Search Results

Search found 1214 results on 49 pages for 'tomaz tsql'.

Page 28/49 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

  • Most optimal way to convert to date

    - by IMHO
    I have legacy system where all date fields are maintained in YMD format. Example: 20101123 this is date: 11/23/2010 I'm looking for most optimal way to convert from number to date field. Here is what I came up with: declare @ymd int set @ymd = 20101122 select @ymd, convert(datetime, cast(@ymd as varchar(100)), 112) This is pretty good solution but I'm wandering if someone has better way doing it

    Read the article

  • How to invert rows and columns using a T-SQL Pivot Table

    - by Jeff Stock
    I have a query that returns one row. However, I want to invert the rows and columns, meaning show the rows as columns and columns as rows. I think the best way to do this is to use a pivot table, which I am no expert in. Here is my simple query: SELECT Period1, Period2, Period3 FROM GL.Actuals WHERE Year = 2009 AND Account = '001-4000-50031' Results (with headers): Period1, Period2, Period3 612.58, 681.36, 676.42 I would like for the results to look like this: Desired Results: Period, Amount Period1, 612.58 Period2, 681.36 Period3, 676.42 This is a simple example, but what I'm really after is a bit more comlex than this. I realize I could produce theses results by using several SELECT commands instead. I'm just hoping someone can shine some light on how to accomplish this with a Pivot Table or if there is yet a better way.

    Read the article

  • constructing dynamic In Statements with sql

    - by nitroxn
    Suppose we need to check three boolean conditions to perform a select query. Let the three flags be 'A', 'B' and 'C'. If all of the three flags are set to '1' then the query to be generated is SELECT * FROM Food WHERE Name In ('Apple, 'Biscuit', 'Chocolate'); If only the flags 'A' and 'B' are set to '1' with C set to '0'. Then the following query is generated. SELECT * FROM Food WHERE Name In ('Apple, 'Biscuit'); What is the best way to do it?

    Read the article

  • Export products and variants from SQL Server

    - by mickyjtwin
    I have a SQL Server DB that has a table of products, and another table which contains a list of the sku variants of each product if it has one. I want to export all the products and their SKU's into excel. At the moment, I have a helper SQL function which performs the subquery against a product_id and concatenates all the SKU's into a comma-delimited string, e.g: Product Code, Name, SKUs 111 P1 77, 22, 11 Is there an easier way to do this, so that each SKU is a row which the associated product code as well, i.e: Product Code, Name, SKUs 111 P1 77 111 P1 22 111 P1 11

    Read the article

  • Group Specific set of data by Day

    - by Jacques444
    Need to get a certian subgroup of data per day (Seperated by weekday) For example Select weekday,bla,blabla,blablabla from dbo.blabla where bla = @StartDate and bla <=@endDate I need the output to be: Monday bla blabla blablabla Tuesday bla blabla blablabla If someone could help me that would be awesome. Thanks & Regards Jacques

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2005 - Building a WHERE clause

    - by user336786
    Hello, I have a stored procedure that is dynamically building a query. The where clause associated with this query is based on filter values selected by a user. No matter what I do though, the where clause does not seem to get set. -- Dynamically build the WHERE clause based on the filters DECLARE @whereClause as nvarchar(1024) IF (@hasSpouse > -1) BEGIN IF (@hasSpouse = 0) SET @whereClause='p.[HasSpouse]=0' ELSE SET @whereClause='(p.[HasSpouse]=1 OR p.[HasSpouse] IS NULL)' END -- Dynamically add the next filter if necessary IF (@isVegan > -1) BEGIN IF (LEN(@whereClause) > 0) BEGIN SET @whereClause = @whereClause + ' AND ' END IF (@isVegan = 0) SET @whereClause = @whereClause + 'c.[IsVegan]=0' ELSE SET @whereClause = @whereClause + '(c.[IsVegan]=1 OR c.[IsVegan] IS NULL)' END PRINT @whereClause The @whereClause never prints anything. In turn, the LEN(@whereClause) is always NULL. The @isVegan and @hasSpouse values are passed into the stored procedure. The values are what I expected. What am I doing wrong? Why is the @whereClause never being set? Thank you for your help! Thank you!

    Read the article

  • How would I duplicate the Rank function in a Sql Server Compact Edition SELECT statement?

    - by AMissico
    It doesn't look like SQL Server Compact Edition supports the RANK() function. (See Functions (SQL Server Compact Edition) at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms174077(SQL.90).aspx). How would I duplicate the RANK() function in a SQL Server Compact Edition SELECT statement. (Please use Northwind.sdf for any sample select statements, as it is the only one I can open with SQL Server 2005 Management Studio.)

    Read the article

  • t-sql pivot filter based on input column name

    - by stackoverflowuser
    Based on following AreaState table Area State ------------------- A1 Active A1 Active A1 Active A1 Proposed A1 Proposed A2 Active A2 Proposed I want to write a stored proc that returns count of state for each of the areas. Input to the stored proc is any valid State (in this case @state is the input parameter). I was hoping that below would work but it does not. declare @state varchar(10) set @state = 'Active' select Area, QUOTENAME(@state) from ( select Area, State from AreaState ) as src pivot ( count(State) for State in (QUOTENAME(@state)) ) as pvt Pls. suggest.

    Read the article

  • What are the advantages of a query using a derived table(s) over a query not using them?

    - by AspOnMyNet
    I know how derived tables are used, but I still can’t really see any real advantages of using them. For example, in the following article http://techahead.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/sql-derived-tables/ the author tried to show benefits of a query using derived table over a query without one with an example, where we want to generate a report that shows off the total number of orders each customer placed in 1996, and we want this result set to include all customers, including those that didn’t place any orders that year and those that have never placed any orders at all( he’s using Northwind database ). But when I compare the two queries, I fail to see any advantages of a query using a derived table ( if nothing else, use of a derived table doesn't appear to simplify our code, at least not in this example): Regular query: SELECT C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName, COUNT(O.OrderID) AS TotalOrders FROM Customers C LEFT OUTER JOIN Orders O ON C.CustomerID = O.CustomerID AND YEAR(O.OrderDate) = 1996 GROUP BY C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName Query using a derived table: SELECT C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName, COUNT(dOrders.OrderID) AS TotalOrders FROM Customers C LEFT OUTER JOIN (SELECT * FROM Orders WHERE YEAR(Orders.OrderDate) = 1996) AS dOrders ON C.CustomerID = dOrders.CustomerID GROUP BY C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName Perhaps this just wasn’t a good example, so could you show me an example where benefits of derived table are more obvious? thanx

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Merge statement issue

    - by George2
    Hello everyone, I am learning and using SQL Server 2008 new Merge statement, merge statement will compare/operate source table and destination table row by row ("operate" I mean operations performed for when matched or not-matched conditions). My question is whether the whole merge process will be one transaction or each row comparison/operation will be one transaction? Appreciate if any document to prove it. thanks in advance, George

    Read the article

  • SQl Server - Hierarchical Data

    - by JMSA
    I use SQL Server 2000. Suppose I have two tables like the following: Area ---------------------------------- ID| Name | HierarchyLevel ---------------------------------- 1 | World | 1 2 | America| 2 3 | Europe | 2 4 | Africa | 2 5 | USA | 3 and AreaHierarchy ------------------------ ID | ParentID | ChildID ------------------------ 1 | 1 | 2 2 | 1 | 3 3 | 1 | 4 4 | 2 | 5 where AreaHierarchy.ParentID and AreaHierarchy.ChildID are FKs of Area.ID How can I find the nth parent of USA? Is it possible without looping? Probably not.

    Read the article

  • Transaction count after EXECUTE indicates that a COMMIT or ROLLBACK TRANSACTION statement is missing

    - by Paresh
    I am getting the error from the application as following with SQL server 2005 "Transaction count after EXECUTE indicates that a COMMIT or ROLLBACK TRANSACTION statement is missing. Previous count = 1, current count = 0" How can i find the stage where this error raised? how can i found the missing transaction or the stored procedure where it is not committ or rollback?

    Read the article

  • Simulating an identity column within an insert trigger

    - by William Jens
    I have a table for logging that needs a log ID but I can't use an identity column because the log ID is part of a combo key. create table StuffLogs { StuffID int LogID int Note varchar(255) } There is a combo key for StuffID & LogID. I want to build an insert trigger that computes the next LogID when inserting log records. I can do it for one record at a time (see below to see how LogID is computed), but that's not really effective, and I'm hoping there's a way to do this without cursors. select @NextLogID = isnull(max(LogID),0)+1 from StuffLogs where StuffID = (select StuffID from inserted) The net result should allow me to insert any number of records into StuffLogs with the LogID column auto computed. StuffID LogID Note 123 1 foo 123 2 bar 456 1 boo 789 1 hoo Inserting another record using StuffID: 123, Note: bop will result in the following record: StuffID LogID Note 123 3 bop

    Read the article

  • T-SQL MERGE - finding out which action it took

    - by IanC
    I need to know if a MERGE statement performed an INSERT. In my scenario, the insert is either 0 or 1 rows. Test code: DECLARE @t table (C1 int, C2 int) DECLARE @C1 INT, @C2 INT set @c1 = 1 set @c2 = 1 MERGE @t as tgt USING (SELECT @C1, @C2) AS src (C1, C2) ON (tgt.C1 = src.C1) WHEN MATCHED AND tgt.C2 != src.C2 THEN UPDATE SET tgt.C2 = src.C2 WHEN NOT MATCHED BY TARGET THEN INSERT VALUES (src.C1, src. C2) OUTPUT deleted.*, $action, inserted.*; SELECT inserted.* The last line doesn't compile (no scope, unlike a trigger). I can't get access to @action, or the output. Actually, I don't want any output meta data. How can I do this?

    Read the article

  • Eliminating matching values in a SQL result set

    - by Burgess Taylor
    I have a table with a list of transactions (invoices and credits) and I need to get a list of all the rows where the invoices and credits don't match up. eg user product value bill ThingA 200 jim ThingA -200 sue ThingB 100 liz ThingC 50 I only want to see the third and fourth rows, as the values of the others match off. I can do this if I select product, sum(value) ... group by product having sum(value) < 0 which works well, but I want to return the user name as well. As soon as I add the user to the select, I need to group by it as well, which messes it up as the amounts don't match up by user AND product. Any ideas ? I am using MS SQL 2000... Cheers

    Read the article

  • Is it a Good Practice to Add two Conditions when using a JOIN keyword?

    - by Raúl Roa
    I'd like to know if having to conditionals when using a JOIN keyword is a good practice. I'm trying to filter this resultset by date but I'm unable to get all the branches listed even if there's no expense or income for a date using a WHERE clause. Is there a better way of doing this, if so how? SELECT Branches.Name ,SUM(Expenses.Amount) AS Expenses ,SUM(Incomes.Amount) AS Incomes FROM Branches LEFT JOIN Expenses ON Branches.Id = Expenses.BranchId AND Expenses.Date = '3/11/2010' LEFT JOIN Incomes ON Branches.Id = Incomes.BranchId AND Incomes.Date = '3/11/2010' GROUP BY Branches.Name

    Read the article

  • help with t-sql self join

    - by stackoverflowuser
    Based on the following table ID Date State ----------------------------- 1 06/10/2010 Complete 1 06/04/2010 Pending 2 06/06/2010 Active 2 06/05/2010 Pending I want the following ouptut ID Date State --------------------------- 1 06/04/2010 Complete 2 06/05/2010 Active So date is the earliest one and State is the latest one. I am failing to apply self join on the table to get the output. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to list all duplicated rows which may include NULL columns?

    - by Yousui
    Hi guys, I have a problem of listing duplicated rows that include NULL columns. Lemme show my problem first. USE [tempdb]; GO IF OBJECT_ID(N'dbo.t') IS NOT NULL BEGIN DROP TABLE dbo.t END GO CREATE TABLE dbo.t ( a NVARCHAR(8), b NVARCHAR(8) ); GO INSERT t VALUES ('a', 'b'); INSERT t VALUES ('a', 'b'); INSERT t VALUES ('a', 'b'); INSERT t VALUES ('c', 'd'); INSERT t VALUES ('c', 'd'); INSERT t VALUES ('c', 'd'); INSERT t VALUES ('c', 'd'); INSERT t VALUES ('e', NULL); INSERT t VALUES (NULL, NULL); INSERT t VALUES (NULL, NULL); INSERT t VALUES (NULL, NULL); INSERT t VALUES (NULL, NULL); GO Now I want to show all rows that have other rows duplicated with them, I use the following query. SELECT a, b FROM dbo.t GROUP BY a, b HAVING count(*) > 1 which will give us the result: a b -------- -------- NULL NULL a b c d Now if I want to list all rows that make contribution to duplication, I use this query: WITH duplicate (a, b) AS ( SELECT a, b FROM dbo.t GROUP BY a, b HAVING count(*) > 1 ) SELECT dbo.t.a, dbo.t.b FROM dbo.t INNER JOIN duplicate ON (dbo.t.a = duplicate.a AND dbo.t.b = duplicate.b) Which will give me the result: a b -------- -------- a b a b a b c d c d c d c d As you can see, all rows include NULLs are filtered. The reason I thought is that I use equal sign to test the condition(dbo.t.a = duplicate.a AND dbo.t.b = duplicate.b), and NULLs cannot be compared use equal sign. So, in order to include rows that include NULLs in it in the last result, I have change the aforementioned query to WITH duplicate (a, b) AS ( SELECT a, b FROM dbo.t GROUP BY a, b HAVING count(*) > 1 ) SELECT dbo.t.a, dbo.t.b FROM dbo.t INNER JOIN duplicate ON (dbo.t.a = duplicate.a AND dbo.t.b = duplicate.b) OR (dbo.t.a IS NULL AND duplicate.a IS NULL AND dbo.t.b = duplicate.b) OR (dbo.t.b IS NULL AND duplicate.b IS NULL AND dbo.t.a = duplicate.a) OR (dbo.t.a IS NULL AND duplicate.a IS NULL AND dbo.t.b IS NULL AND duplicate.b IS NULL) And this query will give me the answer as I wanted: a b -------- -------- NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL a b a b a b c d c d c d c d Now my question is, as you can see, this query just include two columns, in order to include NULLs in the last result, you have to use many condition testing statements in the query. As the column number increasing, the condition testing statements you need in your query is increasing astonishingly. How can I solve this problem? Great thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there a better way to find the max count in a table

    - by nXqd
    select NV.PHG From Nhanvien NV Group by NV.phg Having count(nv.Manv) >= all (select count(NV.MANV from nhanvien nv group by nv.MANV)) I'm finding a better way to find the 'max count' NV of a PHG ( in this example ) . I think, we meet this case all the time when we do SQL, i should've a better way . Thanks for reading this :)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >