Search Results

Search found 84007 results on 3361 pages for 'sql system table'.

Page 206/3361 | < Previous Page | 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213  | Next Page >

  • Create System.Data.Linq.Table in Code for Testing

    - by S. DePouw
    I have an adapter class for Linq-to-Sql: public interface IAdapter : IDisposable { Table<Data.User> Activities { get; } } Data.User is an object defined by Linq-to-Sql pointing to the User table in persistence. The implementation for this is as follows: public class Adapter : IAdapter { private readonly SecretDataContext _context = new SecretDataContext(); public void Dispose() { _context.Dispose(); } public Table<Data.User> Users { get { return _context.Users; } } } This makes mocking the persistence layer easy in unit testing, as I can just return whatever collection of data I want for Users (Rhino.Mocks): Expect.Call(_adapter.Users).Return(users); The problem is that I cannot create the object 'users' since the constructors are not accessible and the class Table is sealed. One option I tried is to just make IAdapter return IEnumerable or IQueryable, but the problem there is that I then do not have access to the methods ITable provides (e.g. InsertOnSubmit()). Is there a way I can create the fake Table in the unit test scenario so that I may be a happy TDD developer?

    Read the article

  • SQL: convert tokens in a string or elements of an array into rows of a table

    - by slowpoison
    Is there a simple way in SQL to convert a string or an array to rows of a table? For example, let's stay the string is 'a,b,c,d,e,f,g'. I'd prefer an SQL statement that takes that string, splits it at commas and inserts the resulting strings into a table. In PostgreSQL I can use regexp_split_to_array() and split the string into an array. So, if you know a way to insert an array's elements as rows into a table, that would work too.

    Read the article

  • MS SQL Bridge Table Constraints

    - by greg
    Greetings - I have a table of Articles and a table of Categories. An Article can be used in many Categories, so I have created a table of ArticleCategories like this: BridgeID int (PK) ArticleID int CategoryID int Now, I want to create constraints/relationships such that the ArticleID-CategoryID combinations are unique AND that the IDs must exist in the respective primary key tables (Articles and Categories). I have tried using both VS2008 Server Explorer and Enterprise Manager (SQL-2005) to create the FK relationships, but the results always prevent Duplicate ArticleIDs in the bridge table, even though the CategoryID is different. I am pretty sure I am doing something obviously wrong, but I appear to have a mental block at this point. Can anyone tell me please how should this be done? Greaty appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Accessing SQL server Table is slow -very few data inside

    - by Joseph
    Dear all I have a temp table ,datas keep on coming in and going out. now a days even if there is very few records also if we select ,its taking so long. i cant put index on this table because its a Temp table. The only way i found that drop the table and recreate it.its working very fine. any idea why this is happening?is it like some kind of fragmentation?if there is index ,then we can check the frgment,but if there is no index then waht to do. we are using sql server 2008 64 bit thanks Joseph

    Read the article

  • What is your best-practice advice on implementing SQL stored procedures (in a C# winforms applicatio

    - by JYelton
    I have read these very good questions on SO about SQL stored procedures: When should you use stored procedures? and Are Stored Procedures more efficient, in general, than inline statements on modern RDBMS’s? I am a beginner on integrating .NET/SQL though I have used basic SQL functionality for more than a decade in other environments. It's time to advance with regards to organization and deployment. I am using .NET C# 3.5, Visual Studio 2008 and SQL Server 2008; though this question can be regarded as language- and database- agnostic, meaning that it could easily apply to other environments that use stored procedures and a relational database. Given that I have an application with inline SQL queries, and I am interested in converting to stored procedures for organizational and performance purposes, what are your recommendations for doing so? Here are some additional questions in my mind related to this subject that may help shape the answers: Should I create the stored procedures in SQL using SQL Management Studio and simply re-create the database when it is installed for a client? Am I better off creating all of the stored procedures in my application, inside of a database initialization method? It seems logical to assume that creating stored procedures must follow the creation of tables in a new installation. My database initialization method creates new tables and inserts some default data. My plan is to create stored procedures following that step, but I am beginning to think there might be a better way to set up a database from scratch (such as in the installer of the program). Thoughts on this are appreciated. I have a variety of queries throughout the application. Some queries are incredibly simple (SELECT id FROM table) and others are extremely long and complex, performing several joins and accepting approximately 80 parameters. Should I replace all queries with stored procedures, or only those that might benefit from doing so? Finally, as this topic obviously requires some research and education, can you recommend an article, book, or tutorial that covers the nuances of using stored procedures instead of direct statements?

    Read the article

  • Joining on a common table, how do you get a FULL OUTER JOIN to expand on another table?

    - by stimpy77
    I've scoured StackOverflow and Google for an answer to this problem. I'm trying to create a Microsot SQL Server 2008 view. Not a stored procedure. Not a function. Just a query (i.e. a view). I have three tables. The first table defines a common key, let's say "CompanyID". The other two tables have a sometimes-common field, let's say "EmployeeName". I want a single table result that, when my WHERE clause says "WHERE CompanyID = 12" looks like this: CompanyID | TableA | TableB 12 | John Doe | John Doe 12 | Betty Sue | NULL 12 | NULL | Billy Bob I've tried a FULL OUTER JOIN that looks like this: SELECT Company.CompanyID, TableA.EmployeeName, TableB.EmployeeName FROM Company FULL OUTER JOIN TableA ON Company.CompanyID = TableA.CompanyID FULL OUTER JOIN TableB ON Company.CompanyID = TableB.CompanyID AND (TableA.EmployeeName IS NULL OR TableB.EmployeeName IS NULL OR TableB.EmployeeName = TableA.EmployeeName) I'm only getting the NULL from one matched table, I'm not getting the expansion for the other table. In the above sample, I'm basically only getting the first and third rows and not the second. Can someone help me create this query and show me how this is done correctly? BTW I already have a stored procedure that looks very clean and populates an in-memory table, but that isn't what I want. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework Many-To-Many with additional field on Joining Table

    - by Cory G
    I have an entity context that includes three tables (see diagram here). The first is a table that contain products, the second contains recipes. The joining table has fields for IDs in both the products and recipes table as well as a 'bit' field called 'featured'. I've searched and found no example on how to insert only how to select against this type of scenario.Does anyone have any suggestions on how this can be done? Thanks in advance for any help. Cory

    Read the article

  • Value Comparison with a multivalued column in SQL Database Table

    - by Rishabh Ohri
    Hi All, Suppose there is a table A which has a column AccessRights which is multivalued( Eg of values in it in this format STOLI,HELP,BRANCH(comma separated string) Now a stored procedure is written against this table to fetch records based on a AccessRight parameter sent to the SP. Let that parameter be @AccessRights, this is also a comma separated string which may have a value like STOLI,BRANCH,HELPLINE etc Now I want to compare individual values from the parameter @AccessRights with the column AccessRights. Current Approach is I split the Comma Separated string(@AccessRights) using a User Defined Function Split. And I get Individual values in a Table variable(Contains only one column "accessGroup"), the individual values are in a Table variable under the column name accessGroup and I use following code in the SP for comparison Where AccessRights like '%'+accessGroup+'%' Now if the user passes the parameter (HELP, OLI) instead of( HELP,STOLI) the SP will give the output. What should be done for comparison so that that subststring OLI does not give the output for STOLI

    Read the article

  • Getting hierarchy data from a self-referencing table

    - by Emanuil
    Let's say you have the following table: items(item_id, item_parent) ... and it is a self-referencing table as item_parent refers to item_id. What SQL query would you use to SELECT all items in the table along with their depth where the depth of an item is the sum of all parents and grand parents of that item. If the following is the content of the table: item_id item_parent ----------- ----------- 1 0 2 0 3 2 4 2 5 3 ... the query should retrieve the following set of objects: {"item_id":1,"depth":0} {"item_id":2,"depth":0} {"item_id":3,"depth":1} {"item_id":4,"depth":1} {"item_id":5,"depth":2} P.S. I'm looking for a MySQL supported approach.

    Read the article

  • Move million records from MEMORY table to MYISAM table.

    - by Prashant
    Hi, I am looking for a fast way to move records from a MEMORY table to MYISAM table. MEMORY table has around 0.5 million records. Both tables have exactly the same structure (same number of columns, data types etc.). But the MYISAM table is indexed (B-TREE) on a few columns. There are around 25 columns most of which are unsigned integers. I have already tried using "INSERT INTO SELECT * FROM " query. But is there any faster way to do this? Appreciate your help. Prashant

    Read the article

  • Active Record two belongs_to calls or single table inheritance

    - by ethyreal
    In linking a sports event to two teams, at first this seemed to make sense: events - id:integer - integer:home_team_id - integer:away_team_id teams - integer:id - string:name However I am troubled by how I would link that up in the active record model: class Event belongs_to :home_team, :class_name => 'Team', :foreign_key => "home_team_id" belongs_to :away_team, :class_name => 'Team', :foreign_key => "away_team_id" end Is that the best solution? In an answer to a similar question I was pointed to single table inheritance, and then later found polymorphic associations. Neither of which seemed to fit this association. Perhaps I am looking at this wrong, but I see no need to subclass a team into home and away teams since the distinction is only in where the game is played. If I did go with single table inheritance I wouldn't want each team to belong_to an event so would this work? # app/models/event.rb class Event < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :home_team belongs_to :away_team end # app/models/team.rb class Team < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :teams end # app/models/home_team.rb class HomeTeam < Team end # app/models/away_team.rb class AwayTeam < Team end I thought also about a has_many through association but that seems two much as I will only ever need two teams, but those two teams don't belong to any one event. event_teams - integer:event_id - integer:team_id - boolean:is_home Is there a cleaner more semantic way for making these associations in active record? or is one of these solutions the best choice? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Acquiring Table Lock in Database - Interview Question

    - by harigm
    One of my interview Questions, if multiple users across the world are accessing the application, in which it uses a Table which has a Primary Key as Auto Increment Field. The Question how can you prevent the other user getting the Same Primary key when the other user is executing? My answer was I will obtain the Lock on the table and I will make the user to wait Until that user is released with the Primary key. But the Question How do you acquire the Table lock programmatically and implement this? If there are 1000 users coming every minute to the application, if you explicity hold the lock on the table, then the application will become slower? How do you manage this? Please suggest the possible answers for the above question

    Read the article

  • Inserting new <TD> elements into a table row.

    - by Hunter S. Smythe
    I have created a small application written in XHTML, JavaScript/JQuery and PHP. The PHP reads and writes to a small SQLite database. How would i go about inserting cells into a pre-scripted table. The cells would need to be configured using some information from my database. For example, below are two cells with their data retrieved from my database: Cell One Starts: 120px; Finishes: 180px; Background: Blue; Cell Two Starts: 240px; Finishes: 300px; Background: Green; On my table row, it is 500px in width. How would I insert the cells above into the row. In this example, the first cell would start 120px into the row and have a width of 180px. The second cell would start 240px into the row and have a width of 300px. I just cant seem to work out a way of doing this, any ideas would be very helpful. Thank you for any input, all is appreciated. Hunter.

    Read the article

  • sql-server: how to insert to temporary table?

    - by RedsDevils
    I have one Temporary Table CREATE TABLE #TEMP (TEMP_ID INT IDENTITY(1,1)) And I would like to insert records to that table, How can I?I do as follow: INSERT INTO #TEMP DEFAULT VALUES But sometimes it doesn't work. What it might be?And I would like to know lifetime of temptable in MSSQL. Please Help me! Thanks all!

    Read the article

  • MySQL MyISAM table performance... painfully, painfully slow

    - by Salman A
    I've got a table structure that can be summarized as follows: pagegroup * pagegroupid * name has 3600 rows page * pageid * pagegroupid * data references pagegroup; has 10000 rows; can have anything between 1-700 rows per pagegroup; the data column is of type mediumtext and the column contains 100k - 200kbytes data per row userdata * userdataid * pageid * column1 * column2 * column9 references page; has about 300,000 rows; can have about 1-50 rows per page The above structure is pretty straight forwad, the problem is that that a join from userdata to page group is terribly, terribly slow even though I have indexed all columns that should be indexed. The time needed to run a query for such a join (userdata inner_join page inner_join pagegroup) exceeds 3 minutes. This is terribly slow considering the fact that I am not selecting the data column at all. Example of the query that takes too long: SELECT userdata.column1, pagegroup.name FROM userdata INNER JOIN page USING( pageid ) INNER JOIN pagegroup USING( pagegroupid ) Please help by explaining why does it take so long and what can i do to make it faster. Edit #1 Explain returns following gibberish: id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 SIMPLE userdata ALL pageid 372420 1 SIMPLE page eq_ref PRIMARY,pagegroupid PRIMARY 4 topsecret.userdata.pageid 1 1 SIMPLE pagegroup eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 topsecret.page.pagegroupid 1 Edit #2 SELECT u.field2, p.pageid FROM userdata u INNER JOIN page p ON u.pageid = p.pageid; /* 0.07 sec execution, 6.05 sec fecth */ id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 SIMPLE u ALL pageid 372420 1 SIMPLE p eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 topsecret.u.pageid 1 Using index SELECT p.pageid, g.pagegroupid FROM page p INNER JOIN pagegroup g ON p.pagegroupid = g.pagegroupid; /* 9.37 sec execution, 60.0 sec fetch */ id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 SIMPLE g index PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 3646 Using index 1 SIMPLE p ref pagegroupid pagegroupid 5 topsecret.g.pagegroupid 3 Using where Moral of the story Keep medium/long text columns in a separate table if you run into performance problems such as this one.

    Read the article

  • SQL searching table fields with LIKE

    - by Tom Gullen
    Given your data stored somewhere in a database: Hello my name is Tom I like dinosaurs to talk about SQL. SQL is amazing. I really like SQL. We want to implement a site search, allowing visitors to enter terms and return relating records. A user might search for: Dinosaurs And the SQL: WHERE articleBody LIKE '%Dinosaurs%' Copes fine with returning the correct set of records. How would we cope however, if a user mispells dinosaurs? IE: Dinosores (Poor sore dino). How can we search allowing for error in spelling? We can associate common misspellings we see in search with the correct spelling, and then search on the original terms + corrected term, but this is time consuming to maintain. Any way programatically?

    Read the article

  • how relate one table to another for future records

    - by Sinan
    I have a games table which holds the data about a game. Then another table which holds the data about news. So far so good. First I thought about creating a junction table for game_news so I could relate news to games. This way works as intended when the game exists. So whenever I insert a news I can relate it to a game using the junction table. However there are cases when there is news about game but the game isn't published and it doesn't exists. So my question would be; is there a way to relate these news to a particular game when the game record is created. What is the best way to do this? Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • SQL Join a View with a Table

    - by gamerzfuse
    CREATE VIEW qtyorderedview AS SELECT titleditors.title_id, titleditors.ed_id, salesdetails.title_id, salesdetails.qty_shipped FROM titleditors, salesdetails WHERE titleditors.title_id = salesdetails.title_id I am using the above SQL statement to create a view. I need to show Editors First Name, Last Name, City where they shipped more than 50 books. The three tables I have are: create table editors ( ed_id char(11), ed_lname varchar(20), ed_fname varchar(20), ed_pos varchar(12), phone varchar(10), address varchar(30), city varchar(20), state char(2), zip char(5), ed_boss char(11)); create table titleditors ( ed_id char(11), title_id char(6), ed_ord integer); create table salesdetails ( sonum integer, qty_ordered integer, qty_shipped integer, title_id char(6), date_shipped date); Can anyone tell me what the second Join code would be to create this result? My first view works fine, but I don't know how to join it to the second table to achieve this result? I didn't make the tables, I just have to work with what I was given. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Frequency Table by user in SQL

    - by Roberto
    Very basic SQL question (DB is MySQL): I want a table of number of transactions by users. User ID Transaction count 1 43 2 213 3 0 4 23 5 0 In a table I have the two relevant records (user_id and buy_count). How could I get the table I want? Thanks, Roberto

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework and stored procedure returning temp table Issues

    - by kaplooeymom
    (Disclaimer - I'm not the database designer. I'm just the poor developer what has to make this work.) There are 17 (at the moment) tables with identical structure - name, address, phone number. Given a phone number, I have to check to see if there's a matching entry in any of the tables, then return that address. So, I created a view to get the list of tables (there's a ref table that holds that info), then I created a stored procedure to create a temp table, using cursors, check each table in the view for the phone number, using sql concatenation. If a record is found, insert it into the temp table. return the rows from the temp table. This all works in straight T-SQL. Now, I'm trying to use Entity Framework 4+ to call the stored procedure. But the function import interface won't generate columns. It says return type = none, and the LINQ code expects an int and won't compile. Any ideas on how to make this work? I know I can move the check tables part to code, if I absolutely have to, but I'd rather have the above method work.

    Read the article

  • broken SQL 2008 SP1 Web Edition (can not login with SSMS)

    - by gerryLowry
    Scenario: My installation of SQL Server 2008 Web Edition SP1 was working properly. Since I've recently joined Microsoft's Website Spark*, I removed SQL2008 and installed SQL 2008 again using my Website Spark edition and license from the MSDN download site. Next, I updated SQL 2008 to SP1 (this is required because I'm running Windows 2008 Server R2 Web edition). When I launch SSMS (SQL Server Management Studio), "User name" is "myhost\Administrator" and is greyed out so it can not be changed. When I installed my Website Spark version, I did not include "myhost\Administrator" when I was configuring SQL 2008 service accounts. Instead I created an administrator account "myhost\mySQLaccount". ERROR MESSAGE: Connect to Server (X) Cannot connect to (local) Additional information: Login failed for user 'myhost'Admistrator' (Microsoft SQL Server, Error: 18456) I tried to use the SQL Server Configuration Manager to correct this problem but could not find any useful way to fix this issue. How to I fix this problem? Connect to Server ... Server type: Database Engine Server name: (local) Authentication: Windows Authentication Please advise. Thank you. Gerry * http://www.microsoft.com/web/websitespark/default.aspx

    Read the article

  • Update mapping table in Linq

    - by Gary McGill
    I have a table Customers with a CustomerId field, and a table of Publications with a PublicationId field. Finally, I have a mapping table CustomersPublications that records which publications a customer can access - it has two fields: CustomerId field PublicationId. For a given customer, I want to update the CustomersPublications table based on a list of publication ids. I want to remove records in CustomersPublications where the PublicationId is not in the list, and add new records where the PublicationId is in the list but not already in the table. This would be easy in SQL, but I can't figure out how to do it in Linq. For the delete part, I tried: var recordsToDelete = dataContext.CustomersPublications.Where ( cp => (cp.CustomerId == customerId) && ! publicationIds.Contains(cp.PublicationId) ); dataContext.CustomersPublications.DeleteAllOnSubmit(recordsToDelete); ... but that didn't work. I got an error: System.NotSupportedException: Method 'Boolean Contains(Int32)' has no supported translation to SQL So, I tried using Any(), as follows: var recordsToDelete = dataContext.CustomersPublications.Where ( cp => (cp.CustomerId == customerId) && ! publicationIds.Any(p => p == cp.PublicationId) ); ... and this just gives me another error: System.NotSupportedException: Local sequence cannot be used in LINQ to SQL implementation of query operators except the Contains() operator Any pointers? [I have to say, I find Linq baffling (and frustrating) for all but the simplest queries. Better error messages would help!]

    Read the article

  • Insert Data from to a table

    - by Lee_McIntosh
    I have a table that lists number of comments from a particular site like the following: Date Site Comments Total --------------------------------------------------------------- 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 1 5 5 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 2 8 13 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 4 2 7 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 7 13 13 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 9 1 2 I have another table that lists ALL sites for example from 1 to 10 Site ----- 1 2 ... 9 10 Using the following code i can find out which sites are missing entries for the previous month: SELECT s.site from tbl_Sites s EXCEPT SELECT c.site from tbl_Comments c WHERE c.[Date] = DATEADD(mm, DATEDIFF(mm, 0, GetDate()) -1,0) Producing: site ----- 3 5 6 8 10 I would like to be able to insert the missing sites that is listed from my query into the comments table with some default values, i.e '0's Date Site Comments Total --------------------------------------------------------------- 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 3 0 0 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 5 0 0 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 6 0 0 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 8 0 0 2010-04-01 00:00:00.000 10 0 0 the question is, how did i update/insert the table/values? cheers, Lee

    Read the article

  • SQL2008 merge replication fails to update depdendent items when table is added

    - by Dan Puzey
    Setup: an existing SQL2008 merge replication scenario. A large server database, including views and stored procs, being replicated to client machines. What I'm doing: * adding a new table to the database * mark the new table for replication (using SP_AddMergeArticle) * alter a view (which is already part of the replicated content) is updated to include fields from this new table (which is joined to the tables in the existing view). A stored procedure is similarly updated. The problem: the table gets replicated to client machines, but the view is not updated. The stored procedure is also not updated. Non-useful workaround: if I run the snapshot agent after calling SP_AddMergeArticle and before updating the view/SP, both the view and the stored procedure changes correctly replicate to the client. The bigger problem: I'm running a list of database scripts in a transaction, as part of a larger process. The snapshot agent can't be run during a transaction, and if I interrupt the transaction (e.g. by running the scripts in multiple transactions), I lose the ability to roll back the changes should something fail. Does anyone have any suggestions? It seems like I must be missing something obvious, because I don't see why the changes to the view/sproc wouldn't be replicating anyway, regardless of what's going on with the new table.

    Read the article

  • mysql result set joining existing table

    - by Yang
    is there any way to avoid using tmp table? I am using a query with aggregate function (sum) to generate the sum of each product: the result looks like this: product_name | sum(qty) product_1 | 100 product_2 | 200 product_5 | 300 now i want to join the above result to another table called products. so that i will have a summary like this: product_name | sum(qty) product_1 | 100 product_2 | 200 product_3 | 0 product_4 | 0 product_5 | 300 i know 1 way of doing this is the dump the 1st query result to a temp table then join it with products table. is there a better way?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213  | Next Page >