Search Results

Search found 14772 results on 591 pages for 'full trust'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 40/591 | < Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >

  • MS SQL: Primary file group is full

    - by aximili
    I have a very large table in my database and I am starting to get this error Could not allocate a new page for database 'mydatabase' because of insufficient disk space in filegroup 'PRIMARY'. Create the necessary space by dropping objects in the filegroup, adding additional files to the filegroup, or setting autogrowth on for existing files in the filegroup. How do you fix this error? I don't understand the suggestions there.

    Read the article

  • Need a tool to search large structure text documents for words, phrases and related phrases

    - by pitosalas
    I have to keep up with structured documents containing things such as requests for proposals, government program reports, threat models and all kinds of things like that. They are in techno-legalese as I would call them: highly structured, with section numbering and 3, 4 and 5 levels of nesting. All in English I need a more efficient way to locate those paragraphs of nuggets that matter to me. So what I’d like is kind of a local document index/repository, that would allow me to have some standing queries and easily locate sections in documents that talk about my queries. Here’s an example: I’d like to load in 10 large PDF files, each of say 100 pages. Each PDF contains English text, formatted very nicely into paragraphs and sections. I’d like to specify that I am interested in “blogging platforms”, “weaknesses in Ruby”, “localization and internationalization” Ideally then look at a list that showed the section of text, the name of the document, and other information that seemed to be related to and/or include the words and phrases I specified. I am sure something like this exists. I would call it something like document indexing, document comprehension or structured searching.

    Read the article

  • sql server: import operation won't copy full schema

    - by P a u l
    I recall that the import tool in sql server 2000 would copy indexes, relationships, etc. In sql server 2005/2008 the import tool in SSMS will only create the tables, copy the data, but the keys, indexes, relationships are missing. I can find no option in the import wizard to enable this? What am I missing here? Is this not possible anymore for any good reason?

    Read the article

  • Fastest way to display a full calendar

    - by Aurélien Ribon
    Hello, I need to display a complete calendar (12 months, 31~ days/month) on screen. Currently, I'm using a 12-column grid, with each column filled with a "months" stackpanel. Each "month" stackpanel is filled with 31 (or less) day representations. Each day representation is composed of a DockPanel embedding three controls : a textblock to display the day letter a textblock to display the day number a textblock to display a short message Of course, performances are crushed down when I try to resize the window. Is there a useful trick to allow a fast display of many textblocks ?

    Read the article

  • I'm trying to build a query to search against a fulltext index in mysql

    - by Rockinelle
    The table's schema is pretty simple. I have a child table that stores a customer's information like address and phone number. The columns are user_id, fieldname, fieldvalue and fieldname. So each row will hold one item like phone number, address or email. This is to allow an unlimited number of each type of information for each customer. The people on the phones need to look up these customers quickly as they call into our call center. I have experimented with using LIKE% and I'm working with a FULLTEXT index now. My queries work, but I want to make them more useful because if someone searches for a telephone area code like 805 that will bring up many people, and then they add the name Bill to narrow it down, '805 Bill'. It will show EVERY customer that has 805 OR Bill. I want it to do AND searches across multiple rows within each customer. Currently I'm using the query below to grab the user_ids and later I do another query to fetch all the details for each user to build their complete record. SELECT DISTINCT `user_id` FROM `user_details` WHERE MATCH (`fieldvalue`) AGAINST ('805 Bill') Again, I want to do the above query against groups of rows that belong to a single user, but those users have to match the search keywords. What should I do?

    Read the article

  • How to index a string like "aaa.bbb.ddd-fff" in Lucene?

    - by user46703
    Hi, I have to index a lot documents that contain reference numbers like "aaa.bbb.ddd-fff". The structure can change but it's always some arbitrary numbers or characters combined with "/","-","_" or some other delimiter. The users want to be able to search for any of the substrings like "aaa" or "ddd" and also for combinations like "aaa.bbb" or "ddd-fff". The best I have been able to come up with is to create my own token filter modeled after the synonym filter in "Lucene in action" which spits out multiple terms for each input. In my case I return "aaa.bbb", "bbb.ddd","bbb.ddd-fff" and all other combinations of the substrings. This works pretty well but when I index large documents (100MB) that contain lots of such strings I tend to get out of memory exceptions because my filter returns multiple terms for each input string. Is there a better way to index these strings?

    Read the article

  • FORMSOF Thesaurus in SQL Server

    - by Coolcoder
    Has anyone done any performance measures with this in terms of speed where there is a high number of substitutes for any given word. For instance, I want to use this to store common misspellings; expecting to have 4-10 variations of a word. <expansion> <sub>administration</sub> <sub>administraton</sub> <sub>aministraton</sub> </expansion> When you run a fulltext search, how does performance degrade with that number of variations? for instance, I assume it has to do a separate fulltext search performing an OR? Also, having say 20/30K entries in the Thesaurus xml file - does this impact performance?

    Read the article

  • Something confusing about FormsOf (Sql server Full-Text searching)

    - by AspOnMyNet
    hi I'm using Sql Server 2008 1) A given <simple_term> within a <generation_term> will not match both nouns and verbs. If I understand the above text correctly, then query SELECT * FROM someTable WHERE CONTAINS ( *, ' FORMSOF ( INFLECTIONAL, park ) ' ) should search for either nouns or verbs derived from the root word “park”, but not for both? Thus out of the two rows, one containing noun parks and other verb parking, the above query should return just one of the two rows? But as it turns out, query returns both rows, so are perhaps my assumptions a bit off or is the above quote wrong?! 2) From Msdn: If freetext_string is enclosed in double quotation marks, a phrase match is instead performed; stemming and thesaurus are not performed. According to the above quote the following query shouldn’t return rows containing strings surfing ( due to query not performing stemming ), surf ( due to query performing phrase matching and not individual word matching ) and surfing with suzy’s sister ( due to query not performing stemming and due to query performing phrase matching and not word matching ), but it does. Thus, it appears that even when *freetext_string* is enclosed in double quotation marks, stemming is still preformed, while phrase matching is not: SELECT * FROM someTable WHERE FREETEXT( *, ' "surf sister" ' ) So is the above quote wrong or...? thanx

    Read the article

  • Effective Method to Manage and Search Through 100,000+ Objects Instantly? (C#)

    - by Kirk
    I'm writing a media player for enthusiasts with large collections (over 100,000 tracks) and one of my main goals is speed in search. I would like to allow the user to perform a Google-esque search of their entire music collection based on these factors: Song Path and File Name Items in ID3 Tag (Title, Artist, Album, etc.) Lyrics What is the best way for me to store this data and search through it? Currently I am storing each track in an object and iterating over an array of these objects checking each of their variables for string matches based on given search text. I've run into problems though where my search is not effective because it is always a phrase search and I'm not sure how to make it more fuzzy. Would an internal DB like SQLlite be faster than this? Any ideas on how I should structure this system? I also need playlist persistence, so that when they close the app and open the app their same playlist loads immediately. How should I store the playlist information so it can load quickly when the application starts? Currently I am JSON encoding the entire playlist, storing it in a text file, and reading it into the ListView at runtime, but it is getting sluggish over 20,000 tracks. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • .Net Entity Framework & POCO ... querying full table problem

    - by Chris Klepeis
    I'm attempting to implement a repository pattern with my poco objects auto generated from my edmx. In my repository class, I have: IObjectSet<E> _objectSet; private IObjectSet<E> objectSet { get { if (_objectSet == null) { _objectSet = this._context.CreateObjectSet<E>(); } return _objectSet; } } public IQueryable<E> GetQuery(Func<E, bool> where) { return objectSet.Where(where).AsQueryable<E>(); } public IList<E> SelectAll(Func<E, bool> where) { return GetQuery(where).ToList(); } Where E is the one of my POCO classes. When I trace the database and run this: IList<Contact> c = contactRepository.SelectAll(r => r.emailAddress == "[email protected]"); It shows up in the sql trace as a select for everything in my Contact table. Where am I going wrong here? Is there a better way to do this? Does an objectset not lazy load... so it omitted the where clause? This is the article I read which said to use objectSet's... since with POCO, I do not have EntityObject's to pass into "E" http://devtalk.dk/CommentView,guid,b5d9cad2-e155-423b-b66f-7ec287c5cb06.aspx

    Read the article

  • How can I make keyword order more relevant in my search?

    - by Atomiton
    In my database, I have a keywords field that stores a comma-delimited list of keywords. For example, a Shrek doll might have the following keywords: ogre, green, plush, hero, boys' toys A "Beanie Baby" doll ( that happens to be an ogre ) might have: beanie baby, kids toys, beanbag toys, soft, infant, ogre (That's a completely contrived example.) What I'd like to do is if the consumer searches for "ogre" I'd like the "Shrek" doll to come up higher in the search results. My content administrator feels that if the keyword is earlier in the list, it should get a higher ranking. ( This makes sense to me and it makes it easy for me to let them control the search result relevance ). Here's a simplified query: SELECT p.ProductID AS ContentID , p.ProductName AS Title , p.ProductCode AS Subtitle , 100 AS Rank , p.ProductKeywords AS Keywords FROM Products AS p WHERE FREETEXT( p.ProductKeywords, @SearchPredicate ) I'm thinking something along the lines of replacing the RANK with: , 200 - INDEXOF(@SearchTerm) AS Rank This "should" rank the keyword results by their relevance I know INDEXOF isn't a SQL command... but it's something LIKE that I would like to accomplish. Am I approaching this the right way? Is it possible to do something like this? Does this make sense?

    Read the article

  • Problems when going from SQL 2005 to SQL 2008

    - by Nezdet
    Hi! I did go over from SQL server 2005 to 2008. Doing that gave me some problems with the fulltext search. This site is based on Fulltext search. It occurs more deadlocks, the search is slower and sometimes it return empty lists, don't know why. A lot of people has been writning about they having this problem with 2008. But I haven'tgot any solutions why 2005 worked better for my program.. PLS help me out!

    Read the article

  • How well does Solr scale over large number of facet values?

    - by Continuation
    I'm using Solr and I want to facet over a field "group". Since "group" is created by users, potentially there can be a huge number of values for "group". Would Solr be able to handle a use case like this? Or is Solr not really appropriate for facet fields with a large number of values? I understand that I can set facet.limit to restrict the number of values returned for a facet field. Would this help in my case? Say there are 100,000 matching values for "group" in a search, if I set facet.limit to 50. would that speed up the query, or would the query still be slow because Solr still needs to process and sort through all the facet values and return the top 50 ones? Any tips on how to tune Solr for large number of facet values? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Recommended way to perform Lucene search without limit

    - by Thomas
    The Lucene documents tell me that "Hits" will be removed from the API in Lucene 3.0. Deprecated. Hits will be removed in Lucene 3.0. Use search(Query, Filter, int) instead. The proposed overload limits the number of documents returned to the value of the int. So my question is: what is the recommended way to perform a search in Lucene with no limit on the number of documents to be returned?

    Read the article

  • Writing a post search algorithm.

    - by MdaG
    I'm trying to write a free text search algorithm for finding specific posts on a wall (similar kind of wall as Facebook uses). A user is suppose to be able to write some words in a search field and get hits on posts that contain the words; with the best match on top and then other posts in decreasing order according to match score. I'm using the edit distance (Levenshtein) "e(x, y) = e" to calculate the score for each post when compared to the query word "x" and post word "y" according to: score(x, y) = 2^(2 - e)(1 - min(e, |x|) / |x|) Each word in a post contributes to the total score for that specific post. This approach seems to work well when the posts are of roughly the same size, but sometime certain large posts manages to rack up score solely on having a lot of words in them while in practice not being relevant to the query. Am I approaching this problem in the wrong way or is there some way to normalize the score that I haven't thought of?

    Read the article

  • Search filenames in MySQL database table restricted by filetype?

    - by ju
    Hello I have a MySQL database that I replicate from another server. The database contains a table with this columns ID, FileName and FileSize In the table there are more than 4'000'000 records. I want to make fast a search in FileName (varchar) column I found that I can use for this Sphinx search engine. The problem is that I want to restrict searches by filetype. Do I have to and how (trigers?) to extract file extensions for all rows? May be I have to create another table (because this one is replicated) and join them in 1:1 relation? Can you give me some advices please :)

    Read the article

  • Python module seeing a full list as empty in another module

    - by Nick
    I'm working on a pygame project and have the main engine layed out. The problem is I hit a bug that I just can not seem to figure out. What happens is one module can't read a variable from another module. It's not that the variable can't be read, it just sees an empty list instead of what it really is. Instead of posting the entire source code I reproduced the bug in two small snippets that hopefully a skillful python-ist can interpret in his\her head. Code: main.py (This is the file that gets run) import screen screens = [] #A stack for all the game screens def current_screen(): #return a reference to the current screen return screens[-1] def play(): print'play called' current_screen().update() if __name__=='__main__': screens.append(screen.Screen()) play() screen.py import main class Screen: def __init__(self): print'screen made' def update(self): print main.screens #Should have a reference to itself in there Thanks!

    Read the article

  • MessageListener didnt receive full message ASMACK Android

    - by Frank Junior
    i got problem when want to receive message, right now i am able to receive message, but some attribut is missing class MyMessageListener implements MessageListener { @Override public void processMessage(Chat chat, Message message) { Util.DebugLog("message->"+message.toXmlns()); } } what i got is <message to="[email protected]" type="chat" from="[email protected]/ff3b2485"><body asdf="asdf">aaa</body></message> talk_id and chat type inside message is missing. This is want i want when receive message <message to="[email protected]" type="chat" talk_id="304" chat_type="0" from="[email protected]/ff3b2485"><body asdf="asdf">aaa</body></message>

    Read the article

  • using STI and ActiveRecordBase<> with full FindAll

    - by oillio
    Is it possible to use generic support with single table inheritance, and still be able to FindAll of the base class? As a bonus question, will I be able to use ActiveRecordLinqBase< as well? I do love those queries. More detail: Say I have the following classes defined: public interface ICompany { int ID { get; set; } string Name { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord("companies", DiscriminatorColumn="type", DiscriminatorType="String", DiscriminatorValue="NA")] public abstract class Company<T> : ActiveRecordBase<T>, ICompany { [PrimaryKey] private int Id { get; set; } [Property] public String Name { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord(DiscriminatorValue="firm")] public class Firm : Company<Firm> { [Property] public string Description { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord(DiscriminatorValue="client")] public class Client : Company<Client> { [Property] public int ChargeRate { get; set; } } This works fine for most cases. I can do things like: var x = Client.FindAll(); But sometimes I want all of the companies. If I was not using generics I could do: var x = (Company[]) FindAll(Company); Client a = (Client)x[0]; Firm b = (Firm)x[1]; Is there a way to write a FindAll that returns an array of ICompany's that can then be typecast into their respective types? Something like: var x = (ICompany[]) FindAll(Company<ICompany>); Client a = (Client)x[0]; Or maybe I am going about implementing the generic support all wrong?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >