Search Results

Search found 16179 results on 648 pages for 'structural search'.

Page 39/648 | < Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >

  • Binary Search Tree - Postorder logic

    - by daveb
    I am looking at implementing code to work out binary search tree. Before I do this I was wanting to verify my input data in postorder and preorder. I am having trouble working out what the following numbers would be in postorder and preorder I have the following numbers 4, 3, 14 ,8 ,1, 15, 9, 5, 13, 10, 2, 7, 6, 12, 11, that I am intending to put into an empty binary tree in that order. The order I arrived at for the numbers in POSTORDER is 2, 1, 6, 3, 7, 11, 12, 10, 9, 8, 13, 15, 14, 4. Have I got this right? I was wondering if anyone here would be able to kindly verify if the postorder sequence I came up with is indeed the correct sequence for my input i.e doing left subtree, right subtree and then root. The order I got for pre order (Visit root, do left subtree, do right subtree) is 4, 3, 1, 2, 5, 6, 14 , 8, 7, 9, 10, 12, 11, 15, 13. I can't be certain I got this right. Very grateful for any verification. Many Thanks

    Read the article

  • how do i filter my lucene search results?

    - by Andrew Bullock
    Say my requirement is "search for all users by name, who are over 18" If i were using SQL, i might write something like: Select * from [Users] Where ([firstname] like '%' + @searchTerm + '%' OR [lastname] like '%' + @searchTerm + '%') AND [age] >= 18 However, im having difficulty translating this into lucene.net. This is what i have so far: var parser = new MultiFieldQueryParser({ "firstname", "lastname"}, new StandardAnalyser()); var luceneQuery = parser.Parse(searchterm) var query = FullTextSession.CreateFullTextQuery(luceneQuery, typeof(User)); var results = query.List<User>(); How do i add in the "where age = 18" bit? I've heard about .SetFilter(), but this only accepts LuceneQueries, and not IQueries. If SetFilter is the right thing to use, how do I make the appropriate filter? If not, what do I use and how do i do it? Thanks! P.S. This is a vastly simplified version of what I'm trying to do for clarity, my WHERE clause is actually a lot more complicated than shown here. In reality i need to check if ids exist in subqueries and check a number of unindexed properties. Any solutions given need to support this. Thanks

    Read the article

  • does lucene search function work in large size document?

    - by shaon-fan
    Hi,there I have a problem when do search with lucene. First, in lucene indexing function, it works well to huge size document. such as .pst file, the outlook mail storage. It can build indexing file include all the information of .pst. The only problem is to large sometimes, include very much words. So when i search using lucene, it only can process the front part of this indexing file, if one word come out the back part of the indexing file, it couldn't find this word and no hits in result. But when i separate this indexing file to several parts in stupid way when debugging, and searching every parts, it can work well. So i want to know how to separate indexing file, how much size should be the limit of searching? cheers and wait 4 reply. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ hi,there, follow Coady siad, i set the length to max 2^31-1. But the search result still can't include what i want. simply, i convert the doc word to string array[] to analyze, one doc word has 79680 words include the space and any symbol. when i search certain word, it just return 300 count, actually it has more than 300 results. The same reason, when i search a word in back part of the doc, it also couldn't find. //////////////set the length idexwriter.SetMaxFieldLength(2147483647); ////////////////////search IndexSearcher searcher = new ndexSearcher(Program.Parameters["INDEX_LOCATION"].ToString()); Hits hits = searcher.Search(query); This is my code, as others same. I found that problem when i need to count every word hits in a doc. So i also found it couldn't search word in back part of doc. pls help me to find, is there any set searcher length somewhere? how u meet this problem.

    Read the article

  • Google Image Search Quick Fix

    - by Asian Angel
    Are you tired of unneeded webpage loading and extra link clicking just to access an image found using Google Image Search? Now you can jump directly to the image itself with the clickGOOGLEview extension for Google Chrome. The Problem When you find an image that you like using Google Image Search you always have to go through extra hassle just to get to the image itself. First you have an entire webpage loading in your browser and then you have to click through that irritating “See full size image” link. All that you need is the image, right? Problem Fixed Once you have installed the clickGOOGLEview extension you will absolutely love the result. Find an image that you like, click the link, and there is your new image without any of the hassle or extra link clicking. Big or small having direct access to the image is how it should have been from the beginning. Conclusion The clickGOOGLEview extension does one thing and does it extremely well…it gets you to those images without the extra hassle or additional link clicking. Links Download the clickGOOGLEview extension (Google Chrome Extensions) Similar Articles Productive Geek Tips Make Firefox Quick Search Use Google’s Beta Search KeysChange Internet Explorer in Windows Vista to Search Google by DefaultMake Firefox Built-In Search Box Use Google’s Experimental Search KeysQuick Tip: Show PageRank in Firefox while Google Toolbar is HiddenQuick Tip: Use Google Talk Sidebar in Firefox TouchFreeze Alternative in AutoHotkey The Icy Undertow Desktop Windows Home Server – Backup to LAN The Clear & Clean Desktop Use This Bookmarklet to Easily Get Albums Use AutoHotkey to Assign a Hotkey to a Specific Window Latest Software Reviews Tinyhacker Random Tips Revo Uninstaller Pro Registry Mechanic 9 for Windows PC Tools Internet Security Suite 2010 PCmover Professional Kill Processes Quickly with Process Assassin Need to Come Up with a Good Name? Try Wordoid StockFox puts a Lightweight Stock Ticker in your Statusbar Explore Google Public Data Visually The Ultimate Excel Cheatsheet Convert the Quick Launch Bar into a Super Application Launcher

    Read the article

  • Sorting data by relevance, from multiple tables

    - by Oden
    Hey, How is it possible to sort data from multiple tables by relevance? My table structure is following: I have 3 tables in my database, one table contains the name of solar systems, the second for e.g. of planets. There is one more table, witch is a connection between solar systems and planets. If I want to get data of a planet, witch is in the Milky Way, i post this data to the server, and it gives me a multi-dimensional array witch contains: The Milky Way, with every planet in it Every planet, witch name contains the string Milky Way (maybe thats a bat example because i don't think that theres but one planet with this name, but the main concept is on file) But, i want to set the most relevant restaurants to the top of the array. (for the relevance i would check the description of the restaurants or something like that) So, how would you do that kind of data sorting?

    Read the article

  • Hide a single content block from search engines?

    - by jonas
    A header is automatically added on top of each content URL, but its not relevant for search and messing up the all the results beeing the first line of every page (in the code its the last line but visually its the first, which google is able to notice) Solution1: You could put the header (content to exculde from google searches) in an iframe with a static url domain.com/header.html and a <meta name="robots" content="noindex" /> ? - are there takeoffs of this solution? Solution2: You could deliver it conditionally by apache mod rewrite, php or javascript -takeoff(?): google does not like it? will google ever try pages with a standard users's useragent and compare? -takeoff: The hidden content will be missing in the google cache version as well... example: add-header.php: <?php $path = $_GET['path']; echo file_get_contents($_SERVER["DOCUMENT_ROOT"].$path); ?> apache virtual host config: RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} !.*spider.* [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} !Yahoo.* [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} !Bing.* [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} !Yandex.* [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} !Baidu.* [NC] RewriteCond %{HTTP_USER_AGENT} !.*bot.* [NC] RewriteCond %{SCRIPT_FILENAME} \.htm$ [NC,OR] RewriteCond %{SCRIPT_FILENAME} \.html$ [NC,OR] RewriteCond %{SCRIPT_FILENAME} \.php$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ /var/www/add-header.php?path=%1 [L]

    Read the article

  • Refining Search Results [PHP/MySQL]

    - by Dae
    I'm creating a set of search panes that allow users to tweak their results set after submitting a query. We pull commonly occurring values in certain fields from the results and display them in order of their popularity - you've all seen this sort of thing on eBay. So, if a lot of rows in our results were created in 2009, we'll be able to click "2009" and see only rows created in that year. What in your opinion is the most efficient way of applying these filters? My working solution was to discard entries from the results that didn't match the extra arguments, like: while($row = mysql_fetch_assoc($query)) { foreach($_GET as $key => $val) { if($val !== $row[$key]) { continue 2; } } // Output... } This method should hopefully only query the database once in effect, as adding filters doesn't change the query - MySQL can cache and reuse one data set. On the downside it makes pagination a bit of a headache. The obvious alternative would be to build any additional criteria into the initial query, something like: $sql = "SELECT * FROM tbl MATCH (title, description) AGAINST ('$search_term')"; foreach($_GET as $key => $var) { $sql .= " AND ".$key." = ".$var; } Are there good reasons to do this instead? Or are there better options altogether? Maybe a temporary table? Any thoughts much appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Cakephp, Route old google search results to new home page

    - by ion
    Hi there, I have created a new website for a company and I would like all the previous search engine results to be redirected. Since there were quite a few pages and most of them where using an id I would like to use something generic instead of re-routing all the old pages. My first thought was to do that: Router::connect('/*', array('controller' => 'pages', 'action' => 'display', 'home')); And put that at the very end of the routes.php file [since it is prioritized] so that all requests not validating with previous route actions would return true with this one and redirect to homepage. However this does not work. I'm pasting my routes.php file [since it is small] hoping that someone could give me a hint: Router::connect('/', array('controller' => 'pages', 'action' => 'display', 'home')); Router::connect('/company/*', array('controller' => 'articles', 'action' => 'view')); Router::connect('/contact/*', array('controller' => 'contacts', 'action' => 'view')); Router::connect('/lang/*', array('controller' => 'p28n', 'action' => 'change')); Router::connect('/eng/*', array('controller' => 'p28n', 'action' => 'shuntRequest', 'lang' => 'eng')); Router::connect('/gre/*', array('controller' => 'p28n', 'action' => 'shuntRequest', 'lang' => 'gre')); Router::parseExtensions('xml');

    Read the article

  • Implement a server that receives and processes client request(cassandra as backend), Python or C++?

    - by Mickey Shine
    I am planning to build an inverted index searching system with cassandra as its storage backend. But I need some guidances to build a highly efficient searching daemon server. I know a web server written in Python called tornado, my questions are: Is Python a good choice for developing such kind of app? Is Nginx(or Sphinx) a good example that I can look inside to learn its architecture to implement a highly efficient server? Anything else I should learn to do this? Thank you~

    Read the article

  • search a listview in Persian

    - by user3641353
    I have listview with textview which I use textview for search items in listview. It works true but just in English. I can not change the keyboard to Persian. Do you have any solution? this is my code: ArrayAdapter<String> adapter; String[] allMovesStr = {"??? ???? ????","?? ???? ????","?? ???? ????? ???????"}; @Override public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); setContentView(R.layout.all_moves); adapter = new ArrayAdapter<String>(this, android.R.layout.simple_list_item_1, allMovesStr); setListAdapter(adapter); EditText ed = (EditText) findViewById(R.id.inputSearch); ListView lv = (ListView) findViewById(android.R.id.list); lv.setTextFilterEnabled(true); ed.addTextChangedListener(new TextWatcher() { public void onTextChanged(CharSequence arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { // TODO Auto-generated method stub } public void beforeTextChanged(CharSequence arg0, int arg1, int arg2, int arg3) { // TODO Auto-generated method stub } public void afterTextChanged(Editable arg0) { // vaghti kar bar harfi vared kard josteju mikone : AllMoves.this.adapter.getFilter().filter(arg0); } }); }

    Read the article

  • php search and replace first element in div

    - by cnotethegr8
    i have a structure that looks like this <div class="table"> <div> <p> name1 </p> <p> title1 </p> </div> <div> <p> name2 </p> <p> title2 </p> </div> <div> <p> name3 </p> <p> title3 </p> </div> </div> and it continues a few hundred more times. what can i write in php that will search ( class="table" div ) and add a class to only the first 'p' in each 'div'?

    Read the article

  • Wordpress Search Results in Order

    - by Brad Houston
    One of my clients websites, www.kevinsplants.co.uk is not showing the search results in alphabetical order, how do I go about ordering the results in alphabetical order? We are using the Shopp plugin and I believe its that plugin that is generating the results! Cheers, Brad case "orderby-list": if (isset($Shopp->Category->controls)) return false; if (isset($Shopp->Category->smart)) return false; $menuoptions = Category::sortoptions(); $title = ""; $string = ""; $default = $Shopp->Settings->get('default_product_order'); if (empty($default)) $default = "title"; if (isset($options['default'])) $default = $options['default']; if (isset($options['title'])) $title = $options['title']; if (value_is_true($options['dropdown'])) { if (isset($Shopp->Cart->data->Category['orderby'])) $default = $Shopp->Cart->data->Category['orderby']; $string .= $title; $string .= '<form action="'.esc_url($_SERVER['REQUEST_URI']).'" method="get" id="shopp-'.$Shopp->Category->slug.'-orderby-menu">'; if (!SHOPP_PERMALINKS) { foreach ($_GET as $key => $value) if ($key != 'shopp_orderby') $string .= '<input type="hidden" name="'.$key.'" value="'.$value.'" />'; } $string .= '<select name="shopp_orderby" class="shopp-orderby-menu">'; $string .= menuoptions($menuoptions,$default,true); $string .= '</select>'; $string .= '</form>'; $string .= '<script type="text/javascript">'; $string .= "jQuery('#shopp-".$Shopp->Category->slug."-orderby-menu select.shopp-orderby-menu').change(function () { this.form.submit(); });"; $string .= '</script>'; } else { if (strpos($_SERVER['REQUEST_URI'],"?") !== false) list($link,$query) = explode("\?",$_SERVER['REQUEST_URI']); $query = $_GET; unset($query['shopp_orderby']); $query = http_build_query($query); if (!empty($query)) $query .= '&'; foreach($menuoptions as $value => $option) { $label = $option; $href = esc_url($link.'?'.$query.'shopp_orderby='.$value); $string .= '<li><a href="'.$href.'">'.$label.'</a></li>'; } } return $string; break;

    Read the article

  • MySQL search for user and their roles

    - by Jenkz
    I am re-writing the SQL which lets a user search for any other user on our site and also shows their roles. An an example, roles can be "Writer", "Editor", "Publisher". Each role links a User to a Publication. Users can take multiple roles within multiple publications. Example table setup: "users" : user_id, firstname, lastname "publications" : publication_id, name "link_writers" : user_id, publication_id "link_editors" : user_id, publication_id Current psuedo SQL: SELECT * FROM ( (SELECT user_id FROM users WHERE firstname LIKE '%Jenkz%') UNION (SELECT user_id FROM users WHERE lastname LIKE '%Jenkz%') ) AS dt JOIN (ROLES STATEMENT) AS roles ON roles.user_id = dt.user_id At the moment my roles statement is: SELECT dt2.user_id, dt2.publication_id, dt.role FROM ( (SELECT 'writer' AS role, link_writers.user_id, link_writers.publication_id FROM link_writers) UNION (SELECT 'editor' AS role, link_editors.user_id, link_editors.publication_id FROM link_editors) ) AS dt2 The reason for wrapping the roles statement in UNION clauses is that some roles are more complex and require a table join to find the publication_id and user_id. As an example "publishers" might be linked accross two tables "link_publishers": user_id, publisher_group_id "link_publisher_groups": publisher_group_id, publication_id So in that instance, the query forming part of my UNION would be: SELECT 'publisher' AS role, link_publishers.user_id, link_publisher_groups.publication_id FROM link_publishers JOIN link_publisher_groups ON lpg.group_id = lp.group_id I'm pretty confident that my table setup is good (I was warned off the one-table-for-all system when researching the layout). My problem is that there are now 100,000 rows in the users table and upto 70,000 rows in each of the link tables. Initial lookup in the users table is fast, but the joining really slows things down. How can I only join on the relevant roles? -------------------------- EDIT ---------------------------------- Explain above (open in a new window to see full resolution). The bottom bit in red, is the "WHERE firstname LIKE '%Jenkz%'" the third row searches WHERE CONCAT(firstname, ' ', lastname) LIKE '%Jenkz%'. Hence the large row count, but I think this is unavoidable, unless there is a way to put an index accross concatenated fields? The green bit at the top just shows the total rows scanned from the ROLES STATEMENT. You can then see each individual UNION clause (#6 - #12) which all show a large number of rows. Some of the indexes are normal, some are unique. It seems that MySQL isn't optimizing to use the dt.user_id as a comparison for the internal of the UNION statements. Is there any way to force this behaviour? Please note that my real setup is not publications and writers but "webmasters", "players", "teams" etc.

    Read the article

  • Finding good heuristic for A* search

    - by Martin
    I'm trying to find the optimal solution for a little puzzle game called Twiddle (an applet with the game can be found here). The game has a 3x3 matrix with the number from 1 to 9. The goal is to bring the numbers in the correct order using the minimum amount of moves. In each move you can rotate a 2x2 square either clockwise or counterclockwise. I.e. if you have this state 6 3 9 8 7 5 1 2 4 and you rotate the upper left 2x2 square clockwise you get 8 6 9 7 3 5 1 2 4 I'm using a A* search to find the optimal solution. My f() is simply the number of rotations need. My heuristic function already leads to the optimal solution but I don't think it's the best one you can find. My current heuristic takes each corner, looks at the number at the corner and calculates the manhatten distance to the position this number will have in the solved state (which gives me the number of rotation needed to bring the number to this postion) and sums all these values. I.e. You take the above example: 6 3 9 8 7 5 1 2 4 and this end state 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 then the heuristic does the following 6 is currently at index 0 and should by at index 5: 3 rotations needed 9 is currently at index 2 and should by at index 8: 2 rotations needed 1 is currently at index 6 and should by at index 0: 2 rotations needed 4 is currently at index 8 and should by at index 3: 3 rotations needed h = 3 + 2 + 2 + 3 = 10 But there is the problem, that you rotate 4 elements at once. So there a rare cases where you can do two (ore more) of theses estimated rotations in one move. This means theses heuristic overestimates the distance to the solution. My current workaround is, to simply excluded one of the corners from the calculation which solves this problem at least for my test-cases. I've done no research if really solves the problem or if this heuristic still overestimates in same edge-cases. So my question is: What is the best heuristic you can come up with? (Disclaimer: This is for a university project, so this is a bit of homework. But I'm free to use any resource if can come up with, so it's okay to ask you guys. Also I will credit Stackoverflow for helping me ;) )

    Read the article

  • Partial string search in boost::multi_index_container

    - by user361699
    I have a struct to store info about persons and multi_index_contaider to store such objects struct person { std::string m_first_name; std::string m_last_name; std::string m_third_name; std::string m_address; std::string m_phone; person(); person(std::string f, std::string l, std::string t = "", std::string a = DEFAULT_ADDRESS, std::string p = DEFAULT_PHONE) : m_first_name(f), m_last_name(l), m_third_name(t), m_address(a), m_phone(p) {} }; typedef multi_index_container , ordered_non_unique, member, member persons_set; operator< and operator<< implementation for person bool operator<(const person &lhs, const person &rhs) { if(lhs.m_last_name == rhs.m_last_name) { if(lhs.m_first_name == rhs.m_first_name) return (lhs.m_third_name < rhs.m_third_name); return (lhs.m_first_name < rhs.m_first_name); } return (lhs.m_last_name < rhs.m_last_name); } std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream &s, const person &rhs) { s << "Person's last name: " << rhs.m_last_name << std::endl; s << "Person's name: " << rhs.m_first_name << std::endl; if (!rhs.m_third_name.empty()) s << "Person's third name: " << rhs.m_third_name << std::endl; s << "Phone: " << rhs.m_phone << std::endl; s << "Address: " << rhs.m_address << std::endl; return s; } Add several persons into container: person ("Alex", "Johnson", "Somename"); person ("Alex", "Goodspeed"); person ("Petr", "Parker"); person ("Petr", "Goodspeed"); Now I want to find person by lastname (the first member of the second index in multi_index_container) persons_set::nth_index<1::type &names_index = my_set.get<1(); std::pair::type::const_iterator, persons_set::nth_index<1::type::const_iterator n_it = names_index.equal_range("Goodspeed"); std::copy(n_it.first ,n_it.second, std::ostream_iterator(std::cout)); It works great. Both 'Goodspeed' persons are found. Now lets try to find person by a part of a last name: std::pair::type::const_iterator, persons_set::nth_index<1::type::const_iterator n_it = names_index.equal_range("Good"); std::copy(n_it.first ,n_it.second, std::ostream_iterator(std::cout)); This returns nothing, but partial string search works as a charm in std::set. So I can't realize what's the problem. I only wraped strings by a struct. May be operator< implementation? Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • How to order results based on number of search term matches?

    - by Travis
    I am using the following tables in mysql to describe records that can have multiple searchtags associated with them: TABLE records ID title desc TABLE searchTags ID name TABLE recordSearchTags recordID searchTagID To SELECT records based on arbitrary search input, I have a statement that looks sort of like this: SELECT recordID FROM recordSearchTags LEFT JOIN searchTags ON recordSearchTags.searchTagID = searchTags.ID WHERE searchTags.name LIKE CONCAT('%','$search1','%') OR searchTags.name LIKE CONCAT('%','$search2','%') OR searchTags.name LIKE CONCAT('%','$search3','%') OR searchTags.name LIKE CONCAT('%','$search4','%'); I'd like to ORDER this resultset, so that rows that match with more search terms are displayed in front of rows that match with fewer search terms. For example, if a row matches all 4 search terms, it will be top of the list. A row that matches only 2 search terms will be somewhere in the middle. And a row that matches just one search term will be at the end. Any suggestions on what is the best way to do this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Search function fails because it refers to the wrong controller action?

    - by Christoffer
    My Sunspot search function (sunspot_rails gem) works just fine in my index view, but when I duplicate it to my show view my search breaks... views/supplierproducts/show.html.erb <%= form_tag supplierproducts_path, :method => :get, :id => "supplierproducts_search" do %> <p> <%= text_field_tag :search, params[:search], placeholder: "Search by SKU, product name & EAN number..." %> </p> <div id="supplierproducts"><%= render 'supplierproducts' %></div> <% end %> assets/javascripts/application.js $(function () { $('#supplierproducts th a').live('click', function () { $.getScript(this.href); return false; } ); $('#supplierproducts_search input').keyup(function () { $.get($("#supplierproducts_search").attr("action"), $("#supplierproducts_search").serialize(), null, 'script'); return false; }); }); views/supplierproducts/show.js.erb $('#supplierproducts').html('<%= escape_javascript(render("supplierproducts")) %>'); views/supplierproducts/_supplierproducts.hmtl.erb <%= hidden_field_tag :direction, params[:direction] %> <%= hidden_field_tag :sort, params[:sort] %> <table class="table table-bordered"> <thead> <tr> <th><%= sortable "sku", "SKU" %></th> <th><%= sortable "name", "Product name" %></th> <th><%= sortable "stock", "Stock" %></th> <th><%= sortable "price", "Price" %></th> <th><%= sortable "ean", "EAN number" %></th> </tr> </thead> <% for supplierproduct in @supplier.supplierproducts %> <tbody> <tr> <td><%= supplierproduct.sku %></td> <td><%= supplierproduct.name %></td> <td><%= supplierproduct.stock %></td> <td><%= supplierproduct.price %></td> <td><%= supplierproduct.ean %></td> </tr> </tbody> <% end %> </table> controllers/supplierproducts_controller.rb class SupplierproductsController < ApplicationController helper_method :sort_column, :sort_direction def show @supplier = Supplier.find(params[:id]) @search = @supplier.supplierproducts.search do fulltext params[:search] end @supplierproducts = @search.results end end private def sort_column Supplierproduct.column_names.include?(params[:sort]) ? params[:sort] : "name" end def sort_direction %w[asc desc].include?(params[:direction]) ? params[:direction] : "asc" end models/supplierproduct.rb class Supplierproduct < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessible :ean, :name, :price, :sku, :stock, :supplier_id belongs_to :supplier validates :supplier_id, presence: true searchable do text :ean, :name, :sku end end Visiting show.html.erb works just fine. Log shows: Started GET "/supplierproducts/2" for 127.0.0.1 at 2012-06-24 13:44:52 +0200 Processing by SupplierproductsController#show as HTML Parameters: {"id"=>"2"} Supplier Load (0.1ms) SELECT "suppliers".* FROM "suppliers" WHERE "suppliers"."id" = ? LIMIT 1 [["id", "2"]] SOLR Request (252.9ms) [ path=#<RSolr::Client:0x007fa5880b8e68> parameters={data: fq=type%3ASupplierproduct&start=0&rows=30&q=%2A%3A%2A, method: post, params: {:wt=>:ruby}, query: wt=ruby, headers: {"Content-Type"=>"application/x-www-form-urlencoded; charset=UTF-8"}, path: select, uri: http://localhost:8982/solr/select?wt=ruby, open_timeout: , read_timeout: } ] Supplierproduct Load (0.2ms) SELECT "supplierproducts".* FROM "supplierproducts" WHERE "supplierproducts"."id" IN (1) Supplierproduct Load (0.1ms) SELECT "supplierproducts".* FROM "supplierproducts" WHERE "supplierproducts"."supplier_id" = 2 Rendered supplierproducts/_supplierproducts.html.erb (2.2ms) Rendered supplierproducts/show.html.erb within layouts/application (3.3ms) Rendered layouts/_shim.html.erb (0.0ms) User Load (0.1ms) SELECT "users".* FROM "users" WHERE "users"."remember_token" = 'zMrtTbDun2MjMHRApSthCQ' LIMIT 1 Rendered layouts/_header.html.erb (2.1ms) Rendered layouts/_footer.html.erb (0.2ms) Completed 200 OK in 278ms (Views: 20.6ms | ActiveRecord: 0.6ms | Solr: 252.9ms) But it breaks when I type in a search. Log shows: Started GET "/supplierproducts?utf8=%E2%9C%93&search=a&direction=&sort=&_=1340538830635" for 127.0.0.1 at 2012-06-24 13:53:50 +0200 Processing by SupplierproductsController#index as JS Parameters: {"utf8"=>"?", "search"=>"a", "direction"=>"", "sort"=>"", "_"=>"1340538830635"} Rendered supplierproducts/_supplierproducts.html.erb (2.4ms) Rendered supplierproducts/index.js.erb (2.9ms) Completed 500 Internal Server Error in 6ms ActionView::Template::Error (undefined method `supplierproducts' for nil:NilClass): 10: <th><%= sortable "ean", "EAN number" %></th> 11: </tr> 12: </thead> 13: <% for supplierproduct in @supplier.supplierproducts %> 14: <tbody> 15: <tr> 16: <td><%= supplierproduct.sku %></td> app/views/supplierproducts/_supplierproducts.html.erb:13:in `_app_views_supplierproducts__supplierproducts_html_erb___2251600857885474606_70174444831200' app/views/supplierproducts/index.js.erb:1:in `_app_views_supplierproducts_index_js_erb___1613906916161905600_70174464073480' Rendered /Users/Computer/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p194@myapp/gems/actionpack-3.2.3/lib/action_dispatch/middleware/templates/rescues/_trace.erb (33.3ms) Rendered /Users/Computer/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p194@myapp/gems/actionpack-3.2.3/lib/action_dispatch/middleware/templates/rescues/_request_and_response.erb (0.9ms) Rendered /Users/Computer/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p194@myapp/gems/actionpack-3.2.3/lib/action_dispatch/middleware/templates/rescues/template_error.erb within rescues/layout (39.7ms)

    Read the article

  • Dominating Search Results With Local SEO

    Local Businesses are turning to local SEO services to obtain high placement with the major search engines. With tens of millions of websites currently online, dominant placement with the search engines is vital for online success. To obtain high placement within search engine results, you will need to deploy proven search engine optimization methods.

    Read the article

  • Beginners Guide To Search Engine Optimisation

    Search Engine Optimisation, (aka ?SEO?, ?organic? or ?natural? search) involves a variety of techniques which are used to improve your natural search engine rankings (i.e. the listings on search engi... [Author: Jim Webster - Web Design and Development - March 29, 2010]

    Read the article

  • Search Engine Optimization (SEO) Tips - Code Optimization

    Code optimization is a very important in making your website Search Engine Friendly. A webpage is called Search Engine Friendly when it is coded in such a way that search engines can read and understand it to the maximum. For making your Webpage Search Engine Friendly you have to keep the following factors in mind and code accordingly.

    Read the article

  • The Know How Series - Understanding Search Engine Crawlers

    While most internet users use a lot of search engines, hardly a handful really know how a search engine works. If you are an online marketer or your business relies heavily on the internet it becomes a prerogative that you understand search engines and web crawlers. Search engines provide data at the flick of a button or at a single click.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >