Search Results

Search found 29814 results on 1193 pages for 'sql datetime'.

Page 355/1193 | < Previous Page | 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362  | Next Page >

  • List all the months using oracle sql .

    - by Suresh S
    Guys is there any better way to list all the months other than this select to_char(add_months(to_date('01/01/1000', 'DD/MM/RRRR'), ind.l-1), 'MONTH') as month_descr , ind.l as month_ind from dual descr , ( select l from (select level l from dual connect by level <= 12) ) ind order by 2; ANSWER : SELECT to_char(add_months(SYSDATE, (LEVEL-1 )),'MONTH') as months FROM dual CONNECT BY LEVEL <= 12

    Read the article

  • Insert hex string value to sql server image field is appending extra 0

    - by rotary_engine
    Have an image field and want to insert into this from a hex string: insert into imageTable(imageField) values(convert(image, 0x3C3F78...)) however when I run select the value is return with an extra 0 as 0x03C3F78... This extra 0 is causing a problem in another application, I dont want it. How to stop the extra 0 being added? The schema is: CREATE TABLE [dbo].[templates]( [templateId] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [templateName] [nvarchar](50) NOT NULL, [templateBody] [image] NOT NULL, [templateType] [int] NULL) and the query is: insert into templates(templateName, templateBody, templateType) values('I love stackoverflow', convert(image, 0x3C3F786D6C2076657273696F6E3D.......), 2) the actual hex string is quite large to post here.

    Read the article

  • LINQ to SQL filter combobox output

    - by Brendan
    OK so I've got 2 tables for this instance, Users{UserID, Name}, Company{CompanyID, UserID, Name, Payrate} i also have 2 combo boxes, first one is for Users which Displays Name, and the Value is UserID i need the second combobox to get the Names from the Company table, but only showing Companies that are relevant to the selected user. I cant work out how to get it to go... Any ideas???

    Read the article

  • SQL Timstamp Function

    - by harrison
    Is there any difference between these two queries? select * from tbl where ts < '9999-12-31-24.00.00.000000'; and select * from tbl where ts < timestamp('9999-12-31-24.00.00.000000'); When is the timestamp function required? Is there a difference in performance?

    Read the article

  • SQL Grouping with multiple joins combining results incorrectly

    - by Matt
    Hi I'm having trouble with my query combining records when it shouldn't. I have two tables Authors and Publications, they are related by Publication ID in a many to many relationship. As each author can have many publications and each publication has many Authors. I want my query to return every publication for a set of authors and include the ID of each of the other authors that have contributed to the publication grouped into one field. (I am working with mySQL) I have tried to picture it graphically below Table: authors Table:publications AuthorID | PublicationID PublicationID | PublicationName 1 | 123 123 | A 1 | 456 456 | B 2 | 123 789 | C 2 | 789 3 | 123 3 | 456 I want my result set to be the following AuthorID | PublicationID | PublicationName | AllAuthors 1 | 123 | A | 1,2,3 1 | 456 | B | 1,3 2 | 123 | A | 1,2,3 2 | 789 | C | 2 3 | 123 | A | 1,2,3 3 | 456 | B | 1,3 This is my query Select Author1.AuthorID, Publications.PublicationID, Publications.PubName, GROUP_CONCAT(TRIM(Author2.AuthorID)ORDER BY Author2.AuthorID ASC)AS 'AuthorsAll' FROM Authors AS Author1 LEFT JOIN Authors AS Author2 ON Author1.PublicationID = Author2.PublicationID INNER JOIN Publications ON Author1.PublicationID = Publications.PublicationID WHERE Author1.AuthorID ="1" OR Author1.AuthorID ="2" OR Author1.AuthorID ="3" GROUP BY Author2.PublicationID But it returns the following instead AuthorID | PublicationID | PublicationName | AllAuthors 1 | 123 | A | 1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,3 1 | 456 | B | 1,1,3,3 2 | 789 | C | 2 It does deliver the desired output when there is only one AuhorID in the where statement. I have not been able to figure it out, does anyone know where i'm going wrong?

    Read the article

  • sql rowlock on select statement

    - by David
    I have an ASP.Net webpage where the user selects a row for editing. I want to use the row lock on that row and once the user finishes the editing and updates another user can edit that row i.e. How can I use rowlock so that only one user can edit a row? Thank you

    Read the article

  • Check constraint over two columns

    - by Rippo
    I want to add a Check Constraint to a table for server 2005 but cannot work it out. MemberId ClubId MeetingId 1 100 10 2 100 10 3 100 10 7 101 10 <-This would throw a check constraint 1 100 11 2 100 11 I do not want to have more than one ClubId for a single MeetingId Basically a ClubId can only belong to a single MeetingId but can have more than one member assigned. How do I achieve this?

    Read the article

  • OnTaskFailed event handler in SSIS

    - by Jason M
    If I use OnError event handler in my SSIS package, there are variables System::ErrorCode and System::ErrorDescription from which I can get the error information if any things fails while execution. But I cant the find the same for OnTaskFailed event handler, i.e. How to get the ErrorCode and ErrorDescription from the OnTaskFailed event handler when any things fails while execution in case we want to only implement OnTaskFailed event handler for our package?

    Read the article

  • Multiple Table Joins to Improve Performance?

    - by EdenMachine
    If I have a table structure like this: Transaction [TransID, ...] Document [DocID, TransID, ...] Signer [SignerID, ...] Signature [SigID, DocID, SignerID, ...] And the business logic is like this: Transactions can have multiple documents Documents can have multiple signatures And the same signer can have multiple signatures in multiple documents within the same transaction So, now to my actual question: If I wanted to find all the documents in a particular transaction, would it be better, performance-wise, if I also stored the TransID and the DocID in the Signer table as well so I have smaller joins. Otherwise, I'd have to join through the Signature Document Transaction Documents to get all the documents in the transaction for that signer. I think it's really messy to have that many relationships in the Signer table though and it doesn't seem "correct" to do it that way (also seems like an update nightmare) but I can see that it might be better performance for direct joins. Thoughts? TIA!

    Read the article

  • SQL Structure of DB table with different types of columns

    - by Dmitry Dvornikov
    I have a problem with the optimization of the structure of the database. I'll try to explain it exactly. I create a project, where we can add different values??, but this values must have different types of the columns in the database (eg, int, double , varchar). What is the best way to store the different types of values ??in the database. In the project I'm using Propel 1.6. The point is availability to add value with 'int', 'varchar' and other columns types, to search the table was efficient. In total, I have two ideas. The first is to create a table of "value", which will have columns: "id ", "value_int", "value_double", "value_varchar", etc - with the corresponding column types. Depending on the type of values??, records will be saved with the value in the appropriate column (the rest will be NULL). The second solution is to create separate tables such as "value_int", "value_varchar" etc. There would be columns: "id", "value", which correspond to the relevant types of "value" (ie, such as int, varchar, etc). I must admit that I do not believe any of the above solutions, originally I was thinking about one table "value", where the column would be a "text" type - but this solution would probably be even worse. I would like to know your opinion on this topic, maybe something else would be better. Thanks in advance. EDIT: For example : We have three tables: USER: [table of users] * id * name FIELD: [table of profile fields - where the column 'type' is the type of field, eg int or varchar) * id * type * name VALUE : * id * User_id - ( FK user.id ) * Field_id - ( FK field.id ) * value So we have in each row an user in USER table, and the profile is stored in the VALUE table. Bit each profile field may have a different type (column 'type' in the FIELD table), and based on that I would want this value to add to the appropriate column of the appropriate type.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to write a database view that encompasses one-to-many relationships?

    - by Brandon Linton
    So I'm not necessarily saying this is even a good idea if it were possible, since the schema of the view would be extremely volatile, but is there any way to represent a has-many relationship in a single view? For example, let's say I have a customer that can have any number of addresses in the database. Is there any way to list out each column of each address with perhaps a number as a part of the alias (e.g., columns like Customer Id, Name, Address_Street_1, Address_Street_2, etc)? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to exclude rows where matching join is in an SQL tree

    - by Greg K
    Sorry for the poor title, I couldn't think how to concisely describe this problem. I have a set of items that should have a 1-to-1 relationship with an attribute. I have a query to return those rows where the data is wrong and this relationship has been broken (1-to-many). I'm gathering these rows to fix them and restore this 1-to-1 relationship. This is a theoretical simplification of my actual problem but I'll post example table schema here as it was requested. item table: +------------+------------+-----------+ | item_id | name | attr_id | +------------+------------+-----------+ | 1 | BMW 320d | 20 | | 1 | BMW 320d | 21 | | 2 | BMW 335i | 23 | | 2 | BMW 335i | 34 | +------------+------------+-----------+ attribute table: +---------+-----------------+------------+ | attr_id | value | parent_id | +---------+-----------------+------------+ | 20 | SE | 21 | | 21 | M Sport | 0 | | 23 | AC | 24 | | 24 | Climate control | 0 | .... | 34 | Leather seats | 0 | +---------+-----------------+------------+ A simple query to return items with more than one attribute. SELECT item_id, COUNT(DISTINCT(attr_id)) AS attributes FROM item GROUP BY item_id HAVING attributes > 1 This gets me a result set like so: +-----------+------------+ | item_id | attributes | +-----------+------------+ | 1 | 2 | | 2 | 2 | | 3 | 2 | -- etc. -- However, there's an exception. The attribute table can hold a tree structure, via parent links in the table. For certain rows, parent_id can hold the ID of another attribute. There's only one level to this tree. Example: +---------+-----------------+------------+ | attr_id | value | parent_id | +---------+-----------------+------------+ | 20 | SE | 21 | | 21 | M Sport | 0 | .... I do not want to retrieve items in my original query where, for a pair of associated attributes, they related like attributes 20 & 21. I do want to retrieve items where: the attributes have no parent for two or more attributes they are not related (e.g. attributes 23 & 34) Example result desired, just the item ID: +------------+ | item_id | +------------+ | 2 | +------------+ How can I join against attributes from items and exclude these rows? Do I use a temporary table or can I achieve this from a single query? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • heirarchial data from self referencing table in tree form

    - by Beta033
    Ii looks like this has been asked and answered in all the simple cases, excluding the one that i'm having trouble with. I've tried using a recursive CTE to generate this, however maybe a cursor would be better? or maybe a set of recursive functions will do the trick? Can this be done in a cte? consider the following table PrimaryKey ParentKey 1 NULL 2 1 3 6 4 7 5 2 6 1 7 NULL should yield PK 1 -2 --5 -6 --3 7 -4 where the number of - marks equal the depth, my primary difficulty is the ordering.

    Read the article

  • Datatype Conversion

    - by user87
    I am trying to execute the following Query select distinct pincode as Pincode,CAST(Date_val as DATE) as Date, SUM(cast(megh_38 as int)) as 'Postage Realized in Cash', SUM(cast(megh_39 as int)) as 'MO Commission', from dbo.arrow_dtp_upg group by pincode,Date_Val but I am getting an error "Conversion failed when converting the nvarchar value '82.25' to data type int." Am I using a wrong data type?

    Read the article

  • Calculate the SUM of the Column which has Time DataType:

    - by thevan
    I want to calculate the Sum of the Field which has Time DataType. My Table is Below: TableA: TotalTime ------------- 12:18:00 12:18:00 Here I want to sum the two time fields. I tried the below Query SELECT CAST( DATEADD(MS, SUM(DATEDIFF(MS, '00:00:00.000', CONVERT(TIME, TotalTime))), '00:00:00.000' ) AS TOTALTIME) FROM [TableA] But it gives the Output as TOTALTIME ----------------- 00:36:00.0000000 But My Desired Output would be like below: TOTALTIME ----------------- 24:36:00 How to get this Output?

    Read the article

  • SQL for sorting boolean column as true, null, false

    - by petehern
    My table has three boolean fields: f1, f2, f3. If I do SELECT * FROM table ORDER BY f1, f2, f3 the records will be sorted by these fields in the order false, true, null. I wish to order them with null in between true and false: the correct order should be true, null, false. I am using PostgreSQL.

    Read the article

  • Comparing Page.User.Identity.Name to value in sql Table

    - by Peggy Fusselman
    First, I am SO sorry if the answer is out there. I've looked and looked and feel this is such a simple thing that it should be obvious. I'm wanting to make sure only the person who added an event can modify it. Simple! I already have a datasource that has event_added_by as a data point. It is populating a FormView. SelectCommand="SELECT * FROM [tbl_events] WHERE ([event_ID] = @event_ID)" And I have Page.User.Identity.Name. How do I compare the two? I can't pull the value from the label in the FormView so I need to find another way. if (!IsPostBack) { string uname = Page.User.Identity.Name; string owner = ""// this is where I need to grab the value from dsEvents; if (uname != owner) { //Send them somewhere saying they're not allowed to be here } } TIA for any help!

    Read the article

  • Merge Primary Keys - Cascade Update

    - by Chris Jackson
    Is there a way to merge two primary keys into one and then cascade update all affected relationships? Here's the scenario: Customers (idCustomer int PK, Company varchar(50), etc) CustomerContacts (idCustomerContact int PK, idCustomer int FK, Name varchar(50), etc) CustomerNotes (idCustomerNote int PK, idCustomer int FK, Note Text, etc) Sometimes customers need to be merged into one. For example, you have a customer with the id of 1 and another with the id of 2. You want to merge both, so that everything that was 2 is now 1. I know I could write a script that updates all affected tables one by one, but I'd like to make it more future proof by using the cascade rules, so I don't have to update the script every time there is a new relationship added. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • shreding xml column

    - by csetzkorn
    Hi, I have a XML column which contains XML like this: <Set> <Element> <ID> 1 </ID> <List> <ListElement> <Part1> ListElement 1 </Part1> </ListElement> <ListElement> <Part1> ListElement2 </Part1> </ListElement> </List> </Element> <Element> <ID> 2 </ID> <List> <ListElement> <Part1> ListElement3 </Part1> </ListElement> <ListElement> <Part1> ListElement4 </Part1> </ListElement> </List> </Element> </Set> I would like to shred this into a relation table containing this: ID, ListElement 1, ListElement1 1, ListElement2 2, ListElement3 2, ListElement4 I am able to obtain the content of the Parts using something like this: select List.value('(Part1/text())[1]', 'varchar(max)') as test from Table CROSS APPLY xml.nodes('// Element/List/ListElement') AS List(List) but I have not yet achieved to keep the ‘foreign key’ (the ID value). Thanks. Best wishes, Christian

    Read the article

  • SQL: Get count of rows returned from a left join

    - by Rogue Coder
    I have two tables, one called calendars and one called events. There can be multiple calendars, and multiple events in a calendar. I want to select every calendar, also getting the number of events in the calendar. Right now I have : SELECT C.*, COUNT(*) AS events FROM `calendars` AS C LEFT JOIN `events` E ON C.ID=E.calendar GROUP BY C.ID But that doesn't work. Items with no events still return 1. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • SQL Query Question ROW_CONCAT

    - by DaveC
    Hello Guy, I have been stuck on this problem for quite awhile... I hope someone out there can give me a hand. The following table is in my database: Product_ID Color Type 1 Red Leather 1 Silver Metal 1 Blue Leather 2 Orange Metal 2 Purple Metal I am trying to get the following output: Product_ID Type Color 1 Leather Red, Blue 1 Metal Silver 2 Metal Orange, Purple I know it has to do with some kind of double group by and a group_concat.... have been looking at this for an hour without figuring it out. Any help is much appreciated!!!

    Read the article

  • Nesting queries in SQL

    - by ZAX
    The goal of my query is to return the country name and its head of state if it's headofstate has a name starting with A, and the capital of the country has greater than 100,000 people utilizing a nested query. Here is my query: SELECT country.name as country, (SELECT country.headofstate from country where country.headofstate like 'A%') from country, city where city.population > 100000; I've tried reversing it, placing it in the where clause etc. I don't get nested queries. I'm just getting errors back, like subquery returns more than one row and such. If someone could help me out with how to order it, and explain why it needs to be a certain way, that'd be great.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362  | Next Page >