Search Results

Search found 14037 results on 562 pages for 'alter index'.

Page 19/562 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • index.php is not opening and running as download the file!

    - by artmania
    Hi friends, when I run the url at localhost for a php file like: http://localhost/project/admin/ it doesnt open the index.php, but gives panel for downloading the file with the message below :/ You have chosen to open which is a: application/x-httpd-php from: http://localhost What should Firefox do with this file? Openwith - Save... etc... any idea what is going on? :( appreciate helps!! thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • Cake Php After Php GD library installation comes error as appending 'index.php' in urls

    - by Jusnit
    I am using using Cake PHP with nginx server, inorder to enable captcha support , I installed the PHP GD library to server After the installation , All the urls in cake php is appended with 'index.php' Like www.mydomain.com/index.php instead of www.mydomain.com There cake php HtmlHelper link and image function, it all appending url "/index.php/img/flower.jpg" instead "/img/flower.jpg". Please help to solve this problem..

    Read the article

  • SQL Alter database failed - being used by checkpoint process

    - by Manjot
    Hi, On my SQL server 2008, i have a SQL agent job to restore a database on nightly basis. Procedure: find latest backup on other server Kill all conenction to the destination database Restore destination database with replace, recovery It failed last weekend because the database was being used by a system process (spid 11 checkpoint). since I couldnt kill the system process, I fixed this by restarting sql server. It failed this weekend as well with same error (checkpint process in this database as from sp_who) and when I run: SELECT session_id,request_id,command,status,start_time FROM sys.dm_exec_requests WHERE session_id = 11 It shows: 11 0 CHECKPOINT background 2010-04-06 10:17:49.103 I cant restart the server every time it fails. Can anyone please help me in fixing this? Thanks in advance Manjot

    Read the article

  • SQL server Rebuild Index

    - by Uday
    How can we know that before rebuilding index --How much space is required for the Transaction Log file( I knew we may required to consider sort_tempdb option , if we set to ON then we may required to ensure about tempdb space as well , Also if we set off then sorting, temporary indexes(during Build phase of rebuild index) creation will takes place in same Database.)?. Usually I have checked with Many users they say :Log file size =1.5 * Index size. How much space required for the Filegroup for datafiles-for ex-Consider I have one filegroup with 1 Mdf + ndf files. I have MSDN Link :those are pretty good information about per-requisites before rebuild index Link :http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms191183.aspx How can I tell exactly or Approx... to get Log/Primary FG size(or any other filegroup).

    Read the article

  • varnish: Alter response body

    - by soulmerge
    I need to rewrite the response received by the backend in varnish. The C-function is ready, embedded in the configuration file, and passes tests run on response headers. But I need to access the body of the response. I couldn't find a way to extract that from the response struct, though. Does anyone have an idea how I could extract it anyway?

    Read the article

  • static index.html file nginx

    - by Guntis
    We are using nginx with php-fpm. We plan to make first page static (generate html file). if we have 100 concurrent connections, how we can handle file regeneration? basically we need generate new file index_new.html, then delete index.html, and then move index_new.html to index.html. What happens when index.html file was deleted? User gets 404 error? Or nginx handles file from OS cache? One idea is to tell nginx, that 404 error is index_new.html and then not to move index_new to index, but copy. But i don't like idea about 404 error. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Apache rewrite rule to remove index.php and direct certain areas to https

    - by Stephen Martin
    I have a codeignitor application running on Apache2, I have managed to remove the index.php from the urls with this .htaccess RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule .* index.php/$0 [PT,L] now I want to make certain parts of the site redirect to https, I tried this: RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule .* index.php/$0 [PT,L] RewriteRule ^/?cpanel/(.*) https://%{SERVER_NAME}/cpanel/$1 [R,L] RewriteRule ^/?login/(.*) https://%{SERVER_NAME}/cpanel/$1 [R,L] But it doesn't work. I have to say when it comes to Apache rewrites im a noob. I can't find any tutorials on how to remove index.php and rewrite/redirect certain parts of the site to https. Any ideas, Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Serving index.html from a subdirectory

    - by xbonez
    In my document root, I have to directories: home and foobar, both with their own index.html files. How can I set it up so that when someone visits my site at example.com, they see the contents on home/index.html? I tried using an index.php with a redirect in document root, as well as a .htaccess redirect, but both of them change the URL in the browser to example.com/home/, which I would like to ideally avoid.

    Read the article

  • How to Modify Windows 7 Search to Index Removable Drives

    - by AMissico
    I have over 8GB in my "Code Library" that I maintain on a 64GB "ScanDisk Ultra Backup USB Device". Windows Search 4.0 (installed on Windows XP) can index removable drives, but Windows 7 (which uses Windows Search 4.0) cannot because the USB device identifies itself as a "Removable" drive and Windows 7 refuses to index removable drives. How can I modify Windows 7 Search to index removable drives? All suggestions welcome and greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Mysql: create index on 1.4 billion records

    - by SiLent SoNG
    I have a table with 1.4 billion records. The table structure is as follows: CREATE TABLE text_page ( text VARCHAR(255), page_id INT UNSIGNED ) ENGINE=MYISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=ascii The requirement is to create an index over the column text. The table size is about 34G. I have tried to create the index by the following statement: ALTER TABLE text_page ADD KEY ix_text (text) After 10 hours' waiting I finally give up this approach. Is there any workable solution on this problem? UPDATE: the table is unlikely to be updated or inserted or deleted. The reason why to create index on the column text is because this kind of sql query would be frequently executed: SELECT page_id FROM text_page WHERE text = ? UPDATE: I have solved the problem by partitioning the table. The table is partitioned into 40 pieces on column text. Then creating index on the table takes about 1 hours to complete. It seems that MySQL index creation becomes very slow when the table size becomes very big. And partitioning reduces the table into smaller trunks.

    Read the article

  • Fresh install of nginx causes browser to download index.html instead of opening it

    - by 010110110101
    When I view this in Chrome, http://localhost:90 the file is downloaded instead of displayed in Chrome. This question has been asked a lot of times on SO, but about index.php files. My problem is a plain jane HTML file, not a PHP file. That hasn't been asked yet. I was hoping the solution would be similar, but I haven't been able to figure it out. Here's my example.com.conf: server { server_name localhost; listen 90; root /var/www/example.com/html index index.html location / { try_file $uri $uri/ =404; } } My index.html file contains only two words, no markup Hello World I think it's the mime.types. The mime.types file has the entry for html in it. This is a fresh nginx install. nginx -t reports "test is successful"

    Read the article

  • MySQL reclaim index space after large delete?

    - by cdunn
    After performing a large delete in MySQL, I understand you need to run a NULL ALTER to reclaim disk space, is this also true for reclaiming index space? We have tables using 10G of index space and have deleted/archived large chunks of this data and unsure if we need to rebuild the table in order to decrease the size of the index. Can anyone offer any advice? We are trying to avoid rebuilding the table since it would take quite awhile and lock the table. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • multi-dimension array problem in RGSS (RPG Maker XP)

    - by AzDesign
    This is my first day code script in RMXP. I read tutorials, ruby references, etc and I found myself stuck on a weird problem, here is the scenario: I made a custom script to display layered images Create the class, create an instance variable to hold the array, create a simple method to add an element into it, done The draw method (skipped the rest of the code to this part): def draw image = [] index = 0 for i in [email protected] if image.size > 0 index = image.size end image[index] = Sprite.new image[index].bitmap = RPG::Cache.picture(@components[i][0] + '.png') image[index].x = @x + @components[i][1] image[index].y = @y + @components[i][2] image[index].z = @z + @components[i][3] @test =+ 1 end end Create an event that does these script > $layerz = Layerz.new $layerz.configuration[0] = ['root',0,0,1] > $layerz.configuration[1] = ['bark',0,10,2] > $layerz.configuration[2] = ['branch',0,30,3] > $layerz.configuration[3] = ['leaves',0,60,4] $layerz.draw Run, trigger the event and the result : ERROR! Undefined method`[]' for nil:NilClass pointing at this line on draw method : image[index].bitmap = RPG::Cache.picture(@components[i][0] + '.png') THEN, I changed the method like these just for testing: def draw image = [] index = 0 for i in [email protected] if image.size > 0 index = image.size end image[index] = Sprite.new image[index].bitmap = RPG::Cache.picture(@components[0][0] + '.png') image[index].x = @x + @components[0][1] image[index].y = @y + @components[0][2] image[index].z = @z + @components[0][3] @test =+ 1 end I changed the @components[i][0] to @components[0][0] and IT WORKS, but only the root as it not iterates to the next array index Im stuck here, see : > in single level array, @components[0] and @components[i] has no problem > in multi-dimension array, @components[0][0] has no problem BUT > in multi-dimension array, @components[i][0] produce the error as above > mentioned. any suggestion to fix the error ? Or did I wrote something wrong ?

    Read the article

  • How to get search engines to properly index an ajax driven search page

    - by Redtopia
    I have an ajax-driven search page that will allow users to search through a large collection of records. Each search result points to index.php?id=xyz (where xyz is the id of the record). The initial view does not have any records listed, and there is no interface that allows you to browse through all records. You can only conduct a search. How do I build the page so that spiders can crawl each record? Or is there another way (outside of this specific search page) that will allow me to point spiders to a list of all records. FYI, the collection is rather large, so dumping links to every record in a single request is not a workable solution. Outputting the records must be done in multiple requests. Each record can be viewed via a single page (eg "record.php?id=xyz"). I would like all the records indexed without anything indexed from the sitemap that shows where the records exist, for example: <a href="/result.php?id=record1">Record 1</a> <a href="/result.php?id=record2">Record 2</a> <a href="/result.php?id=record3">Record 3</a> <a href="/seo.php?page=2">next</a> Assuming this is the correct approach, I have these questions: How would the search engines find the crawl page? Is it possible to prevent the search engines from indexing the words "Record 1", etc. and "next"? Can I output only the links? Or maybe something like:  

    Read the article

  • SEO - Index images (lazyload)

    - by Guilherme Nascimento
    Note:My question is not about Javascript. I'm developing a plugin for jQuery/Mootols/Prototype, that work with DOM. This plugin will be to improve page performance (better user experience). The plugin will be distributed to other developers so that they can use in their projects. How does the lazyload: The images are only loaded when you scroll down the page (will look like this: http://www.appelsiini.net/projects/lazyload/enabled_timeout.html LazyLoad). But he does not need HTML5, I refer to this attribute: data-src="image.jpg" Two good examples of website use LazyLoad are: youtube.com (suggested videos) and facebook.com (photo gallery). I believe that the best alternative would be to use: <A href="image.jpg">Content for ALT=""</a> and convert using javascript, for this: <IMG alt="Content for ALT=\"\"" src="image.jpg"> Then you question me: Why do you want to do that anyway? I'll tell you: Because HTML5 is not supported by any browser (especially mobile) And the attribute data-src="image.jpg" not work at all Indexers. I need a piece of HTML code to be fully accessible to search engines. Otherwise the plugin will not be something good for other developers. I thought about doing so to help in indexing: <noscript><img src="teste.jpg"></noscript> But noscript has negative effect on the index (I refer to the contents of noscript) I want a plugin that will not obstruct the image indexing in search engines. This plugin will be used by other developers (and me too). This is my question: How to make a HTML images accessible to search engines, which can minimize the requests?

    Read the article

  • Request Removal of naked domain from Google Index

    - by Pedr
    I have a site which was temporarily available at both example.com and www.example.com. All traffic to example.com is now redirected to www.example.com, however during the brief period that the site was available at the naked domain, Google indexed it. So Google now has two versions of every page indexed: www.example.com www.example.com/about_us www.example.com/products/something ... and example.com example.com/about_us example.com/products/something ... For obvious reasons, this is a bad situation, so how can I best resolve it? Should I request removal of these pages from the index? There is still content at these URLs, but they now redirect to the www subdomain equivalent. The site has many hundreds of pages, but the only way I can see to request removal is via the Remove outdated content screen in Webmaster Tools, one URL at a time. How can I request removal of an entire domain (ie. the naked domain) without it effecting the true site located at the www subdomain? Is this the correct strategy given that all the naked domains now redirect to their www equivalent?

    Read the article

  • SQL indexes for "not equal" searches

    - by bortzmeyer
    The SQL index allows to find quickly a string which matches my query. Now, I have to search in a big table the strings which do not match. Of course, the normal index does not help and I have to do a slow sequential scan: essais=> \d phone_idx Index "public.phone_idx" Column | Type --------+------ phone | text btree, for table "public.phonespersons" essais=> EXPLAIN SELECT person FROM PhonesPersons WHERE phone = '+33 1234567'; QUERY PLAN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Index Scan using phone_idx on phonespersons (cost=0.00..8.41 rows=1 width=4) Index Cond: (phone = '+33 1234567'::text) (2 rows) essais=> EXPLAIN SELECT person FROM PhonesPersons WHERE phone != '+33 1234567'; QUERY PLAN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Seq Scan on phonespersons (cost=0.00..18621.00 rows=999999 width=4) Filter: (phone <> '+33 1234567'::text) (2 rows) I understand (see Mark Byers' very good explanations) that PostgreSQL can decide not to use an index when it sees that a sequential scan would be faster (for instance if almost all the tuples match). But, here, "not equal" searches are really slower. Any way to make these "is not equal to" searches faster? Here is another example, to address Mark Byers' excellent remarks. The index is used for the '=' query (which returns the vast majority of tuples) but not for the '!=' query: essais=> EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT person FROM EmailsPersons WHERE tld(email) = 'fr'; QUERY PLAN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Index Scan using tld_idx on emailspersons (cost=0.25..4010.79 rows=97033 width=4) (actual time=0.137..261.123 rows=97110 loops=1) Index Cond: (tld(email) = 'fr'::text) Total runtime: 444.800 ms (3 rows) essais=> EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT person FROM EmailsPersons WHERE tld(email) != 'fr'; QUERY PLAN -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seq Scan on emailspersons (cost=0.00..27129.00 rows=2967 width=4) (actual time=1.004..1031.224 rows=2890 loops=1) Filter: (tld(email) <> 'fr'::text) Total runtime: 1037.278 ms (3 rows) DBMS is PostgreSQL 8.3 (but I can upgrade to 8.4).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >