Search Results

Search found 6905 results on 277 pages for 'fork join'.

Page 2/277 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Conditional Join - join 1 tables 2 ways

    - by Jon H
    I have a set of (not very well normalised or relational) tables named PLAN, GROUP, PRODUCT CLIENT Most have linkage i.e. PLAN - CLIENT on clno GROUP to PRODUCT on PRODCD However, the linkage between PLAN and GROUP is tricky. A plan has 2 field of interest GRPNO and PRODCD. What I want to do is if GRPNO != 0 then join GROUP on GRPNO. However if GRPNO = 0 then I want to join GROUP on PRODCD. The frustrating thing is that the fileds I want to return in my queries are the same across the board I just need to be able to vary the join, or join the same table twice. The best I can come up with is 2 queries and merge them using datasets, or possibly using a union. Is there a nifty way to do this in one select? I should point out I am access Foxpro over ODBC to do this. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • SQL: Join multiple tables and get a grouped sum

    - by Scienceprodigy
    I have a database with 3 tables that have related data. One table has transactions, and the other two relate to transaction categories. Basically it's financial data, so each transaction has a category (i.e. "gasoline" for a gas purchase transaction). A short version of my Transactions table looks like this- Transactions Table: ________________________________ | ID | Type | Amount | Category | --------------------------------- I also have two more tables relating a category to a categories parent. So basically, every Category entry in the Transactions Table belongs to a parent category (i.e. "gasoline" would belong to say "Automotive Expenses"). For categories, and their parent, I have two tables - Category Children: ____________________________________________ | ID | Parent Category ID | Child Category | -------------------------------------------- Category Parent: ________________________ | ID | Parent Category | ------------------------ What I'm trying to do is query the database and have it return a total spending by parent category. To get "spending" the Type of transactions must be "Debit". I tried the following statement: SELECT category_parents.parent_category, SUM(amount) AS totals FROM (transactions INNER JOIN category_children ON transactions.category = 'category_children.child_category') INNER JOIN category_parents ON category_children.parent_category_id = category_parents._id WHERE trans_type = 'Debit' GROUP BY parent_category ORDER BY totals DESC but it gives me the following exception: 12-31 13:51:21.515: ERROR/Exception on query(4403): android.database.sqlite.SQLiteException: no such column: category_children.parent_category_id: , while compiling: SELECT category_parents.parent_category, SUM(amount) AS totals FROM (transactions INNER JOIN category_children ON transactions.category='category_children.child_category') INNER JOIN category_parents ON category_children.parent_category_id=category_parents._id where trans_type='Debit' group by parent_category order by totals desc Any help is appreciated. (EXTRA CREDIT: I also need to make another statement to do spending by child category, given the parent category)

    Read the article

  • Remove Duplicates from LEFT OUTER JOIN

    - by Kaushik Gopal
    Hey folk my question is quite similar to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/757957/restricting-a-left-join I have a variation in that request though and the comment didn't allow too many characters hence posting as a new question. I hope this doesn't go against the posting rules/etiquette. Assuming i have a table SHOP and another table LOCATION. Location is a sort of child table of table SHOP, that has two columns of interest, one is a Division Key (calling it just KEY) and a "SHOP" number. This matches to the Number "NO" in table SHOP. I tried this left outer join: SELECT S.NO, L.KEY FROM SHOP S LEFT OUTER JOIN LOCATN L ON S.NO = L.SHOP But i'm getting a lot of duplicates since there are many locations that belong to a single shop. I want to eliminate them and just get a list of "shop, key" entries without duplicates. any ideas how? (edit: ORACLE 10g Database)

    Read the article

  • MySQL Dynamicly determine the tabel to use with inner join

    - by user366990
    He guys, I'm stuck with a problem and I hope someone can help me out. I have a date. For example 2009-10-1. This date is used to check in which season I am working. This could be summer or winter. If whe are in the summer the table to use for my inner join whould be 'summer09_rooms'. If winter 'winter09_rooms'. So I basicly whant to do a CASE WHEN in my INNER JOIN. How to accomplish this. The query would look like this: SELECT name, arrival_date, departure_date FROM holliday a INNER JOIN ( CASE when arrival_date BETWEEN 2009-10-1 AND 2009-4-1 THEN summer09_rooms b ELSE winter09_rooms b END ) ON a.dossier=b.dossier Of course this query isn't working but now I hope you'l see what I want to accomplish. Kind regards, Digital Human

    Read the article

  • embedding LEFT OUTER JOIN within INNER JOIN

    - by user3424954
    I am having some problems with one of the question's answered in the book "SQL FOR MERE MORTALS". Here is the problem statement Here is the Database Structure Here is the answer which I am unable to comprehend Here is an answer which looks perfect to me Now the problem with the first answer I am having is: We first use LEFT OUTER JOIN for recipe class and recipes. So it selects all recipe class rows but only matching recipes. Perfecty fine as the question is demanding. Lets call this result set R. Now in the next step when we use INNER JOIN to join RecipieIngridients, it should filter out the rows from R in which Recipie ID doesn't match with the Recipe Id in Recipie Ingredients and hence filtering out the related Recipe class and recipe description also(Since it filters out the entire row of R). So this contradicts with the problem which demands all recipieID and RecipieDescription to be displayed from Recipe_Classes Table in this very step only. How can it be correct. Or Am i Missing some concept.

    Read the article

  • outer join for parent child chain

    - by dotnetcoder
    Considering below tables and relationships: parent --1:Many-- children --1:Many-- shubchildren Parent may or many not have children records. children always have subchildren records. I wan to write a qiery to select parent names where any if matched parent.name,children.name or subchildren.name Here i understand I have to do a left outer join between parent and children. But what kind of join should I put between children and subchildren ?

    Read the article

  • Basic join query understanding

    - by OM The Eternity
    I know this very silly, but can anybody help me in understanding what does this join query is doing in elabortive description? SELECT j1.* FROM jos_audittrail j1 LEFT OUTER JOIN jos_audittrail j2 ON (j1.trackid = j2.trackid AND j1.field = j2.field AND j1.changedone < j2.changedone) WHERE j1.operation = 'UPDATE' AND j1.trackid=$t_ids[$n] AND j2.id IS NULL I know its very silly, but i need to go ahead with my further need... Pls do help me...

    Read the article

  • MySQL Join Question

    - by rbaker86
    Hi i'm struggling to write a particular MySQL Join Query. I have a table containing product data, each product can belong to multiple categories. This m:m relationship is satisfied using a link table. For this particular query I wish to retrieve all products belonging to a given category, but with each product record, I also want to return the other categories that product belongs to. Ideally I would like to achieve this using an Inner Join on the categories table, rather than performing an additional query for each product record, which would be quite inefficient. My simplifed schema is designed roughly as follows: products table: product_id, name, title, description, is_active, date_added, publish_date, etc.... categories table: category_id, name, title, description, etc... product_category table: product_id, category_id I have written the following query, which allows me to retrieve all the products belonging to the specified category_id. However, i'm really struggling to work out how to retrieve the other categories a product belongs to. SELECT p.product_id, p.name, p.title, p.description FROM prod_products AS p LEFT JOIN prod_product_category AS pc ON pc.product_id = p.product_id WHERE pc.category_id = $category_id AND UNIX_TIMESTAMP(p.publish_date) < UNIX_TIMESTAMP() AND p.is_active = 1 ORDER BY p.name ASC I'd be happy just retrieving the category id's releated to each returned product row, as I will have all category data stored in an object, and my application code can take care of the rest. Many thanks, Richard

    Read the article

  • Nhibernate Left Outer Join Return First Record of the Join

    - by Touch
    I have the following mappings of which Im trying to bring back 0 - 1 Media Id associated with a Product using a left join (I havnt included my attempt as it confuses the situation) ICriteria productCriteria = Session.CreateCriteria(typeof(Product)); productCriteria .CreateAlias("ProductCategories", "pc", JoinType.InnerJoin) .CreateAlias("pc.ParentCategory", "category") .CreateAlias("category.ParentCategory", "group") .Add(Restrictions.Eq("group.Id", 333)) .SetProjection( Projections.Distinct( Projections.ProjectionList() .Add(Projections.Alias(Projections.Property("Id"), "Id")) .Add(Projections.Alias(Projections.Property("Title"), "Title")) .Add(Projections.Alias(Projections.Property("Price"), "Price")) .Add(Projections.Alias(Projections.Property("media.Id"), "SearchResultMediaId")) // I NEED THIS ) ) .SetResultTransformer(Transformers.AliasToBean<Product>()); IList<Product> products = productCriteria .SetFirstResult(0) .SetMaxResults(10) .List<Product>(); I need the query to populate the SearchResultMediaId with Media.Id, I only want to bring back the first Media in a left outer join, as this is 1 to many association between Product and Media Product is mapped to Media in the following way mapping.HasManyToMany<Media>(x => x.Medias) .Table("ProductMedias") .ParentKeyColumn("ProductId") .ChildKeyColumn("MediaId") .Cascade.AllDeleteOrphan() .LazyLoad() .AsBag(); Any Help would be fantastic.

    Read the article

  • LINQ, Left Join, Only Get where null in join table

    - by kmehta
    Hi. I am trying to do a left outer join on two tables, but I only want to return the results from the first table where the second table does not have a record (null). var agencies = from a in agencyList join aa in joinTable on a.AgencyId equals aa.AgencyId into joined from aa in joined.DefaultIfEmpty() where aa == null) select a; But this does not exclude the non null values of aa, and returns all the records just the same as if the 'where aa == null' was not there. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • SQL: Join Parent - Child tables

    - by pray4Mojo
    I'm building a simple review website application and need some help with SQL Query. There are 3 tables (Topics, Comments, Users). I need a SQL query to select the data from all 3 tables. The 'Topics' table is the parent and the 'Comments' table contains the child records (anywhere from zero to 100 records per parent. The third table 'Users' contains the user information for all users. Here are the fields for the 3 tables: Topics (topicID, strTopic, userID) Comments (commentID, topicID, strComment, userID) Users (userID, userName) I tried: SELECT * FROM Topics Inner Join Comments ON Topics.topicID = Comments.topicID Inner Join Users ON Topics.userID = Users.userID But this does not work correctly because there are multiple topics and the User info is not joined to the Comments table. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • double fork using vfork

    - by Oren S
    HI I am writing a part of a server which should dispatch some other child processes. Because I want to wait on some of the processes, and dispatch others without waiting for completion, I use double fork for the second kind of processes (thus avoiding the zombie processes). Problem is, my server holds a lot of memory, so forking takes a long time (even the copy-on-write fork used in Linux which copies only the paging tables) I want to replace the fork() with vfork(), and it's easy for the second fork (as it only calls execve() in the child), but I couldn't find any way I can replace the first one. Does anyone know how I can do that? Thanks! The server is a linux (RH5U4), written in C++.

    Read the article

  • Unable to log in to ubuntu server 10.04 after trying to join windows domain

    - by nash
    I was trying to join our ubuntu 10.04 server to the windows domain and I ended up editing the pam.d configuration files. My aim was to have domain users log into the ubuntu server with their domain accounts in order to access some applications instead of creating new unix users each time. My system admin says the join was successful to the domain. Now I have no way of logging into the sever. Is there a way I can undo everything and get the server back to the original login using the local account? I will also appreciate if someone pointed me to some configuration that actually worked - I am still willing to try and make it work.

    Read the article

  • How to JOIN a COUNT from a table, and then effect that COUNT with another JOIN

    - by jakenoble
    Hi I have three tables Post ID Name 1 'Something' 2 'Something else' 3 'One more' Comment ID PostId ProfileID Comment 1 1 1 'Hi my name is' 2 2 2 'I like cakes' 3 3 3 'I hate cakes' Profile ID Approved 1 1 2 0 3 1 I want to count the comments for a post where the profile for the comment is approved I can select the data from Post and then join a count from Comment fine. But this count should be dependent on if the Profile is approved or not. The results I am expecting is CommentCount PostId Count 1 1 2 0 3 1 Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • SQL Join query help

    - by lostInTransit
    Hi I have 2 tables A and B with the following columns Table A - id,bId,aName,aVal Table B - id,bName where A.bId is the same as B.id. I want a result set from a query to get A.id, A.aName, B.bName where A.bId=B.id OR A.id, A.aName, "" when A.bId=0. In both cases, only those records should be considered where A.aVal LIKE "aVal" Can someone please help me with the query? I can use left join but how do I get the blank string if bId=0 and B.bName otherwise? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Join using combined conditions on one join table

    - by Nathan Wienert
    I have join a table joining songs to genres. The table has a 'source' column that's used to identify where the genre was found. Genres are found from blogs, artists, tags, and posts. So, songs | song_genre | genres id | song_id, source, genre_id | id What I want to build is a song SELECT query that works something like this, given I already have a genre_id: IF exists song_genre with source='artist' AND a song_genre with source='blog' OR exists song_genre with source='artist' AND a song_genre with source='post' OR exists song_genre with source='tag' I'm was going to do it by doing a bunch of joins, but am sure I'm not doing it very well. Using Postgres 9.1.

    Read the article

  • MS SQL 2008, join or no join?

    - by Patrick
    Just a small question regarding joins. I have a table with around 30 fields and i was thinking about making a second table to store 10 of those fields. Then i would just join them in with the main data. The 10 fields that i was planning to store in a second table does not get queried directly, it's just some settings for the data in the first table. Something like: Table 1 Id Data1 Data2 Data3 etc ... Table 2 Id (same id as table one) Settings1 Settings2 Settings3 Is this a bad solution? Should i just use 1 table? How much performance inpact does it have? All entries in table 1 would also then have an entry in table 2. Small update is in order. Most of the Data fields are of the type varchar and 2 of them are of the type text. How is indexing treated? My plan is to index 2 data fields, email (varchar 50) and author (varchar 20). And yes, all records in Table 1 will have a record in Table 2. Most of the settings fields are of the bit type, around 80%. The rest is a mix between int and varchar. The varchars can be null.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008, join or no join?

    - by Patrick
    Just a small question regarding joins. I have a table with around 30 fields and i was thinking about making a second table to store 10 of those fields. Then i would just join them in with the main data. The 10 fields that i was planning to store in a second table does not get queried directly, it's just some settings for the data in the first table. Something like: Table 1 Id Data1 Data2 Data3 etc ... Table 2 Id (same id as table one) Settings1 Settings2 Settings3 Is this a bad solution? Should i just use 1 table? How much performance inpact does it have? All entries in table 1 would also then have an entry in table 2. Small update is in order. Most of the Data fields are of the type varchar and 2 of them are of the type text. How is indexing treated? My plan is to index 2 data fields, email (varchar 50) and author (varchar 20). And yes, all records in Table 1 will have a record in Table 2. Most of the settings fields are of the bit type, around 80%. The rest is a mix between int and varchar. The varchars can be null.

    Read the article

  • Basics of Join Factorization

    - by Hong Su
    We continue our series on optimizer transformations with a post that describes the Join Factorization transformation. The Join Factorization transformation was introduced in Oracle 11g Release 2 and applies to UNION ALL queries. Union all queries are commonly used in database applications, especially in data integration applications. In many scenarios the branches in a UNION All query share a common processing, i.e, refer to the same tables. In the current Oracle execution strategy, each branch of a UNION ALL query is evaluated independently, which leads to repetitive processing, including data access and join. The join factorization transformation offers an opportunity to share the common computations across the UNION ALL branches. Currently, join factorization only factorizes common references to base tables only, i.e, not views. Consider a simple example of query Q1. Q1:    select t1.c1, t2.c2    from t1, t2, t3    where t1.c1 = t2.c1 and t1.c1 > 1 and t2.c2 = 2 and t2.c2 = t3.c2   union all    select t1.c1, t2.c2    from t1, t2, t4    where t1.c1 = t2.c1 and t1.c1 > 1 and t2.c3 = t4.c3; Table t1 appears in both the branches. As does the filter predicates on t1 (t1.c1 > 1) and the join predicates involving t1 (t1.c1 = t2.c1). Nevertheless, without any transformation, the scan (and the filtering) on t1 has to be done twice, once per branch. Such a query may benefit from join factorization which can transform Q1 into Q2 as follows: Q2:    select t1.c1, VW_JF_1.item_2    from t1, (select t2.c1 item_1, t2.c2 item_2                   from t2, t3                    where t2.c2 = t3.c2 and t2.c2 = 2                                  union all                   select t2.c1 item_1, t2.c2 item_2                   from t2, t4                    where t2.c3 = t4.c3) VW_JF_1    where t1.c1 = VW_JF_1.item_1 and t1.c1 > 1; In Q2, t1 is "factorized" and thus the table scan and the filtering on t1 is done only once (it's shared). If t1 is large, then avoiding one extra scan of t1 can lead to a huge performance improvement. Another benefit of join factorization is that it can open up more join orders. Let's look at query Q3. Q3:    select *    from t5, (select t1.c1, t2.c2                  from t1, t2, t3                  where t1.c1 = t2.c1 and t1.c1 > 1 and t2.c2 = 2 and t2.c2 = t3.c2                 union all                  select t1.c1, t2.c2                  from t1, t2, t4                  where t1.c1 = t2.c1 and t1.c1 > 1 and t2.c3 = t4.c3) V;   where t5.c1 = V.c1 In Q3, view V is same as Q1. Before join factorization, t1, t2 and t3 must be joined first before they can be joined with t5. But if join factorization factorizes t1 from view V, t1 can then be joined with t5. This opens up new join orders. That being said, join factorization imposes certain join orders. For example, in Q2, t2 and t3 appear in the first branch of the UNION ALL query in view VW_JF_1. T2 must be joined with t3 before it can be joined with t1 which is outside of the VW_JF_1 view. The imposed join order may not necessarily be the best join order. For this reason, join factorization is performed under cost-based transformation framework; this means that we cost the plans with and without join factorization and choose the cheapest plan. Note that if the branches in UNION ALL have DISTINCT clauses, join factorization is not valid. For example, Q4 is NOT semantically equivalent to Q5.   Q4:     select distinct t1.*      from t1, t2      where t1.c1 = t2.c1  union all      select distinct t1.*      from t1, t2      where t1.c1 = t2.c1 Q5:    select distinct t1.*     from t1, (select t2.c1 item_1                   from t2                union all                   select t2.c1 item_1                  from t2) VW_JF_1     where t1.c1 = VW_JF_1.item_1 Q4 might return more rows than Q5. Q5's results are guaranteed to be duplicate free because of the DISTINCT key word at the top level while Q4's results might contain duplicates.   The examples given so far involve inner joins only. Join factorization is also supported in outer join, anti join and semi join. But only the right tables of outer join, anti join and semi joins can be factorized. It is not semantically correct to factorize the left table of outer join, anti join or semi join. For example, Q6 is NOT semantically equivalent to Q7. Q6:     select t1.c1, t2.c2    from t1, t2    where t1.c1 = t2.c1(+) and t2.c2 (+) = 2  union all    select t1.c1, t2.c2    from t1, t2      where t1.c1 = t2.c1(+) and t2.c2 (+) = 3 Q7:     select t1.c1, VW_JF_1.item_2    from t1, (select t2.c1 item_1, t2.c2 item_2                  from t2                  where t2.c2 = 2                union all                  select t2.c1 item_1, t2.c2 item_2                  from t2                                                                                                    where t2.c2 = 3) VW_JF_1       where t1.c1 = VW_JF_1.item_1(+)                                                                  However, the right side of an outer join can be factorized. For example, join factorization can transform Q8 to Q9 by factorizing t2, which is the right table of an outer join. Q8:    select t1.c2, t2.c2    from t1, t2      where t1.c1 = t2.c1 (+) and t1.c1 = 1 union all    select t1.c2, t2.c2    from t1, t2    where t1.c1 = t2.c1(+) and t1.c1 = 2 Q9:   select VW_JF_1.item_2, t2.c2   from t2,             (select t1.c1 item_1, t1.c2 item_2            from t1            where t1.c1 = 1           union all            select t1.c1 item_1, t1.c2 item_2            from t1            where t1.c1 = 2) VW_JF_1   where VW_JF_1.item_1 = t2.c1(+) All of the examples in this blog show factorizing a single table from two branches. This is just for ease of illustration. Join factorization can factorize multiple tables and from more than two UNION ALL branches.  SummaryJoin factorization is a cost-based transformation. It can factorize common computations from branches in a UNION ALL query which can lead to huge performance improvement. 

    Read the article

  • Behavior of a pipe after a fork()

    - by Steve Melvin
    When reading about pipes in Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment, I noticed that after a fork that the parent can close() the read end of a pipe and it doesn't close the read end for the child. When a process forks, does its file descriptors get retained? What I mean by this is that before the fork the pipe read file descriptor had a retain count of 1, and after the fork 2. When the parent closed its read side the fd went to 1 and is kept open for the child. Is this essentially what is happening? Does this behavior also occur for regular file descriptors?

    Read the article

  • What's the proper way to fork() in FastCGI ?

    - by eugene y
    I have an app running under Catalyst+FastCGI. And I want it to fork() to do some work in background. I used this code for plain CGI long ago: defined(my $pid = fork) or die "Can't fork: $!"; if ($pid) { # print response exit 0; } die "Can't start a new session: $!" if setsid == -1; close STDIN or die $!; close STDOUT or die $!; close STDERR or die $!; # do some work in background I tried some variations on this under FastCGI but with no success. How should forking be done under FastCGI?

    Read the article

  • Help with output generated by this C code using fork()

    - by Seephor
    I am trying to figure out the output for a block of C code using fork() and I am having some problems understanding why it comes out the way it does. I understand that when using fork() it starts another instance of the program in parallel and that the child instance will return 0. Could someone explain step by step the output to the block of code below? Thank you. main() { int status, i; for (i=0; i<2; ++i){ printf("At the top of pass %d\n", i); if (fork() == 0){ printf("this is a child, i=%d\n", i); } else { wait(&status); printf("This is a parent, i=%d\n", i); } } }

    Read the article

  • Performing Inner Join for Multiple Columns in the Same Table

    - by frankiefrank
    I have a scenario which I'm a bit stuck on. Let's say I have a survey about colors, and I have one table for the color data, and another for people's answers. tbColors color_code , color_name 1 , 'blue' 2 , 'green' 3 , 'yellow' 4 , 'red' tbAnswers answer_id , favorite_color , least_favorite_color , color_im_allergic_to 1 , 1 , 2 3 2 , 3 , 1 4 3 , 1 , 1 2 4 , 2 , 3 4 For display I want to write a SELECT that presents the answers table but using the color_name column from tbColors. I understand the "most stupid" way to do it naming tbColors three times in the FROM section, using a different alias for each column to replace. How would a non-stupid way look?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >