Search Results

Search found 34274 results on 1371 pages for 'mysql table'.

Page 291/1371 | < Previous Page | 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298  | Next Page >

  • Foosball result prediction

    - by Wolf
    In our office, we regularly enjoy some rounds of foosball / table football after work. I have put together a small java program that generates random 2vs2 lineups from the available players and stores the match results in a database afterwards. The current prediction of the outcome uses a simple average of all previous match results from the 4 involved players. This gives a very rough estimation, but I'd like to replace it with something more sophisticated, taking into account things like: players may be good playing as attacker but bad as defender (or vice versa) players do well against a specific opponent / bad against others some teams work well together, others don't skills change over time What would be the best algorithm to predict the game outcome as accurately as possible? Someone suggested using a neural network for this, which sounds quite interesting... but I do not have enough knowledge on the topic to say if that could work, and I also suspect it might take too many games to be reasonably trained. EDIT: Had to take a longer break from this due to some project deadlines. To make the question more specific: Given the following mysql table containing all matches played so far: table match_result match_id int pk match_start datetime duration int (match length in seconds) blue_defense int fk to table player blue_attack int fk to table player red_defense int fk to table player red_attack int fk to table player score_blue int score_red int How would you write a function predictResult(blueDef, blueAtk, redDef, redAtk) {...} to estimate the outcome as closely as possible, executing any sql, doing calculations or using external libraries?

    Read the article

  • database schema eligible for delta synchronization

    - by WilliamLou
    it's a question for discussion only. Right now, I need to re-design a mysql database table. Basically, this table contains all the contract records I synchronized from another database. The contract record can be modified, deleted or users can add new contract records via GUI interface. At this stage, the table structure is exactly the same as the Contract info (column: serial number, expiry date etc.). In that case, I can only synchronize the whole table (delete all old records, replace with new ones). If I want to delta(only synchronize with modified, new, deleted records) synchronize the table, how should I change the database schema? here is the method I come up with, but I need your suggestions because I think it's a common scenario in database applications. 1)introduce a sequence number concept/column: for each sequence, mark the new added records, modified records, deleted records with this sequence number. By recording the last synchronized sequence number, only pass those records with higher sequence number; 2) because deleted contracts can be added back, and the original table has primary key constraints, should I create another table for those deleted records? or add a flag column to indicate if this contract has been deleted? I hope I explain my question clearly. Anyway, if you know any articles or your own suggestions about this, please let me know. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • PHP / MYSQL: Sanitizing user input - is this a bad idea?

    - by Greg
    I have one "go" script that fetches any other script requested and this is what I wrote to sanitize user input: foreach ($_REQUEST as $key => $value){ if (get_magic_quotes_gpc()) $_REQUEST[$key] = mysql_real_escape_string(stripslashes($value)); else $_REQUEST[$key] = mysql_real_escape_string($value); } I haven't seen anyone else use this approach. Is there any reason not to? EDIT - amended for to work for arrays: function mysql_escape($thing) { if (is_array($thing)) { $escaped = array(); foreach ($thing as $key => $value) { $escaped[$key] = mysql_escape($value); } return $escaped; } // else if (get_magic_quotes_gpc()) $thing = stripslashes($thing); return mysql_real_escape_string($thing); } foreach ($_REQUEST as $key => $value){ $_REQUEST[$key] = mysql_escape($value); }

    Read the article

  • Using OUTPUT/INTO within instead of insert trigger invalidates 'inserted' table

    - by Dan
    I have a problem using a table with an instead of insert trigger. The table I created contains an identity column. I need to use an instead of insert trigger on this table. I also need to see the value of the newly inserted identity from within my trigger which requires the use of OUTPUT/INTO within the trigger. The problem is then that clients that perform INSERTs cannot see the inserted values. For example, I create a simple table: CREATE TABLE [MyTable]( [MyID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [MyBit] [bit] NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_MyTable_MyID] PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED ( [MyID] ASC )) Next I create a simple instead of trigger: create trigger [trMyTableInsert] on [MyTable] instead of insert as BEGIN DECLARE @InsertedRows table( MyID int, MyBit bit); INSERT INTO [MyTable] ([MyBit]) OUTPUT inserted.MyID, inserted.MyBit INTO @InsertedRows SELECT inserted.MyBit FROM inserted; -- LOGIC NOT SHOWN HERE THAT USES @InsertedRows END; Lastly, I attempt to perform an insert and retrieve the inserted values: DECLARE @tbl TABLE (myID INT) insert into MyTable (MyBit) OUTPUT inserted.MyID INTO @tbl VALUES (1) SELECT * from @tbl The issue is all I ever get back is zero. I can see the row was correctly inserted into the table. I also know that if I remove the OUTPUT/INTO from within the trigger this problem goes away. Any thoughts as to what I'm doing wrong? Or is how I want to do things not feasible? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Failed to obtain JDBC Driver for MySQL under Tomcat environment

    - by Michael Mao
    Hi all: I've been trying to obtain the Driver class for JDBC connection to MySQL. The workstation is running on Linux, Fedora 10. I have manually set up the classpath variable for Java by CLI like this: bash-3.2$ echo $CLASSPATH /home/cmao/public_html/jsp/mysql-connector-java-5.1.12-bin.jar This shows that I've added the lastest mysql connection jar archive to my CLASSPATH variable. I've created a test JSP page which can be found here And source code for this page is: <%@page language="java"%> <%@page import="java.sql.*"%> <%@page import="java.util.*"%> <html> <head> <title>UTS JDBC MySQL connection test page</title> </head> <body> <% Connection con = null; out.print("Java version is : " + System.getProperty("java.version") + "<br />"); out.print("Tomcat version is : " + application.getServerInfo() + "<br />"); out.print("Servlet version is: " + application.getMajorVersion() + "<br />"); out.print("JSP version is : " + JspFactory.getDefaultFactory().getEngineInfo().getSpecificationVersion() +"<br />"); //out.print("Java classpath is : " + System.getProperty("java.class.path")+ "<br />"); //out.print("JSP classpath is : " + appliaction.getAttribute("org.apache.catalina.jsp_classpath") + "<br />"); //out.print("Tomcat classpath is : " + System.getProperty("org.apache.tomcat.common.classpath") + "<br />"); try { Class c = Class.forName("com.mysql.jdbc.Driver"); } catch(Exception e) { out.println("Error! Failed to obtain JDBC driver for MySQL... Missing class \"com.mysql.jdbc.Driver\"<br />"); } %> </body> </html> None of those commented out line would work, various Jsper Expetions would be thrown. You can check those Error pages from the following links: classpath Error page catalina Error page tomcat Error page It seems, from my limited knowledge of JSP and Servlet, the Tomcat environment "ignores" my Java CLASSPATH? In which case I cannot configure the MySQL JDBC package to let my Servlets(a JSP is but a Servlet anyway) work. I am not sure how to fix this issue. would it be better if I use an IDE like Eclipse or NetBeans and create a real Java "web app" so that everything can be "self-configured" by the usage of a web.config XML configuration file? So that I can certainly bypass this Tomcat environment restriction? Many thanks for the suggestions in advance.

    Read the article

  • Mysql limit function doesn't seem to work for me...

    - by chandru_cp
    Here is my query, select t1.dSyllabus_id,t1.dBatch,t1.dFilePathName, t2.dDegreeName,t3.dDepartmentAbbr from tbl_syllabus as t1 join tbl_degree_master as t2, tbl_department_master as t3 where t2.dDegree_id=t1.dDegree_id and t3.dDepartment_id=t1.dDepartment_id and t1.dCollege_id='1' and t1.dIsDelete='0' and i get applying limit , select t1.dSyllabus_id,t1.dBatch,t1.dFilePathName, t2.dDegreeName,t3.dDepartmentAbbr from tbl_syllabus as t1 join tbl_degree_master as t2, tbl_department_master as t3 where t2.dDegree_id=t1.dDegree_id and t3.dDepartment_id=t1.dDepartment_id and t1.dCollege_id='1' and t1.dIsDelete='0' limit 0,5 i get , I dont get the first five records why?

    Read the article

  • MySQL, SQL Select Statement, Where with OR... What's wrong with this?

    - by nobosh
    I'm looking for help with my query below. which is never returning anything for veggie... Is the way I have my WHERE statement written valid? SELECT * FROM newsfeed INNER JOIN newsfeedaction ON newsfeed.newsfeedactionid = newsfeedaction.newsFeedActionID INNER JOIN person ON newsfeed.personID = person.personID LEFT OUTER JOIN food ON newsfeed.foodID = food.foodID LEFT OUTER JOIN veggie ON newsfeed.veggieID = veggie.veggieID WHERE ( newsfeed.veggieID IS NOT NULL AND veggie.deleted = 'N' ) OR ( newsfeed.foodID IS NOT NULL AND food.deleted = 'N')

    Read the article

  • SQL statement to split a table based on a join

    - by williamjones
    I have a primary table for Articles that is linked by a join table Info to a table Tags that has only a small number of entries. I want to split the Articles table, by either deleting rows or creating a new table with only the entries I want, based on the absence of a link to a certain tag. There are a few million articles. How can I do this? Not all of the articles have any tag at all, and some have many tags. Example: table Articles primary_key id table Info foreign_key article_id foreign_key tag_id table Tags primary_key id It was easy for me to segregate the articles that do have the match right off the bat, so I thought maybe I could do that and then use a NOT IN statement but that is so slow running it's unclear if it's ever going to finish. I did that with these commands: INSERT INTO matched_articles SELECT * FROM articles a LEFT JOIN info i ON a.id = i.article_id WHERE i.tag_id = 5; INSERT INTO unmatched_articles SELECT * FROM articles a WHERE a.id NOT IN (SELECT m.id FROM matched_articles m); If it makes a difference, I'm on Postgres.

    Read the article

  • Whats the most efficient MySQL column types for this data?

    - by AlabamaKush
    I have several tables with some pretty standard data in each. Can somebody help me optimize them by telling me the best column types for this data. Whats beside them is what I have currently. Number (max length 7) --> MEDIUMINT(8) Unsigned Text (max length 30) --> VARCHAR(30) Text (max length 200) --> VARCHAR(200) Number (max length 4) --> SMALLINT(5) Unsigned Number (either 0 or 1) --> TINYINT(1) Unsigned Text (max length 500) --> TEXT Any suggestions? I'm just guessing with this so I know some of them are wrong...

    Read the article

  • atk4 advanced crud?

    - by thindery
    I have the following tables: -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `product` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `product` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `productName` VARCHAR(255) NULL , `s7location` VARCHAR(255) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) ) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `pages` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `pages` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `productID` INT NULL , `pageName` VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL , `isBlank` TINYINT(1) NULL , `pageOrder` INT(11) NULL , `s7page` INT(11) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `productID` (`productID` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `productID` FOREIGN KEY (`productID` ) REFERENCES `product` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `field` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `field` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `pagesID` INT NULL , `fieldName` VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL , `fieldType` VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL , `fieldDefaultValue` VARCHAR(255) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `id` (`pagesID` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `pagesID` FOREIGN KEY (`pagesID` ) REFERENCES `pages` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB; I have gotten CRUD to work on the 'product' table. //addproduct.php class page_addproduct extends Page { function init(){ parent::init(); $crud=$this->add('CRUD')->setModel('Product'); } } This works. but I need to get it so that when a new product is created it basically allows me to add new rows into the pages and field tables. For example, the products in the tables are a print product(like a greeting card) that has multiple pages to render. Page 1 may have 2 text fields that can be customized, page 2 may have 3 text fields, a slider to define text size, and a drop down list to pick a color, and page 3 may have five text fields that can all be customized. All three pages (and all form elements, 12 in this example) are associated with 1 product. So when I create the product, could i add a button to create a page for that product, then within the page i can add a button to add a new form element field? I'm still somewhat new to this, so my db structure may not be ideal. i'd appreciate any suggestions and feedback! Could someone point me toward some information, tutorials, documentation, ideas, suggestions, on how I can implement this?

    Read the article

  • How do I bring forward the SELECTED option in PHP from MySQL?

    - by Derek
    Hi all, In my update form, I want the fields to recall the values that are already stored. This is very simple in a text field, but for my drop down () I'm having trouble with PHP reading the already stored name of user. Here is my query and code: $sql = "SELECT users.user_id, users.name FROM users"; $result = mysql_query($sql, $connection) or die ("Couldn't perform query $sql <br />".mysql_error()); $row = mysql_fetch_array($result);?> <label>Designated Person:</label> <select name="name" id="name"> <option value="<?php echo $row['user_id']?>" SELECTED><?php echo $row['name']?> - Current</option> <?php while($row = mysql_fetch_array($result)) { ?> <option value="<?php echo $row['user_id']; if (isset($_POST['user_id']));?>"><?php echo $row['fullname']?></option> <?php } ?> The result of this displays all of the users (as required) and lets me select a user then perform the change successfully...however the 'SELECTED' is always the first one in my database and never the user that was selected when my activity was added :( !!!

    Read the article

  • Which Table Should be Master and Child in Database Design

    - by Jason
    I am quickly learning the ins and outs of database design (something that, as of a week ago, was new to me), but I am running across some questions that don't seem immediately obvious, so I was hoping to get some clarification. The question I have right is about foreign keys. As part of my design, I have a Company table. Originally, I had included address information directly within the table, but, as I was hoping to achieve 3NF, I broke out the address information into its own table, Address. In order to maintain data integrity, I created a row in Company called "addressId" as an INT and the Address table has a corresponding addressId as its primary key. What I'm a little bit confused about (or what I want to make sure I'm doing correctly) is determining which table should be the master (referenced) table and which should be the child (referencing) table. When I originally set this up, I made the Address table the master and the Company the child. However, I now believe this is wrong due to the fact that there should be only one address per Company and, if a Company row is deleted, I would want the corresponding Address to be removed as well (CASCADE deletion). I may be approaching this completely wrong, so I would appreciate any good rules of thumb on how to best think about the relationship between tables when using foreign keys. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • PDOStatement::bindParam() not setting AI value from MySQL insert?

    - by Alan
    I have a simple insert statement using PDO php class. $statement = $db->prepare('INSERT INTO demographics (id,location_id,male,ethnicity_id,birthyear) VALUES (:id,:location_id,:male,:ethnicity_id,:birthyear)'); $statement->bindParam(':id',$demo->id,PDO::PARAM_INT,4); $statement->bindParam(':location_id', $demo->locationid,PDO::PARAM_INT); $statement->bindParam(':male',$demo->male,PDO::PARAM_BOOL); $statement->bindParam(':ethnicity_id',$demo->ethnicityid,PDO::PARAM_INT); $statement->bindParam(':birthyear',$demo->birthyear,PDO::PARAM_INT); $statement->execute(); print_r($demo); Even though the statement executes correctly (row is correctly written), $demo-id is null. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • MySQL - are FK's useful / viable in a web app?

    - by yoda
    Hi all, I've encountered this discussion related to FK's and web applications. Basically some people say that FK's in web applications doesn't represent a real improvement and can even make the application slower in some cases. What do you guys think, what's your experience? -- A quote from Heikki Tuuri, creator of InnoDB engine, founder and CEO of Innobase: InnoDB checks foreign keys as soon as a row is updated, no batching is performed or checks delayed till transaction commit Foreign keys are often serious performance overhead, but help maintain data consistency Foreign Keys increase amount of row level locking done and can make it spread to a lot of tables besides the ones directly updated

    Read the article

  • MySql - Select from - Don't Show Duplicate Words - maybe "on duplicate key"?

    - by ali
    hi, how can I insert "on duplicate key" in this Code to remove duplicate words? or is there a better method that you know? thank you!! this is my code: function sm_list_recent_searches($before = '', $after = '', $count = 20) { // List the most recent successful searches. global $wpdb, $table_prefix; $count = intval($count); $results = $wpdb->get_results( "SELECT `terms`, `datetime` FROM `{$table_prefix}searchmeter_recent` WHERE 3 < `hits` AND CHAR_LENGTH(`terms`) > 4 ORDER BY `datetime` DESC LIMIT $count"); if (count($results)) { foreach ($results as $result) { echo '<a href="'. get_settings('home') . '/search/' . urlencode($result->terms) . '">'. htmlspecialchars($result->terms) .'</a>'.", "; } } }

    Read the article

  • table design for storing large number of rows

    - by hyperboreean
    I am trying to store in a postgresql database some unique identifiers along with the site they have been seen on. I can't really decide which of the following 3 option to choose in order to be faster and easy maintainable. The table would have to provide the following information: the unique identifier which unfortunately it's text the sites on which that unique identifier has been seen The amount of data that would have to hold is rather large: there are around 22 millions unique identifiers that I know of. So I thought about the following designs of the table: id - integer identifier - text seen_on_site - an integer, foreign key to a sites table This approach would require around 22 mil multiplied by the number of sites. id - integer identifier - text seen_on_site_1 - boolean seen_on_site_2 - boolean ............ seen_on_site_n - boolean Hopefully the number of sites won't go past 10. This would require only the number of unique identifiers that I know of, that is around 20 millions, but it would make it hard to work with it from an ORM perspective. one table that would store only unique identifiers, like in: id - integer unique_identifier - text, one table that would store only sites, like in: id - integer site - text and one many to many relation, like: id - integer, unique_id - integer (fk to the table storing identifiers) site_id - integer (fk to sites table) another approach would be to have a table that stores unique identifiers for each site So, which one seems like a better approach to take on the long run?

    Read the article

  • rookie MySql question about paging; Is one query enough?

    - by Camran
    I have managed to get paging to work, almost. I want to display to the user, total nr of records found, and the currently displayed records. Ex: 4000 found, displaying 0-100. I am testing this with the nr 2 (because I don't have that many records, have like 20). So I am using LIMIT $start, $nr_results; Do I have to make two queries in order to display the results the way I want, one query fetching all records and then make a mysql_num_rows to get all records, then the one with the LIMIT ? I have this: mysql_num_rows($qry_result); $total_pages = ceil($num_total / $res_per_page); //$res_per_page==2 and $num_total = 2 if ($p - 10 < 1) { $pagemin=1; } else { $pagemin = $p - 10; } if ($p + 10 $total_pages) { $pagemax = $total_pages; } else { $pagemax = $p + 10; } Here is the query: SELECT mt.*, fordon.*, boende.*, elektronik.*, business.*, hem_inredning.*, hobby.* FROM classified mt LEFT JOIN fordon ON fordon.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN boende ON boende.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN elektronik ON elektronik.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN business ON business.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN hem_inredning ON hem_inredning.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN hobby ON hobby.classified_id = mt.classified_id ORDER BY modify_date DESC LIMIT 0, 2 Thanks, if you need more input let me know. Basically Q is, do I have to make two queries?

    Read the article

  • Safe to KILL a mysql process REPLACEing records in a large myisam table?

    - by threecheeseopera
    I have a REPLACE query running for a few days now on a few MyISAM tables, the largest having 20+million records. I need it to stop. It is, basically: REPLACE INTO really_large_table (a,b,c,d) SELECT e,f,g,h FROM big_table INNER JOIN huge_table ON big_table.x LIKE CONCAT('%', huge_table.y, '%'); I need to KILL it, and I am worried that I may corrupt really_large_table. Because the sub-query itself takes a significant amount of time, the REPLACEing probably occurs (relatively) infrequently; if this is true, does this make it less likely for the data to become corrupted? For the curious, here is the SO question asked about the query I am trying to kill.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298  | Next Page >