Search Results

Search found 389 results on 16 pages for 'batosai fk'.

Page 3/16 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Database design grouping contacts by lists and companies

  - by Serge

  Hi, I'm wondering what would be the best way to group contacts by their company. Right now a user can group their contacts by custom created lists but I'd like to be able to group contacts by their company as well as store the contact's position (i.e. Project Manager of XYZ company). Database wise this is what I have for grouping contacts into lists contact [id_contact] [int] PK NOT NULL, [lastName] [varchar] (128) NULL, [firstName] [varchar] (128) NULL, ...... contact_list [id_contact] [int] FK, [id_list] [int] FK, list [id_list] [int] PK [id_user] [int] FK [list_name] [varchar] (128) NOT NULL, [description] [TEXT] NULL Should I implement something similar for grouping contacts by company? If so how would I store the contact's position in that company and how can I prevent data corruption if a user modifies a contact's company name. For instance John Doe changed companies but the other co-workers are still in the old company. I doubt that will happen often (might not even happen at all) but better be safe than sorry. I'm also keeping an audit trail so in a way the contact would still need to be linked to the old company as well as the new one but without confusing what company he's actually working at the moment. I hope that made sense... Has anyone encountered such a problem? UPDATE Would something like this make sense contact_company [id_contact_company] [int] PK [id_contact] [int] FK [id_company] [int] FK [contact_title] [varchar] (128) company [id_company] [int] PK NOT NULL, [company_name] [varchar] (128) NULL, [company_description] [varchar] (300) NULL, [created_date] [datetime] NOT NULL This way a contact can work for more than one company and contacts can be grouped by companies

  Read the article

• Trying to verify understanding of foreign keys SQL Server

  - by msarchet

  So I'm working on just a learning project to expose myself to doing some things I do not get to do at work. I'm just making a simple bug and case tracking app (I know there are a million this is just to work with some tools I don't get to). So I was designing my database and realized I've never actually used Foreign Keys before in any of my projects, I've used them before but never actually setting up a column as a FK. So I've designed my database as follows, which I think is close to correct (at least for the initial layout). However When I try to add the FK's to the linking Tables I get an error saying, "The tables present in the relationship must have the same number of columns". I'm doing this by in SQLSMS by going to the Keys 'folder' and adding a FK. Is there something that I am doing wrong here, I don't understand why the tables would have to have the same number of columns for me to add a FK relationship between the tables?

  Read the article

• Creating Two Cascading Foreign Keys Against Same Target Table/Col

  - by alram

  I have the following tables: user (userid int [pk], name varchar(50)) action (actionid int [pk], description nvarchar(50)) being referenced by another table that captures the relationship: <user1> <action>'s <user2>. I did this with the following table: userAction (userActionId int [pk], actionid int [fk: action.actionid], **userId1 int [fk ref's user.userid; on del/update cascade], userId2 int [fk ref's user.userid; on del/update cascade]**). However, when I try to save the userAction table i get an error because I have two cascading fk's against user.userid. Is there any way to remedy this or must I use a trigger?

  Read the article

• Trying to verify understanding of Foreign Keys MSSQL

  - by msarchet

  So I'm working on just a learning project to expose myself to doing some things I do not get to do at work. I'm just making a simple bug and case tracking app (I know there are a million this is just to work with some tools I don't get to). So I was designing my database and realized I've never actually used Foreign Keys before in any of my projects, I've used them before but never actually setting up a column as a FK. So I've designed my database as follows, which I think is close to correct (at least for the initial layout). However When I try to add the FK's to the linking Tables I get an error saying, "The tables present in the relationship must have the same number of columns". I'm doing this by in SQLSMS by going to the Keys 'folder' and adding a FK. Is there something that I am doing wrong here, I don't understand why the tables would have to have the same number of columns for me to add a FK relationship between the tables?

  Read the article

• SQL Syntax for Complex Scenario (Deals)

  - by Yisman

  hello everyone i have a complex query to be written but cannot figure it out here are my tables Sales --one row for each sale made in the system SaleProducts --one row for each line in the invoice (similar to OrderDetails in NW) Deals --a list of possible deals/offers that a sale may be entitled to DealProducts --a list of quantities of products that must be purchased in order to get a deal now im trying to make a query which will tell me for each sale which deals he may get the relevant fields are: Sales: SaleID (PK) SaleProducts: SaleID (FK), ProductID (FK) Deals: DealID (PK) DealProducts: DealID(FK), ProductID(FK), Mandatories (int) for required qty i believe that i should be able to use some sort of cross join or outer join, but it aint working here is one sample (of about 30 things i tried) SELECT DealProducts.DealID, DealProducts.ProductID, DealProducts.Mandatories, viwSaleProductCount.SaleID, viwSaleProductCount.ProductCount FROM DealProducts LEFT OUTER JOIN viwSaleProductCount ON DealProducts.ProductID = viwSaleProductCount.ProductID GROUP BY DealProducts.DealID, DealProducts.ProductID, DealProducts.Mandatories, viwSaleProductCount.SaleID, viwSaleProductCount.ProductCount the problem is that it doesnt show any product deals that r not fullfiled (probably because of the productid join). i need that also sales that dont have the requiremnets show up, then i can filter out any saleid that exists in this query "where AmountBought thank you for your help

  Read the article

• Symfony 1.4: Deleting a sfGuardUser

  - by Tom

  Hi, I'm having some trouble with the following... I have a sfGuardUser table set up normally, and it has a one-to-one relationship with a Profile table, which contains some additional user info. When a user wants to delete themselves from the site, I'd like to retain their info in the Profile table for various purposes BUT delete the sfGuardUser in order to keep that table cleaner/shorter (not just set it to inactive). I was under the impression that I could set the FK in the Profile table to NULL and then delete the sfGuardUser, but it seems the FK-constraint fails. Indeed, it seems I can't delete either and the queries fail: If I try to delete the sfGuardUser, the Profile table will have an invalid FK If I try to delete a Profile, the sfGuardUser will have an invalid FK Other than leaving outdated sfGuardUsers and Profiles in these tables, or having to use a cascaded delete to get rid of both, can anyone tell me if there's any other way around this? Thank you.

  Read the article

• best database design for city zip & state tables

  - by ryan a

  My application will need to reference addresses. Street info will be stored with my main objects but the rest needs to be stored seperately to reduce redundancy. How should I store/retrieve ZIPs, cities and states? Here are some of my ideas. single table solution (cant do relationships) [locations] locationID locationParent (FK for locationID - 0 for state entries) locationName (city, state) locationZIP two tables (with relationships, FK constraints, ref integrity) [state] stateID stateName [city] cityID stateID (FK for state.stateID) cityName zipCode three tables [state] stateID stateName [city] cityID stateID (FK for state.stateID) cityName [zip] zipID cityID (FK for city.cityID) zipName Then I read into ZIP codes amd how they are assigned. They aren't specifically related to cities. Some cities have more than one ZIP (ok will still work) but some ZIPs are in more than one city (oh snap) and some other ZIPs (very few) are in more than one state! Also some ZIPs are not even in the same state as the address they belong to at all. Seems ZIPs are made for carrier route identification and some remote places are best served by post offices in neighboring cities or states. Does anybody know of a good (not perfect) solution that takes this into consideration to minimize discrepencies as the database grows?

  Read the article

• basic database design table on rails

  - by runcode

  I am confuse on a concept. I am doing this on rails. Is that Entity set equal to a table in the database? Is that Relationship set equal to a table in the database? Let say we have Entity set "USER" and Entity set "POST" and Entity set "COMMENT" User- can post many posts and comments as they want Post- belong to users Comments-belong to posts ,users, so comment is weak entity. SCHEMA ====== USER -id -name POST -id -user_id(FK) -comment_id (FK) COMMENT -id -user_id (FK) -post_id (FK) so USER,POST,COMMENT are tables I think. And what else is a table? And do I need a table for the relationship??

  Read the article

• Creating new Entities from Stored Procedure

  - by SK

  I have a stored procedure that retrieves existing rows from a table and also creates includes new rows that match the table definition and mapped entity (.net 3.5 entity framework). These new rows are not written to the database in the stored procedure. The stored procedure executes, but the new rows that were created will not load the navigation properties sucessfully i.e. the rows that do not actually exist in the database. e.g. database rows: key, data, FK 1, xxx, a 2, xxx, b returned rows from stored procedure: key, data, FK 1, xxx, a 2, xxx, b 3, yyy, a 4, yyy, b The entity will load FK entities a and b for rows 1 and 2, but for rows 3 and 4 the FK entity is null. Do I somehow need to add the new rows to the data context? or turn off tracking?

  Read the article

• Unnecessary Redundancy with Tables.

  - by Stacey

  My items are listed as follows; This is just a summary of course. But I'm using a method shown for the "Detail" table to represent a type of 'inheritence', so to speak - since "Item" and "Downloadable" are going to be identical except that each will have a few additional fields relevant only to them. My question is in this design pattern. This sort of thing appears many, many times in our projects - is there a more intelligent way to handle it? I basically need to normalize the tables as much as possible. I'm extremely new to databases and so this is all very confusing to me. There are 5 items. Awards, Items, Purchases, Tokens, and Downloads. They are all very, very similar, except each has a few pieces of data relevant only to itself. I've tried to use a declaration field (like an enumerator 'Type' field) in conjunction with nullable columns, but I was told that is a bad approach. What I have done is take everything similar and place it in a single table, and then each type has its own table that references a column in the 'base' table. The problem occurs with relationships, or junctions. Linking all of these back to a customer. Each type takes around 2 additional tables to properly junction all of the data together- and as such, my database is growing very, very large. Is there a smarter practice for this kind of behavior? Item ID | GUID Name | varchar(64) Product ID | GUID Name | varchar(64) Store | GUID [ FK ] Details | GUID [FK] Downloadable ID | GUID Name | varchar(64) Url | nvarchar(2048) Details | GUID [FK] Details ID | GUID Price | decimal Description | text Peripherals [ JUNCTION ] ID | GUID Detail | GUID [FK] Store ID | GUID Addresses | GUID Addresses ID | GUID Name | nvarchar(64) State | int [FK] ZipCode | int Address | nvarchar(64) State ID | int Name | varchar(32)

  Read the article

• Generate Delete Statement From Foreign Key Relationships in SQL 2008 ?

  - by Element

  Is it possible via script/tool to generate a delete statement based on the tables fk relations. i.e. I have the table: DelMe(ID) and there are 30 tables with fk references to its ID that I need to delete first, is there some tool/script that I can run that will generate the 30 delete statements based on the FK relations for me ? (btw I know about cascade delete on the relations, I can't use it in this existing db) I'm using Microsoft SQL Server 2008

  Read the article

• Normalization of database for timesheet tool and ensure data integrity

  - by fireeyedboy

  I'm creating a timesheet application. I have the following entities (amongst others): Company Employee = an employee associated with a company Client = a client associated with a company So far I have the following (abbreviated) database setup: Company - id - name Employee - id - companyId (FK to Company.id) - name Client - id - companyId (FK to Company.id) - name Now, I want an employee to be associated with a client, but only if that client is associated with the company the employee works for. How would you guarantee this data integrity on a database level? Or should I just depend on the application to guarantee this data integrity? I thought about creating a many to many table like this: EmployeeClient - employeeId (FK to Employee.id) - companyId \ (combined FK to Client.companyId, Client.id) - clientId / Thus, when I insert a client for an employee along with the employee's company id, the database should prevent this when the client is not associated with the employee's company id. Does this make sense? Because this still doesn't guarantee the employee is associated with the company. How do you deal with these things? UPDATE The scenario is as followed: A company has multiple employees. Employees will only be linked to one company. A company has multiple clients also. Clients will only be linked to one company. (Company is a sandbox, so to speak). An employee of a company can be linked to a client of it's company, but only if the client is part of the company's clientele. In other words: The application will allow a company to create/add employees and create/add clients (hence the companyId FK in the Employee and Client tables). Next, the company will be allowed to assign certain clients to certain of it's employees (EmployeeClient table). Imagine an employee working on projects for a few clients for which s/he can write billable hours, but the employee must not be allowed to write billable hours for clients they are not assigned to by their employer (the company). So, employees will not automatically have access to all their company's clients, but only to those that the company has selected for them. Hopefully this has shed some more light on the matter.

  Read the article

• Legit? Two foreign keys referencing the same primary key.

  - by Ryan

  Hi All, I'm a web developer and have recently started a project with a company. Currently, I'm working with their DBA on getting the schema laid out for the site, and we've come to a disagreement regarding the design on a couple tables, and I'd like some opinions on the matter. Basically, we are working on a site that will implement a "friends" network. All users of the site will be contained in a table tblUsers with (PersonID int identity PK, etc). What I am wanting to do is to create a second table, tblNetwork, that will hold all of the relationships between users, with (NetworkID int identity PK, Owners_PersonID int FK, Friends_PersonID int FK, etc). Or conversely, remove the NetworkID, and have both the Owners_PersonID and Friends_PersonID shared as the Primary key. This is where the DBA has his problem. Saying that "he would only implement this kind of architecture in a data warehousing schema, and not for a website, and this is just another example of web developers trying to take the easy way out." Now obviously, his remark was a bit inflammatory, and that have helped motivate me to find an suitable answer, but more so, I'd just like to know how to do it right. I've been developing databases and programming for over 10 years, have worked with some top-notch minds, and have never heard this kind of argument. What the DBA is wanting to do is instead of storing both the Owners_PersonId and Friends_PersonId in the same table, is to create a third table tblFriends to store the Friends_PersonId, and have the tblNetwork have (NetworkID int identity PK, Owner_PersonID int FK, FriendsID int FK(from TBLFriends)). All that tblFriends would house would be (FriendsID int identity PK, Friends_PersonID(related back to Persons)). To me, creating the third table is just excessive in nature, and does nothing but create an alias for the Friends_PersonID, and cause me to have to add (what I view as unneeded) joins to all my queries, not to mention the extra cycles that will be necessary to perform the join on every query. Thanks for reading, appreciate comments. Ryan

  Read the article

• 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 setup for web application

  - by vbNewbie

  I have an application that requires a database and I have already setup tables but not sure if they match the requirements of the app. The app is a crawler which fetches web urls, crawls and stores appropriate urls and posts and all this is based on client requests which are stored as projects. So for each url stored there is one post and for client there are many projects and for each project there are many types of requests. So we get a client with a request and assign them a project name and then use the request to search for content and store the url and post. A request could already exist and should not be duplicated but should be associated with the right client and project and post etc. Here is my schema now: url table: urlId PK queryId FK url post table: postId PK urlId FK post date request table: queryId PK request client table: clientId PK client Name projectId FK project table: projectID PK queryID FK project Does this look right? or does anyone have suggestions. Of course my stored procedures and insert statements will have to be in depth.

  Read the article

• DuplicateKeyException in LINQ, but I've set auto increment and auto sync

  - by Fritos

  I'm getting a DuplicateKeyException error in my C# code. I've set Auto Generated = true, and Auto-Sync = OnInsert in my dbml. I'm not even touching the PK field in any manually written code (as seen below [My primary key field is actually called PK]). using (DeviceExerciseDataDataContext context = new DeviceExerciseDataDataContext()) { foreach(Data tgudData in data.Data) { tgd = new tableData(); tgd.FK = key; tgd.Time = tgudData.TimeStamp; tgd.Calories = Convert.ToInt32(tgudData.Calories); tgd.HeartRate = tgudData.AvgHr; tgd.BenchAngle = tgudData.Angle; tgd.WorkoutTarget = 0; tgd.Reps = tgudData.Reps; context.tableDatas.InsertOnSubmit(tgd); } context.SubmitChanges(); } This is the code for the column in the designer (columns are named PK and FK) [global::System.Data.Linq.Mapping.ColumnAttribute(Storage="_PK", AutoSync=AutoSync.OnInsert, DbType="Int NOT NULL", IsPrimaryKey=true, IsDbGenerated=true)] public int PK { get { return this._PK; } set { if ((this._PK != value)) { this.OnPKChanging(value); this.SendPropertyChanging(); this._PK = value; this.SendPropertyChanged("PK"); this.OnPKChanged(); } } } [global::System.Data.Linq.Mapping.ColumnAttribute(Storage="_FK", DbType="Int")] public System.Nullable<int> FK { get { return this._FK; } set { if ((this._FK != value)) { this.OnFKChanging(value); this.SendPropertyChanging(); this._FK = value; this.SendPropertyChanged("FK"); this.OnFKChanged(); } } }

  Read the article

• Common Properties: Consolidating Loan, Purchase, Inventory and Sale tables into one Transaction tabl

  - by Frank Computer

  Pawnshop Application: I have separate tables for Loan, Purchase, Inventory & Sales transactions. Each tables rows are joined to their respective customer rows by: customer.pk [serial] = loan.fk [integer]; = purchase.fk [integer]; = inventory.fk [integer]; = sale.fk [integer]; Since there are so many common properties within the four tables, I consolidated the four tables into one table called "transaction", where a column: transaction.trx_type char(1) {L=Loan, P=Purchase, I=Inventory, S=Sale} Scenario: A customer initially pawns merchandise, makes a couple of interest payments, then decides he wants to sell the merchandise to the pawnshop, who then places merchandise in Inventory and eventually sells it to another customer. I designed a generic transaction table where for example: transaction.main_amount DECIMAL(7,2) in a loan transaction holds the pawn amount, in a purchase holds the purchase price, in inventory and sale holds sale price. This is clearly a denormalized design, but has made programming alot easier and improved performance. Any type of transaction can now be performed from within one screen, without the need to change to different tables.

  Read the article

• Using NHibernate with an EAV data model

  - by devonlazarus

  I'm trying to leverage NH to map to a data model that is a loose interpretation of the EAV/CR data model. I have most of it working but am struggling with mapping the Entity.Attributes collection. Here are the tables in question: -------------------- | Entities | -------------------- | EntityId PK |-| | EntityType | | -------------------- | ------------- | V -------------------- | EntityAttributes | ------------------ --------------------------- -------------------- | Attributes | | StringAttributes | | EntityId PK,FK | ------------------ --------------------------- | AttributeId FK | -> | AttributeId PK | -> | StringAttributeId PK,FK | | AttributeValue | | AttributeType | | AttributeName | -------------------- ------------------ --------------------------- The AttributeValue column is implemented as an sql_variant column and I've implemented an NHibernate.UserTypes.IUserType for it. I can create an EntityAttribute entity and persist it directly so that part of the hierarchy is working. I'm just not sure how to map the EntityAttributes collection to the Entity entity. Note the EntityAttributes table could (and does) contain multiple rows for a given EntityId/AttributeId combination: EntityId AttributeId AttributeValue -------- ----------- -------------- 1 1 Blue 1 1 Green StringAttributes row looks like this for this example: StringAttributeId AttributeName ----------------- -------------- 1 FavoriteColor How can I effectively map this data model to my Entity domain such that Entity.Attributes("FavoriteColors") returns a collection of favorite colors? Typed as System.String?

  Read the article

• L2E many to many query

  - by 5YrsLaterDBA

  I have four tables: Users PrivilegeGroups rdPrivileges LinkPrivilege ----------- ---------------- --------------- --------------- userId(pk) privilegeGroupId(pk) privilegeId(pk) privilegeId(pk, fk) privilegeGroupId(fk) name code privilegeGroupId(pk, fk) L2E will not create LinkPrivilege entity for me. So we only have Users, PrivilegeGroups and rdPrivileges entities. PrivilegeGroups and rdPrivileges are many to many relationship. What I need to do is retrieve all code from rdPrivileges table based on a passed in userId. How can I do it? EDIT working code: var acc = from u in db.Users from pg in db.PrivilegeGroups from p in pg.rdPrivileges where u.UserId == userId && u.PrivilegeGroups.PrivilegeGroupId == pg.PrivilegeGroupId select p.Code;

  Read the article

• Advanced SQL Data Compare throught multiple tables

  - by podosta

  Hello, Consider the situation below. Two tables (A & B), in two environments (DEV & TEST), with records in those tables. If you look the content of the tables, you understand that functionnal data are identical. I mean except the PK and FK values, the name Roger is sill connected to Fruit & Vegetable. In DEV environment : Table A 1 Roger 2 Kevin Table B (italic field is FK to table A) 1 1 Fruit 2 1 Vegetable 3 2 Meat In TEST environment : Table A 4 Roger 5 Kevin Table B (italic field is FK to table A) 7 4 Fruit 8 4 Vegetable 9 5 Meat I'm looking for a SQL Data Compare tool which will tell me there is no difference in the above case. Or if there is, it will generate insert & update scripts with the right order (insert first in A then B) Thanks a lot guys, Grégoire

  Read the article

• Entity framework (1): implement 1 foreign key to multiple tables

  - by Michel

  Hi, i've modeled this: i have an import table, and an import steps table import 1 .. N importsteps Now i have a table importparams, which hold key/value pairs to register all kind of info about the import or the importsteps. So i have modeled a FK in SqlServer which points to the PK of the import table and to the PK of the importsteps table (the ID's for both the import as the importsteps table are guids, so i can query the importparams with either the id from import or from importsteps and get the right importparams). Makes sense a bit? But how can i model this in the EF? I can see it's a bit hard for the EF to model this, because one realtion can point to multiple classes, but is there a way? The workaround normally is just to get all importparams where FK is the ID, but as you know the FK is not available in the EF version 1. I hope you can help me out, michel

  Read the article

• linq to sql using foreign keys returning iqueryable(of myEntity]

  - by Gern Blandston

  I'm trying to use Linq to SQL to return an IQueryable(of Project) when using foreign key relationships. Using the below schema, I want to be able to pass in a UserId and get all the projects created for the company the user is associated with. DB tables: Projects Projid ProjCreator FK (UserId from UserInfo table) Companyid FK (CompanyID from Companies table) UserInfo UserID PK Companyid FK Companies CompanyId PK Description I can get the iqueryable(of project) when simply getting the ProjectCreator with this: Return (From p In db.Projects _ Where p.ProjectCreator = Me.UserId) But I'm having trouble getting the syntax to get a iqueryable(of projects) when using foreign keys. Below gives me an IQueryable(of anonymous) but I can't seem to convince it to give me an IQueryable(of project) even if I try to cast it: Dim retval = (From p In db.Projects _ Join c In db.Companies On p.CompanyId Equals c.CompanyId _ Join u In db.UserInfos On u.CompanyId Equals c.CompanyId _ Where u.Login = UserId)

  Read the article

• ASP.net application advice needed

  - by c11ada

  hey all, im biulding a ASP.net application, which is connected to a database. the database design is as follows **Users Table** UserID `(PK) autonumber` Username **Question Table** QuestionID `(PK) autonumber` QuestionNumber QuestionText **Questionnaire Table** QuestionnaireID `(PK) autonumber` UserID `(FK) User Table` Date **Feedback Table** FeedbackID `(PK) autonumber` QuestionnaireID `(FK) Questionnaire Table` QuestionID `(FK) Questions Table` Answer Comment please can some one advise me on how I should go about inserting data into the questionnaire table and the feedback table. I know that the questionnaire table needs to be updated first. but the Questionnaire ID is linked to the feedback table, so how do I go about updating both tables ?

  Read the article

• many to many tables linked to grid view

  - by yousof

  i have web page that save data for stores, these stores have activities i want to determine the activities for those stores. this reason i make three tables: first one is : tbOLActivity has fields: ActivityId int (pk), ActivityName nvarchar(50) second one is : tbOLStore has fields: StoreId int (pk), StoreName nvarchar(50), ActivityId int (fk), Address navrchar(50) therd one is: tbOLStoreActivty has fields : SerialNo int (pk), StoreId int (fk), ActivityId int (fk), Activity_Status int i make combobox in web page called "AcivityCombo" to display the data of tbOLActivity table If CtvAct.GetRecords("Fill_ActivityTb") = True Then AcivityCombo.DataSource = CtvAct.MainDataset.Tables("tbOLActivity").DefaultView AcivityCombo.DataTextField = "ActivityName" AcivityCombo.DataValueField = "ActivityId" AcivityCombo.DataBind() the problem is how to select item from this combo and insert it into gridview then save data into the tables

  Read the article

• How to convert a MSSQL database (including procedures, functions and triggers) to a firebird databas

  - by user193655

  I am considering migrating to Firebird. To have a "quick start" approach I downloaded the trial of a conversion tool (DBConvert) and tried it. I just picked up a random tool, this tool doesn't convert procedures, functions and triggers (I don't think it is a limit of the trial since there is not an explicit reference to sp, sf and triggers in the link above). Anyway by trying that tool I had the message: "The DB cannot be converted succesfully because some FK names are too long." This is because in some tables I have FK whose description is 32 chars. Is this a real firebird limit or it is possible to overcome it somehow (of course renaming the FK is an extreme option because it is extra work)? Anyway how to convert a MS SQL DB fully to FIREBIRD? Is there a valid tool? Did someone succed in a conversion of non trivial databases?

  Read the article

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