach? Does anyone know of a tool or script that would help with this? TD: Edited per additional information. See this blog post that addresses an approach when the GUID is the Primary: http://www.sqlmag.com/blogs/sql-server-questions-answered/sql-server-questions-answered/tabid/1977/entryid/12749/Default.aspx

    Read the article

  • How to get Google Search Query Kind of Content Indexed ?

    - by Sunil
    Hello: I was looking for something like flash grabber and I came across this result http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/flash+grabber+firefox/ I am just wondering how giveawayoftheday has managed to get "flash+grabber+firefox/" indexed in Google ? Did they submit via Google Sitemap or is Google doing this on its own ? Or something else ? Kindly enlighten. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Database indexes and their Big-O notation

    - by miket2e
    I'm trying to understand the performance of database indexes in terms of Big-O notation. Without knowing much about it, I would guess that: Querying on a primary key or unique index will give you a O(1) lookup time. Querying on a non-unique index will also give a O(1) time, albeit maybe the '1' is slower than for the unique index (?) Querying on a column without an index will give a O(N) lookup time (full table scan). Is this generally correct ? Will querying on a primary key ever give worse performance than O(1) ? My specific concern is for SQLite, but I'd be interested in knowing to what extent this varies between different databases too.

    Read the article

  • Slow query with unexpected scan

    - by zerkms
    Hello I have this query: SELECT * FROM SAMPLE SAMPLE INNER JOIN TEST TEST ON SAMPLE.SAMPLE_NUMBER = TEST.SAMPLE_NUMBER INNER JOIN RESULT RESULT ON TEST.TEST_NUMBER = RESULT . TEST_NUMBER WHERE SAMPLED_DATE BETWEEN '2010-03-17 09:00' AND '2010-03-17 12:00' the biggest table here is RESULT, contains 11.1M records. The left 2 tables about 1M. this query works slowly (more than 10 minutes) and returns about 800 records. executing plan shows clustered index scan over all 11M records. RESULT.TEST_NUMBER is a clustered primary key. if I change 2010-03-17 09:00 to 2010-03-17 10:00 - i get about 40 records. it executes for 300ms. and plan shows clustered index seek if i replace * in SELECT clause to RESULT.TEST_NUMBER (covered with index) - then all become fast in first case too. this points to hdd io issues, but doesn't clarifies changing plan. so, any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Keeping DB Table sorted using multi-field formula (Microsoft SQL Server)

    - by user298167
    I have a JOB table, with two interesting columns: Creation Date Importance (high - 3, medium 2, low - 1). A JOB record's priority calculated like this: Priority = Importance * (time passed since creation) The problem is, every time I would like to pick 200 jobs with highest priority, and I don't want to resort the table. Is there a way to keep rows sorted? I was also thinking about having three tables one for High, Medium and Low and then sort those by Creation Date.

    Read the article

  • Two Applications using the same index file with Hibernate Search

    - by Dominik Obermaier
    Hi, I want to know if it is possible to use the same index file for an entity in two applications. Let me be more specific: We have an online Application with a frondend for the users and an application for the backend tasks (= administrator interface). Both are running on the same JBOSS AS. Both Applications are using the same database, so they are using the same entities. Of course the package names are not the same in both applications for the entities. So this is our usecase: A user should be able to search via the frondend. The user is only allowed to see results which are tagged with "visible". This tagging happens in our admin interface, so the index for the frontend should be updated every time an entity is tagged as "visible" in the backend. Of course both applications do have the same index root folder. In my index folder there are 2 index files: de.x.x.admin.model.Product de.x.x.frondend.model.Product How to "merge" this via Hibernate Search Configuration? I just did not get it via the documentation... Thanks for any help!

    Read the article

  • Finding a list of indices from master array using secondary array with non-unique entries

    - by fideli
    I have a master array of length n of id numbers that apply to other analogous arrays with corresponding data for elements in my simulation that belong to those id numbers (e.g. data[id]). Were I to generate a list of id numbers of length m separately and need the information in the data array for those ids, what is the best method of getting a list of indices idx of the original array of ids in order to extract data[idx]? That is, given: a=numpy.array([1,3,4,5,6]) # master array b=numpy.array([3,4,3,6,4,1,5]) # secondary array I would like to generate idx=numpy.array([1,2,1,4,2,0,3]) The array a is typically in sequential order but it's not a requirement. Also, array b will most definitely have repeats and will not be in any order. My current method of doing this is: idx=numpy.array([numpy.where(a==bi)[0][0] for bi in b]) I timed it using the following test: a=(numpy.random.uniform(100,size=100)).astype('int') b=numpy.repeat(a,100) timeit method1(a,b) 10 loops, best of 3: 53.1 ms per loop Is there a better way of doing this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >