Search Results

Search found 16921 results on 677 pages for 'entity group transactions'.

Page 31/677 | < Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >

  • SQL SERVER – Table Variables and Transactions – SQL in Sixty Seconds #007 – Video

    - by pinaldave
    Today’s SQL in Sixty Seconds video is inspired from my presentation at TechEd India 2012 on Misconception and Resolution. Quite often I have seen people getting confused with certain behavior of the T-SQL. They expect SQL to behave certain way and SQL Server behave differently. This kind of issue often creates confusion and frustration. Sometime I have seen them also confusing it with bug and submitting the bug, where reality is totally different. Similar concept which are going to see today. I have seen quite commonly developer assuming that table various will be rolled back when transaction is rolled back. This sixty seconds video describes that table various are not rolled back when transactions are rolled back. More on Errors: Difference Temp Table and Table Variable – Effect of Transaction Effect of TRANSACTION on Local Variable – After ROLLBACK and After COMMIT Debate – Table Variables vs Temporary Tables – Quiz – Puzzle – 13 of 31 I encourage you to submit your ideas for SQL in Sixty Seconds. We will try to accommodate as many as we can. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: Database, Pinal Dave, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL in Sixty Seconds, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQLServer, T SQL, Video

    Read the article

  • Distributed transactions and queues, ruby, erlang

    - by chrispanda
    I have a problem that involves several machines, message queues, and transactions. So for example a user clicks on a web page, the click sends a message to another machine which adds a payment to the user's account. There may be many thousands of clicks per second. All aspects of the transaction should be fault tolerant. I've never had to deal with anything like this before, but a bit of reading suggests this is a well known problem. So to my questions. Am I correct in assuming that secure way of doing this is with a two phase commit, but the protocol is blocking and so I won't get the required performance? It appears that DBs like redis and message queuing system like Rescue, RabbitMQ etc don't really help me a lot - even if I implement some sort of two phase commit, the data will be lost if redis crashes because it is essentially memory-only. All of this has led me to look at erlang - but before I wade in and start learning a new language, I would really like to understand better if this is worth the effort. Specifically, am I right in thinking that because of its parallel processing capabilities, erlang is a better choice for implementing a blocking protocol like two phase commit, or am I confused?

    Read the article

  • How to get address the object of an related entity with CoreData ?

    - by eemceebee
    Hi Ok, after I ran into a dead end modifieing an existing Apple example for CoreData, I started completely new creating my own project and that worked fine,..... until I tried to access a related entity. So here is what I did. I created 2 entities, where one is just the detail information of the other one, so there is a one-2-one relationship. Entity #1, Stocks: name value details -- relationship to Entity #2 Entity #2, StockDetails: bank published stock -- relationship to Entity #1 Now, I created the "Managed Object Class" for both of the Entities. Then I created a few lines to put some data into it NSManagedObjectContext *context = [self managedObjectContext]; Stocks *stockinfo= [NSEntityDescription insertNewObjectForEntityForName:@"Stocks" inManagedObjectContext:context]; stockinfo.name = @"Apple"; stockinfo.value = [NSNumber numberWithInt:200]; StockDetails *thestockdetails = [NSEntityDescription insertNewObjectForEntityForName:@"StockDetails" inManagedObjectContext:context]; thestockdetails.bank = @"Bank of America"; thestockdetails.published = [NSDate date]; thestockdetails.stock = stocks_; stockinfo.details = thestockdetails ; NSError *error; if (![context save:&error]) { NSLog(@"A Problem occured, couldn't save: %@", [error localizedDescription]); } Just want to mention here, that I do not get an error with this. Next I put everything into a UITableViewController for a preview and another for a detail view. The preview just shows infos form Entity #1 (Stocks) and when selected it shows the detail view. Now here I also display the infos form Entity #1 (Stocks) but I want to show the Entity #2 (StockDetails) aswell. This is how I try to access the data : StockDetails *details_ = [stockinfo details]; And this gives me a EXC_BAD_ACCESS. So any idea what I am doing wrong here ? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How can I get SQL Server transactions to use record-level locks?

    - by Joe White
    We have an application that was originally written as a desktop app, lo these many years ago. It starts a transaction whenever you open an edit screen, and commits if you click OK, or rolls back if you click Cancel. This worked okay for a desktop app, but now we're trying to move to ADO.NET and SQL Server, and the long-running transactions are problematic. I found that we'll have a problem when multiple users are all trying to edit (different subsets of) the same table at the same time. In our old database, each user's transaction would acquire record-level locks to every record they modified during their transaction; since different users were editing different records, everyone gets their own locks and everything works. But in SQL Server, as soon as one user edits a record inside a transaction, SQL Server appears to get a lock on the entire table. When a second user tries to edit a different record in the same table, the second user's app simply locks up, because the SqlConnection blocks until the first user either commits or rolls back. I'm aware that long-running transactions are bad, and I know that the best solution would be to change these screens so that they no longer keep transactions open for a long time. But since that would mean some invasive and risky changes, I also want to research whether there's a way to get this code up and running as-is, just so I know what my options are. How can I get two different users' transactions in SQL Server to lock individual records instead of the entire table? Here's a quick-and-dirty console app that illustrates the issue. I've created a database called "test1", with one table called "Values" that just has ID (int) and Value (nvarchar) columns. If you run the app, it asks for an ID to modify, starts a transaction, modifies that record, and then leaves the transaction open until you press ENTER. I want to be able to start the program and tell it to update ID 1; let it get its transaction and modify the record; start a second copy of the program and tell it to update ID 2; have it able to update (and commit) while the first app's transaction is still open. Currently it freezes at step 4, until I go back to the first copy of the app and close it or press ENTER so it commits. The call to command.ExecuteNonQuery blocks until the first connection is closed. public static void Main() { Console.Write("ID to update: "); var id = int.Parse(Console.ReadLine()); Console.WriteLine("Starting transaction"); using (var scope = new TransactionScope()) using (var connection = new SqlConnection(@"Data Source=localhost\sqlexpress;Initial Catalog=test1;Integrated Security=True")) { connection.Open(); var command = connection.CreateCommand(); command.CommandText = "UPDATE [Values] SET Value = 'Value' WHERE ID = " + id; Console.WriteLine("Updating record"); command.ExecuteNonQuery(); Console.Write("Press ENTER to end transaction: "); Console.ReadLine(); scope.Complete(); } } Here are some things I've already tried, with no change in behavior: Changing the transaction isolation level to "read uncommitted" Specifying a "WITH (ROWLOCK)" on the UPDATE statement

    Read the article

  • customer.name joining transactions.name vs. customer.id [serial] joining transactions.id [integer]

    - by Frank Computer
    INFORMIX-SQL 7.32 Pawnshop Application: one-to-many relationship where each customer (master) can have many transactions (detail). customer( id serial, pk_name char(30), {PATERNAL-NAME MATERNAL-NAME, FIRST-NAME MIDDLE-NAME} [...] ); unique index on id; unique cluster index on name; transaction( fk_name char(30), ticket_number serial, [...] ); dups cluster index on fk_name; unique index on ticket_number; Several people have told me this is not the correct way to join master to detail. They said I should always join customer.id[serial] to transactions.id[integer]. When a customer pawns merchandise, clerk queries the master using wildcards on name. The query usually returns several customers, clerk scrolls until locating the right name, enters a 'D' to change to detail transactions table, all transactions are automatically queried, then clerk enters an 'A' to add a new transaction. The problem with using customer.id joining transaction.id is that although the customer table is maintained in sorted name order, clustering the transaction table by fk_id groups the transactions by fk_id, but they are not in the same order as the customer name, so when clerk is scrolling through customer names in the master, the system has to jump allover the place to locate the clustered transactions belonging to each customer. As each new customer is added, the next id is assigned to that customer, but new customers dont show up in alphabetical order. I experimented using id joins and confirmed the decrease in performance. How can I use id joins instead of name joins and still preserve the clustered transaction order by name if transactions has no name column?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework and multi-tenancy database design

    - by Junto
    I am looking at multi-tenancy database schema design for an SaaS concept. It will be ASP.NET MVC - EF, but that isn't so important. Below you can see an example database schema (the Tenant being the Company). The CompanyId is replicated throughout the schema and the primary key has been placed on both the natural key, plus the tenant Id. Plugging this schema into the Entity Framework gives the following errors when I add the tables into the Entity Model file (Model1.edmx): The relationship 'FK_Order_Customer' uses the set of foreign keys '{CustomerId, CompanyId}' that are partially contained in the set of primary keys '{OrderId, CompanyId}' of the table 'Order'. The set of foreign keys must be fully contained in the set of primary keys, or fully not contained in the set of primary keys to be mapped to a model. The relationship 'FK_OrderLine_Customer' uses the set of foreign keys '{CustomerId, CompanyId}' that are partially contained in the set of primary keys '{OrderLineId, CompanyId}' of the table 'OrderLine'. The set of foreign keys must be fully contained in the set of primary keys, or fully not contained in the set of primary keys to be mapped to a model. The relationship 'FK_OrderLine_Order' uses the set of foreign keys '{OrderId, CompanyId}' that are partially contained in the set of primary keys '{OrderLineId, CompanyId}' of the table 'OrderLine'. The set of foreign keys must be fully contained in the set of primary keys, or fully not contained in the set of primary keys to be mapped to a model. The relationship 'FK_Order_Customer' uses the set of foreign keys '{CustomerId, CompanyId}' that are partially contained in the set of primary keys '{OrderId, CompanyId}' of the table 'Order'. The set of foreign keys must be fully contained in the set of primary keys, or fully not contained in the set of primary keys to be mapped to a model. The relationship 'FK_OrderLine_Customer' uses the set of foreign keys '{CustomerId, CompanyId}' that are partially contained in the set of primary keys '{OrderLineId, CompanyId}' of the table 'OrderLine'. The set of foreign keys must be fully contained in the set of primary keys, or fully not contained in the set of primary keys to be mapped to a model. The relationship 'FK_OrderLine_Order' uses the set of foreign keys '{OrderId, CompanyId}' that are partially contained in the set of primary keys '{OrderLineId, CompanyId}' of the table 'OrderLine'. The set of foreign keys must be fully contained in the set of primary keys, or fully not contained in the set of primary keys to be mapped to a model. The relationship 'FK_OrderLine_Product' uses the set of foreign keys '{ProductId, CompanyId}' that are partially contained in the set of primary keys '{OrderLineId, CompanyId}' of the table 'OrderLine'. The set of foreign keys must be fully contained in the set of primary keys, or fully not contained in the set of primary keys to be mapped to a model. The question is in two parts: Is my database design incorrect? Should I refrain from these compound primary keys? I'm questioning my sanity regarding the fundamental schema design (frazzled brain syndrome). Please feel free to suggest the 'idealized' schema. Alternatively, if the database design is correct, then is EF unable to match the keys because it perceives these foreign keys as a potential mis-configured 1:1 relationships (incorrectly)? In which case, is this an EF bug and how can I work around it?

    Read the article

  • Execute a SQlite command with Entity Framework

    - by Filimindji
    Hi everybody, I use a SQLite database and Entity Framework (with .net framework 3.5). I'm trying to execute a simple SQL non query command to create a new table in this datase. My Entity Framework already contains the object model for this table : I just want to generate the corresponding table using a command. (By the way, there is maybe a better way to do this. Any ideas someone :) My problem is that I'm not able to execute any command, even the simple commands. Here is my code : EntityConnection entityConnection = new EntityConnection(entitiesConnectionString); Entities db = new Entities(entityConnection); DbCommand command = db.Connection.CreateCommand(); command.CommandText ="CREATE TABLE MyTable (Id int NOT NULL, OtherTable_Id nchar(40) REFERENCES OtherTable (Id) On Delete CASCADE On Update NO ACTION, SomeData nvarchar(1024) NOT NULL, Primary Key(Id) );"; command.ExecuteNonQuery(); I got this error : System.Data.EntitySqlException: The query syntax is not valid., near identifier 'TABLE', line 1, column 8. at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.CqlParser.yyerror(String s) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.CqlParser.yyparse() at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.CqlParser.Parse(String query) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.CqlQuery.Parse(String query, ParserOptions parserOptions) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.CqlQuery.Compile(String query, Perspective perspective, ParserOptions parserOptions, Dictionary`2 parameters, Dictionary`2 variables, Boolean validateTree) at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.MakeCommandTree() at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.CreateCommandDefinition() at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.TryGetEntityCommandDefinitionFromQueryCache(EntityCommandDefinition& entityCommandDefinition) at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.GetCommandDefinition() at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.InnerPrepare() at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.ExecuteReader(CommandBehavior behavior) at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.ExecuteScalar[T_Result](Func`2 resultSelector) It's seem to be a syntax error, but I can't figure where is the problem and how to resolve it. The entityConnection is ok because I can use any entities generated with EF. I tried with another simple command, but it throw another exception : DbCommand command = db.Connection.CreateCommand(); command.CommandText = "SELECT COUNT(Id) From OtherTable;"; int result = (int)command.ExecuteScalar(); And I got this error, witch is not the same, but may help : System.Data.EntitySqlException: 'Groupe' could not be resolved in the current scope or context. Make sure that all referenced variables are in scope, that required schemas are loaded, and that namespaces are referenced correctly., near simple identifier, line 1, column 23. at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.CqlErrorHelper.ReportIdentifierError(Expr expr, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.ConvertIdentifier(Expr expr, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.Convert(Expr astExpr, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.ProcessAliasedFromClauseItem(AliasExpr aliasedExpr, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.ProcessFromClauseItem(FromClauseItem fromClauseItem, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.ProcessFromClause(FromClause fromClause, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.ConvertQuery(Expr expr, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.Convert(Expr astExpr, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.ConvertRootExpression(Expr astExpr, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.SemanticAnalyzer.ConvertGeneralExpression(Expr astExpr, SemanticResolver sr) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.CqlQuery.AnalyzeSemantics(Expr astExpr, Perspective perspective, ParserOptions parserOptions, Dictionary`2 parameters, Dictionary`2 variables) at System.Data.Common.EntitySql.CqlQuery.Compile(String query, Perspective perspective, ParserOptions parserOptions, Dictionary`2 parameters, Dictionary`2 variables, Boolean validateTree) at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.MakeCommandTree() at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.CreateCommandDefinition() at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.TryGetEntityCommandDefinitionFromQueryCache(EntityCommandDefinition& entityCommandDefinition) at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.GetCommandDefinition() at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.InnerPrepare() at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.ExecuteReader(CommandBehavior behavior) at System.Data.EntityClient.EntityCommand.ExecuteScalar[T_Result](Func`2 resultSelector)

    Read the article

  • Problem creating ObjectContext from different project inside solution.

    - by Levelbit
    I have two projects in my Solution. One implements my business logic and has defined entity model of entity framework. When I want to work with classes defined within this project from another project I have some problems in runtime. Actually, the most concerning thing is why I can not instantiate my, so called, TicketEntities(ObjectContext) object from other projects? when I catch following exception: The specified named connection is either not found in the configuration, not intended to be used with the EntityClient provider, or not valid. I found out it's brake at: public partial class TicketEntities : global::System.Data.Objects.ObjectContext { public TicketEntities() : base("name=TicketEntities", "TicketEntities") { this.OnContextCreated(); } with exception: Unable to load the specified metadata resource. Just to remind you everthing works fine from orginal project.

    Read the article

  • Opening an SQL CE file at runtime with Entity Framework 4

    - by David Veeneman
    I am getting started with Entity Framework 4, and I an creating a demo app as a learning exercise. The app is a simple documentation builder, and it uses a SQL CE store. Each documentation project has its own SQL CE data file, and the user opens one of these files to work on a project. The EDM is very simple. A documentation project is comprised of a list of subjects, each of which has a title, a description, and zero or more notes. So, my entities are Subject, which contains Title and Text properties, and Note, which has Title and Text properties. There is a one-to-many association from Subject to Note. I am trying to figure out how to open an SQL CE data file. A data file must match the schema of the SQL CE database created by EF4's Create Database Wizard, and I will implement a New File use case elsewhere in the app to implement that requirement. Right now, I am just trying to get an existing data file open in the app. I have reproduced my existing 'Open File' code below. I have set it up as a static service class called File Services. The code isn't working quite yet, but there is enough to show what I am trying to do. I am trying to hold the ObjectContext open for entity object updates, disposing it when the file is closed. So, here is my question: Am I on the right track? What do I need to change to make this code work with EF4? Is there an example of how to do this properly? Thanks for your help. My existing code: public static class FileServices { #region Private Fields // Member variables private static EntityConnection m_EntityConnection; private static ObjectContext m_ObjectContext; #endregion #region Service Methods /// <summary> /// Opens an SQL CE database file. /// </summary> /// <param name="filePath">The path to the SQL CE file to open.</param> /// <param name="viewModel">The main window view model.</param> public static void OpenSqlCeFile(string filePath, MainWindowViewModel viewModel) { // Configure an SQL CE connection string var sqlCeConnectionString = string.Format("Data Source={0}", filePath); // Configure an EDM connection string var builder = new EntityConnectionStringBuilder(); builder.Metadata = "res://*/EF4Model.csdl|res://*/EF4Model.ssdl|res://*/EF4Model.msl"; builder.Provider = "System.Data.SqlServerCe"; builder.ProviderConnectionString = sqlCeConnectionString; var entityConnectionString = builder.ToString(); // Connect to the model m_EntityConnection = new EntityConnection(entityConnectionString); m_EntityConnection.Open(); // Create an object context m_ObjectContext = new Model1Container(); // Get all Subject data IQueryable<Subject> subjects = from s in Subjects orderby s.Title select s; // Set view model data property viewModel.Subjects = new ObservableCollection<Subject>(subjects); } /// <summary> /// Closes an SQL CE database file. /// </summary> public static void CloseSqlCeFile() { m_EntityConnection.Close(); m_ObjectContext.Dispose(); } #endregion }

    Read the article

  • 'Generic' ViewModel

    - by Ian MacPherson
    Using EF 4, I have several subtypes of a 'Business' entity (customers, suppliers, haulage companies etc). They DO need to be subtypes. I am building a general viewmodel which calls into a service from which a generic repository is accessed. As I have 4 subtypes, it would be good to have a 'generic' viewmodel used for all of these. Problem is of course is that I have to call a specific type into my generic repository, for example: BusinessToRetrieve = _repository .LoadEntity<Customer>(o => o.CustomerID == customerID); It would be good to be able to call <SomethingElse>, somethingElse being one or other of the subtypes), otherwise I shall have to create 4 near identical viemodels, which seems a waste of course! The subtype entity name is available to the viewmodel but I've been unable to figure out how to make the above call convert this into a type. An issue with achieving what I want is that presumably the lambda expression being passed in wouldn't be able to resolve on a 'generic' call ?

    Read the article

  • translate stored procedure - to Linq2SQL (count, max, group, orderby)

    - by Walter
    I've two tables (1:N) CREATE TABLE master (idMaster int identity (1,1) not null, TheName varchar( 100) null, constraint pk_master primary key(idMaster) clustered) and - CREATE TABLE lnk (idSlave int not null, idMaster int not null, constraint pk_lnk_master_slave(idSlave) primary key clustered) link between Master.idMaster and lnk.idMaster I've a SQL query: select max (master.idMaster) as idMaster, master.theName, count (lnk.idSlave) as freq from lnk inner join master ON lnk.idMaster = master.idMaster Group by master.theName order by freq desc, master.theName I need to translate this T-SQL query to a Linq-to-SQL statement, preferably in C#

    Read the article

  • ASP.net MVC 2.0 using the same form for adding and editing.

    - by Chevex
    I would like to use the same view for editing a blog post and adding a blog post. However, I'm having an issue with the ID. When adding a blog post, I have no need for an ID value to be posted. When model binding binds the form values to the BlogPost object in the controller, it will auto-generate the ID in entity framework entity. When I am editing a blog post I DO need a hidden form field to store the ID in so that it accompanies the next form post. Here is the view I have right now. <% using (Html.BeginForm("CommitEditBlogPost", "Admin")) { %> <% if (Model != null) { %> <%: Html.HiddenFor(x => x.Id)%> <% } %> Title:<br /> <%: Html.TextBoxFor(x => x.Title, new { Style = "Width: 90%;" })%> <br /> <br /> Summary:<br /> <%: Html.TextAreaFor(x => x.Summary, new { Style = "Width: 90%; Height: 50px;" }) %> <br /> <br /> Body:<br /> <%: Html.TextAreaFor(x => x.Body, new { Style = "Height: 250px; Width: 90%;" })%> <br /> <br /> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <% } %> Right now checking if the model is coming in NULL is a great way to know if I'm editing a blog post or adding one, because when I'm adding one it will be null as it hasn't been created yet. The problem comes in when there is an error and the entity is invalid. When the controller renders the form after an invalid model the Model != null evaluates to false, even though we are editing a post and there is clearly a model. If I render the hidden input field for ID when adding a post, I get an error stating that the ID can't be null. Any help is appreciated. EDIT: I went with OJ's answer for this question, however I discovered something that made me feel silly and I wanted to share it just in case anyone was having a similar issue. The page the adds/edits blogs does not even need a hidden field for id, ever. The reason is because when I go to add a blog I do a GET to this relative URL BlogProject/Admin/AddBlogPost This URL does not contain an ID and the action method just renders the page. The page does a POST to the same URL when adding the blog post. The incoming BlogPost entity has a null Id and is generated by EF during save changes. The same thing happens when I edit blog posts. The URL is BlogProject/Admin/EditBlogPost/{Id} This URL contains the id of the blog post and since the page is posting back to the exact same URL the id goes with the POST to the action method that executes the edit. The only problem I encountered with this is that the action methods cannot have identical signatures. [HttpGet] public ViewResult EditBlogPost(int Id) { } [HttpPost] public ViewResult EditBlogPost(int Id) { } The compiler will yell at you if you try to use these two methods above. It is far too convenient that the Id will be posted back when doing a Html.BeginForm() with no arguments for action or controller. So rather than change the name of the POST method I just modified the arguments to include a FormCollection. Like this: [HttpPost] public ViewResult EditBlogPost(int Id, FormCollection formCollection) { // You can then use formCollection as the IValueProvider for UpdateModel() // and TryUpdateModel() if you wish. I mean, you might as well use the // argument since you're taking it. } The formCollection variable is filled via model binding with the same content that Request.Form would be by default. You don't have to use this collection for UpdateModel() or TryUpdateModel() but I did just so I didn't feel like that collection was pointless since it really was just to make the method signature different from its GET counterpart. Thanks for the help guys!

    Read the article

  • Better way to do SELECT with GROUP BY

    - by Luca Romagnoli
    Hi i've wrote a query that works: SELECT `comments`.* FROM `comments` RIGHT JOIN (SELECT MAX( id ) AS id, core_id, topic_id FROM comments GROUP BY core_id, topic_id order by id desc) comm ON comm.id = comments.id LIMIT 10 I want know if it is possible (and how) to rewrite it to get better performance. Thanks

    Read the article

  • cakePHP and GROUP BY

    - by Lizard
    I am trying to solve a hopefully simple problem here is the query I am trying produce: SELECT `categories`.*, COUNT(`entities`.id) FROM `categories` LEFT JOIN `entities` ON (`categories`.`id` = `entities`.`category_id`) GROUP BY `categories`.`id` I am really struggling to do this is in cakePHP 1.2 How would/should I go about doing this... (I am using 'Containable' if that helps) Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • GROUP BY a date, with ordering by date.

    - by standard
    Take this simple query: SELECT DATE_FORMAT(someDate, '%y-%m-%d') as formattedDay FROM someTable GROUP BY formatterDay This will select rows from a table with only 1 row per date. How do I ensure that the row selected per date is the earliest for that date, without doing an ordered subquery in the FROM? Cheers

    Read the article

  • Entity framework 4 add to many-to-many

    - by mehanik
    I have model whith 3 tabels and one is link table with additional field: Groups Id Name Users Id Name Roles Id Name LinkTable Id GroupId UserId RoleId The quuestion is how to add 3 related entities: Code bellow doesn't work. using (var db = new dbEntities()) { db.Groups.AddObject(Group.CreateGroup(1, "TestGroup")); db.Users.AddObject(User.CreateUser(1, "AdminUser")); db.Roles.AddObject(Role.CreateRole(1, "Admin")); db.UserGroupRoles.AddObject(UserGroupRole.CreateUserGroupRole(1, 1, 1, 1)); db.SaveChanges(); }

    Read the article

  • MYSQL Select statment Order By with Group By

    - by mouthpiec
    I have the following simple SQL statment SELECT id, name, value_name, value_id FROM table GROUP BY id ORDER BY value_id DESC when grouping I would like to get the value_name and value_id of the tuple where the value_id is the biggest. The way it is i am getting the smallest value. For example 1, name1, valuename, 3 (where i know that there is a value_id of 5) Can you please help?

    Read the article

  • sql - getting the id from a row based on a group by

    - by user85116
    Table A tableAID tableBID grade Table B tableBID name description Table A links to Table b from the tableBID found in both tables. If I want to find the row in Table A, which has the highest grade, for each row in Table B, I would write my query like this: select max(grade) from TableA group by tableBID However, I don't just want the grade, I want the grade plus id of that row.

    Read the article

  • Better mode for do a select with group by

    - by Luca Romagnoli
    Hi i've wrote a query that works: SELECT `comments`.* FROM `comments` RIGHT JOIN (SELECT MAX( id ) AS id, core_id, topic_id FROM comments GROUP BY core_id, topic_id order by id desc) comm ON comm.id = comments.id LIMIT 10 I want know if is possible and how rewrite it for get better performance. thanks

    Read the article

  • MySQL: group by and IF statement

    - by notset
    By default, parent_id = 0. I want to select all records with parent_id = 0 and only the last ones with parent_id 0. I tried this, but it didn't work: SELECT * FROM `articles` IF `parent_id` > 0 THEN GROUP BY `parent_id` HAVING COUNT(`parent_id`) >= 1 END; ORDER BY `time` DESC What could be the solution?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework 5, separating business logic from model - Repository?

    - by bnice7
    I am working on my first public-facing web application and I’m using MVC 4 for the presentation layer and EF 5 for the DAL. The database structure is locked, and there are moderate differences between how the user inputs data and how the database itself gets populated. I have done a ton of reading on the repository pattern (which I have never used) but most of my research is pushing me away from using it since it supposedly creates an unnecessary level of abstraction for the latest versions of EF since repositories and unit-of-work are already built-in. My initial approach is to simply create a separate set of classes for my business objects in the BLL that can act as an intermediary between my Controllers and the DAL. Here’s an example class: public class MyBuilding { public int Id { get; private set; } public string Name { get; set; } public string Notes { get; set; } private readonly Entities _context = new Entities(); // Is this thread safe? private static readonly int UserId = WebSecurity.GetCurrentUser().UserId; public IEnumerable<MyBuilding> GetList() { IEnumerable<MyBuilding> buildingList = from p in _context.BuildingInfo where p.Building.UserProfile.UserId == UserId select new MyBuilding {Id = p.BuildingId, Name = p.BuildingName, Notes = p.Building.Notes}; return buildingList; } public void Create() { var b = new Building {UserId = UserId, Notes = this.Notes}; _context.Building.Add(b); _context.SaveChanges(); // Set the building ID this.Id = b.BuildingId; // Seed 1-to-1 tables with reference the new building _context.BuildingInfo.Add(new BuildingInfo {Building = b}); _context.GeneralInfo.Add(new GeneralInfo {Building = b}); _context.LocationInfo.Add(new LocationInfo {Building = b}); _context.SaveChanges(); } public static MyBuilding Find(int id) { using (var context = new Entities()) // Is this OK to do in a static method? { var b = context.Building.FirstOrDefault(p => p.BuildingId == id && p.UserId == UserId); if (b == null) throw new Exception("Error: Building not found or user does not have access."); return new MyBuilding {Id = b.BuildingId, Name = b.BuildingInfo.BuildingName, Notes = b.Notes}; } } } My primary concern: Is the way I am instantiating my DbContext as a private property thread-safe, and is it safe to have a static method that instantiates a separate DbContext? Or am I approaching this all wrong? I am not opposed to learning up on the repository pattern if I am taking the total wrong approach here.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >