Search Results

Search found 11543 results on 462 pages for 'partition wise join'.

Page 41/462 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

  • Is it possible to LIMIT results from a JOIN query?

    - by Arms
    I've got a query that currently queries a Post table while LEFT JOINing a Comment table. It fetches all Posts and their respective Comments. However, I want to limit the number of Comments returned. I tried adding a sub-select, but ran into errors if I didn't LIMIT the results to 1. I'm really not sure how to go about this while still using only one query. Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • What's a reasonable number of rows and tables to be able to join in MySQL?

    - by Philip Brocoum
    I have one table that maps locations to postal codes. For example, New York State has about 2000 postal codes. I have another table that maps mail to the postal codes it was sent to, but this table has about 5 million rows. I want to find all the mail that was sent to New York State, which seems simple enough, but the query is unbelievably slow. I haven't been able to even wait long enough for it to finish. Is the problem that there are 5 million rows? I can't help but think that 5 million shouldn't be such a large number for a computer these days... Oh, and everything is indexed. Is SQL just not designed to handle such large joins?

    Read the article

  • Should I use two queries, or is there a way to JOIN this in MySQL/PHP?

    - by Jack W-H
    Morning y'all! Basically, I'm using a table to store my main data - called 'Code' - a table called 'Tags' to store the tags for each code entry, and a table called 'code_tags' to intersect it. There's also a table called 'users' which stores information about the users who submitted each bit of code. On my homepage, I want 5 results returned from the database. Each returned result needs to list the code's title, summary, and then fetch the author's firstname based on the ID of the person who submitted it. I've managed to achieve this much so far (woot!). My problem lies when I try to collect all the tags as well. At the moment this is a pretty big query and it's scaring me a little. Here's my problematic query: SELECT code.*, code_tags.*, tags.*, users.firstname AS authorname, users.id AS authorid FROM code, code_tags, tags, users WHERE users.id = code.author AND code_tags.code_id = code.id AND tags.id = code_tags.tag_id ORDER BY date DESC LIMIT 0, 5 What it returns is correct looking data, but several repeated rows for each tag. So for example if a Code entry has 3 tags, it will return an identical row 3 times - except in each of the three returned rows, the tag changes. Does that make sense? How would I go about changing this? Thanks! Jack

    Read the article

  • mdadm superblock hiding/shadowing partition

    - by Kjell Andreassen
    Short version: Is it safe to do mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdd on a disk with a partition (dev/sdd1), filesystem and data? Will the partition be mountable and the data still there? Longer version: I used to have a raid6 array but decided to dismantle it. The disks from the array are now used as non-raid disks. The superblocks were cleared: sudo mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdd The disks were repartitioned with fdisk and filesystems created with mfks.ext4. All disks where mounted and everything worked fine. Today, a couple of weeks later, one of the disks is failing to be recognized when trying to mount it, or rather the single partition on it. sudo mount /dev/sdd1 /mnt/tmp mount: special device /dev/sdd1 does not exist fdisk claims there to be a partition on it: sudo fdisk -l /dev/sdd Disk /dev/sdd: 2000.4 GB, 2000398934016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 243201 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0xb06f6341 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdd1 1 243201 1953512001 83 Linux Of course mount is right, the device /dev/sdd1 is not there, I'm guessing udev did not create it because of the mdadm data still on it: sudo mdadm --examine /dev/sdd /dev/sdd: Magic : a92b4efc Version : 1.2 Feature Map : 0x0 Array UUID : b164e513:c0584be1:3cc53326:48691084 Name : pringle:0 (local to host pringle) Creation Time : Sat Jun 16 21:37:14 2012 Raid Level : raid6 Raid Devices : 6 Avail Dev Size : 3907027120 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Array Size : 15628107776 (7452.06 GiB 8001.59 GB) Used Dev Size : 3907026944 (1863.02 GiB 2000.40 GB) Data Offset : 2048 sectors Super Offset : 8 sectors State : clean Device UUID : 3ccaeb5b:843531e4:87bf1224:382c16e2 Update Time : Sun Aug 12 22:20:39 2012 Checksum : 4c329db0 - correct Events : 1238535 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 512K Device Role : Active device 3 Array State : AA.AAA ('A' == active, '.' == missing) My mdadm --zero-superblock apparently didn't work. Can I safely try it again without losing data? If not, are there any suggestion on what do to? Not starting mdadm at all on boot might be a (somewhat unsatisfactory) solution.

    Read the article

  • EFI vs MBR - Installing Windows Server 2008 R2 or 2012 on 8TB

    - by Riaan de Lange
    I'm having some difficulty installing Windows Server 2008 R2 and Windows Server 2012 on an Intel Server platform. The server specs is as follows: Intel Grizzly Pass Server System - R2308GZ4GC 2x Intel Xeon 2620 - 2.0 GHZ - BX80621E52620 132 GB of Memory REG-DIMM - TS1GKR72V6H 4x Seagate Constellation ES 2TB 3.5" 7200rpm 6GB/S - ST32000645NS Intel Big Laurel 4CH 6G SAS RAID 512MB - RS2BL040 On the Intel RAID Controller Setup, I have setup the HDD to be in RAID-0 - for testing purposes. (Ultimately configured in RAID-5) So, the total size of HDD space I can use is 7.6 TB something... When I install the Server OS's, they don't seem to go beyond 2 TB (1.76 TB) I have read up on EFI and UEFI boot, and this seems to work in 2012, but I could not install any drivers for the motherboard... So, I also tried EFI for 2008R2, and this worked while installing the OS, it did not however work with the Windows Boot Manager option in the BIOS. It kept on freezing once it tries to load the partition. My idea was to allocate the complete 8 TB for the OS, and load a few VM's on there. I have now started with a new approach where I'll have a 256 GB OS Partition, and a secondary 7.5 TB Data partition. Oh, and I also did a diskpart - convert disk to gpt whilst installing 2008R2. The whole disk was accessible, 7.6TB Can anyone please clarify that EFI/UEFI is meant for larger boot volumes? Bigger than 2TB. If I were to have an ideal situation where my OS is run on a SSD, 256GB, and I can attach the 8 TB drives as normal disk to the OS? I'm I correct in saying that if I wanted to boot from a 8TB partition, I would need to force the BIOS to boot from EFI? The limit for MBR is 2 TB as far as I know now... *FYI: The motherboard is EFI-ready

    Read the article

  • NTFS partition size not recognized after disaster recovery clone

    - by djechelon
    I'm in the middle of a disaster recovery of a 250GB hard disk that was "clicking". Obviously I didn't have a backup copy. I managed to salvage all the files thanks to GParted Live that was able to read the disk without a single "click" sound. So I cloned the partition to a new drive sized 500GB. Unfortunately, GParted process went to some kind of infinite loop, disks stopped I/O and after a couple of hours I interrupted the clone process I started. Now the problem is: when cloning the partition I also chose to expand 250GB to the whole 500GB of the target disk. Windows sees the partition sized 500GB in computer management, but Windows Explorer only sees 250. chkdsk e: /f says the filesystem is OK. How can I repair the file system and let Windows see the full 500GB of the new partition? An alternate idea is to deep-copy the files from the backup disk to a newly formatted disk. This should definitely fix. Any other ideas?

    Read the article

  • Create a partition table on a hardware RAID1 drive with [c]fdisk

    - by Lev Levitsky
    My question is, is there a reason for this not to work? Details: I have two 500 Gb drives, and my motherboard RAID support, so I created a RAID1 array and booted from a Linux live medium. I then listed the disks and, apart from the obvious /dev/sda, /dev/sdb, etc. there was /dev/md126 which, I figured, was the mirrored "virtual" drive. Its size was 475 Gb; I had seen that the size of the array would be smaller than 500 Gb when I was creating it, so no surprise there. I did cfdisk /dev/md126, created the necessary partitions and chose write. It's been about half an hour now, I think. It doesn't seem like it's ever going to finish. The only thing about cfdisk in dmesg is that it's "blocked for more than 120 seconds". Doing fdisk -l /dev/md126 in another terminal I see all three partitions I created and a note that "Partition 1 does not start on a physical sector boundary". The table is lost after reboot, though. I tried to partition /dev/sda individually, and it worked, the table was written in about a second. The "not on a physical sector boundary" message is there, too. EDIT: I tried fdisk on /dev/sda, then there were no messages about sector boundaries. After a reboot, I am able to use mkfs on /dev/dm126p1, etc. fdisk shows that /dev/md126 has the same partitions as /dev/sda (but /dev/sdb doesn't have any). But at some point ("writing superblock and filesystem accounting information") mkfs is also blocked. Using it on sda1 results in a "partition is used by the system" error. What can be the problem? EDIT 2: I booted a freshly updated system from a pendrive and was able to create partition table and filesystems on /dev/md126 without any apparent problems. Was it an issue with the support of the hardware? My MB is Asus P9X79.

    Read the article

  • Removing extended partition without deleting logical in it

    - by HisDudeness
    I'm running a Linux-based laptop, and in order to multi-boot several distros in it, I created an extended partition which contains a bunch of logical ones with GParted. Now, after quite a long time with this setup, I've changed my mind because of the consequent lack of storing space for my data partition. Now I want to keep one distro alone like it's normal, and eventually have some other operating systems stored in external supports to plug in and use if I want. Obviously, also this partition I want to keep (and to enlarge a little too) is just a logical inside the extended I want to keep. For what concerns the number I'm ok, meaning I currently have this big distro dedicated extended, the swap and the data partitions, so there's space for another primary before I delete the extended, but I don't know how to delete it without touching the logical in it, I don't want to reinstall the system losing all changes and settings, and I don't want to keep an extended partition for a logical alone. How can I do? Do I have to create a new primary, copy the logical content in it and then delete everything? Will the system boot and maintain exactly all the features it has now? Or is there a way to convert an extended into a primary once it contains just one logical? Or can I directly move a logical out of an extended turning it into a primary? Or, again, am I screwed?

    Read the article

  • Unable to resize ec2 ebs root volume

    - by nathanjosiah
    I have followed many of the tutorials that pretty much all say the same thing which is basically: Stop the instance Detach the volume Create a snapshot of the volume Create a bigger volume from the snapshot Attach the new volume to the instance Start the instance back up Run resize2fs /dev/xxx However, step 7 is where the problems start happening. In any case running resize2fs always tells me that it is already xxxxx blocks big and does nothing, even with -f passed. So I start to continue with tutorials which all basically say the same thing and that is: Delete all partitons Recreate them back to what they were except with the bigger sizes Reboot the instance and run resize2fs (I have tried these steps both from the live instance and by attaching the volume to another instance and running the commands there) The main problem is that the instance won't start back up again and the system error log provided in the AWS console doesn't provide any errors. (it does however stop at the grub bootloader which to me indicates that it doesn't like the partitions(yes, the boot flag was toggled on the partition with no affect)) The other thing that happens regardless of what changes I make to the partitions is that the instance that the volume is attached to says that the partition has an invalid magic number and the super-block is corrupt. However, if I make no changes and reattach the volume, the instance runs without a problem. Can anybody shed some light on what I could be doing wrong? Edit On my new volume of 20GB with the 6GB image,df -h says: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/xvde1 5.8G 877M 4.7G 16% / tmpfs 836M 0 836M 0% /dev/shm And fdisk -l /dev/xvde says: Disk /dev/xvde: 21.5 GB, 21474836480 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 2610 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes Disk identifier: 0x7d833f39 Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/xvde1 1 766 6144000 83 Linux Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. /dev/xvde2 766 784 146432 82 Linux swap / Solaris Partition 2 does not end on cylinder boundary. Also, sudo resize2fs /dev/xvde1 says: resize2fs 1.41.12 (17-May-2010) The filesystem is already 1536000 blocks long. Nothing to do!

    Read the article

  • Moving from 1 Linux Partition to Many over USB Mount

    - by Mistiry
    We have devices which use Compact Flash for storage. They work OK, but we recently got industrial-grade CF cards to start using. One of the major problems we get is corruption on the flash card. As it is now, these flash cards run Debian with everything in a single partition. We want to have multiple partitions on the new industrial CF cards to help avoid some of the corruption problems. I booted up the device, and attached a USB CF reader. I then used fdisk to partition the CF card in the USB reader. How can I move the data to these partitions so that it works? I have a partition for each of these directories: /lib /var /root /boot /tmp /home /etc / swap space I imagine I can't just use rsync - do I need to attach a second CF reader with a copy of the CF card, so that it's not active and in-use - and then copy from the first reader to the second? How will the system know where to find its files? I know I'd have to change fstab, but that resides in /etc, which will be on a separate partition...how will it find the fstab file if it can't find /etc? And what about grub? I'm at a loss, perhaps its just because I'm under the weather, or I'm just missing a piece of logic here... Any help is greatly appreciated, this is somewhat urgent as our existing stock is nearing its end and we don't want to purchase anything but these industrial cards, but need to get it working with partitions.

    Read the article

  • Windows Broken after Deletion of HP_TOOLS partition

    - by beanland
    When I decided to install Ubuntu on my laptop as a dual-boot, I recognized that Windows 7 was using four separate partitions. I (yes, this was stupid) thought the HP_TOOLS partition was probably one I could get rid of, so I deleted it and installed Ubuntu side-by-side Windows using the installation wizard, but now Windows won't progress past the loading screen without the computer automatically restarting. I've had to use Ubuntu exclusively since then. I'm not sure how I can recover it. All of my files seem to still be there--I can mount the other partition and see them, use them, etc--but Windows 7 won't boot. I really have no idea what to do or what to try, or even if I'm at a salvageable point. here's a screenshot of GParted: This makes me suspicious that it wasn't necessarily the removal of my HP_TOOLS partition but the "unknown" status of that 992.50 KiB partition there, sda1. I'm assuming that's the recovery one? How can I get Windows bootable again? I'm sorry, but I'm so unfamiliar with this sort of thing I'm not quite sure where to start.

    Read the article

  • VMworkstation Windows 7 vm from physical partition?

    - by rich
    Hi All, i have a machine with 2 disks. my secondary drive has two partitions, one of which is a windows 7 64 boot partition. I have VM workstation and i would like to make a VM from the physical partition (described above). Ideally this would boot from the live disk, but if i can make a vmdk from the two partitions on the secondary drive that would be fine. 1 issue is the drive is 140gig raptor of which the two partitions i want are 40g and 30g partitions. the rest of the space is unallocated. So if i make a vmdk i really need it to be fixed at say 80 gig. I have converter but i don't understand how i can make the vmdk using this... specs Drive 1: this drive is a 120 SSD, running the host OS (Windows 7 64bit) - i've got 95 gigs free on this Drive 2: 140 gig raptor, partition 1 40g is also a windows 7 64bit install, partition 2 is 35 gig with program files folder on it.. sorta of needed to get the vm to work. There is 65gig unallocated on this disk. Drive 1 will host drive 2 as a VM.. my hope.

    Read the article

  • Shrink Windows OS partition with unmovable files

    - by Tim
    I am trying to shink Windows 7 OS partition C: but cannot shrink as much as I plan due to unmovable files. I have tried Windows own defrag tool before but it does not move files that are unmovable. Here are some ideas I have learned from previous posts, and I hope at least one of them will work and wish to know the detail how to do: Inspired by this post, which suggests backup C:, then delete C: , create a smaller partition, and then copy the backup to the smaller partition. I was wondering if anyone here can confirm that Windows 7 will still work in this way? What reliable tools can be used for backuping the system, and deleting and creating partition, and then copying back the backup in this method? I am actually trying another way suggested in this post. I have identified what unmovable file currently stop further shrinking: \ProgramData\Microsoft\Search\Data\Applications\Windows\Projects\SystemIndex\Indexer\CiFiles\00010015.wid::$DATA If I understand correctly, the file belongs to Windows Search. Can I set up somewhere in Windows system settings to temperately eliminate the file and similar ones (because there are many similar files under the same directory which I guess will also stand in the way of shrinking and unmovable by defrag)? Any other idea that might work will also be appreciated. Thanks and regards!

    Read the article

  • How do I install Ubuntu 13.10 from a partition on my Mac?

    - by Barry
    I am trying to install Ubuntu 13.10 on my Macbook Air. I've previously had no issue installing from a USB stick to this machine. However, I don't currently have access to a USB stick or any external media at all! What I've done so far is partitioned my SSD into 3 partitions. One holds OS X, another is a 5gb partition intended for the install ISO, and a third is intended to be the target for that install. The second two partitions are formatted as FAT. I've used dd (with and without bs=1m) to "burn" my ISO to the small 5gb FAT partition. I also at one point tried using hdituil to convert my ISO file to IMG and went through the same process with same result below. After "burning" my ISO to the small partition, I reboot into Refind. Refind sees my small 5gb partition perfectly well, and when I select that partition it loads GRUB appropriately. However, from here, regardless of what I choose, Ubuntu will start to load and then after a few minutes crash out to: BuzyBox V1.15.3 (Ubuntu 1:1.15.3-1ubuntu5) built-in shell (ash) Enter 'help' for a list of built in commands. (initramfs) unable to find a medium containing a live file system. I've Googled this error and found a number of people encountering it when trying to install from USB, but no solutions seem applicable to my case (installing from a partition on my SSD, to another partition on my SSD). Is there any solution to this, or do I just need to wait a few days until I have access to a USB stick? Many thanks in advance, and apologies for length -- I figured I'd err on the side of being exhaustive rather than having people suggest things I've already tried.

    Read the article

  • What is the safest way to remove a swap partition?

    - by user212062
    I am running Ubuntu 12.04 on a 64-bit HP laptop with a 16 GB flash drive. I do not have a working hard drive right now. When I installed Ubuntu, I created a 2 GB swap partition on sdb1. I have since learned that swap partitions are generally a bad idea on flash drives, so I would like to use my swap space for my other partitions. You can see my partition scheme in the link below. I have read that I just have to comment sdb1 out of the fstab file, boot from a GParted live CD, select swapoff for sdb1, delete/merge with other partition, and everything's good. But, I've also read that messing with sdb1 can change the UUID of sdb2 or sdb3 and cause problems. Is this true? Does initramfs use swap at all? Also, when I get Ubuntu running on my laptop with an internal hard drive, does the swap partition help that much? I have 6 GB of DDR3. Does the rule of 1.5xActual RAM still apply? It seems like quite a bit to me. Thanks for the help! UPDATE: I have removed swap. The process I followed is: Right click swap partition in GParted and selected swapoff. Used # to comment the swap partition out of fstab. I tried to boot from a live GParted CD, but I kept getting an error, so I ran GParted in Ubuntu. Deleted swap partition in GParted. Unmounted /windows. Expanded /windows to take the remaining space. Mounted /windows. The / and /windows partitions each kept their own names and UUIDs, and everything is running fine. I have never seen any swap space being used before, and I don't intend to use the hibernate function, so I think removing swap was a good idea.

    Read the article

  • Grub can not boot after resizing windows XP (NTFS) partition. What is to be done? [closed]

    - by cipricus
    Possible Duplicate: How to Repair Grub while dual booting ( win7 / ubuntu 11.10) I had installed Lubuntu on a PC with Windows XP and used dual boot for some time with no problems. Since I had almost abandoned Windows (kept it for printing...) I decided to resize its ntfs partition and add the free space to my Ubuntu space. Tried that with a gparted stick and a live cd but would not work due to an issue related to the ntfs partition: gparted signaled with a red exclamation point that there was a problem with that partition. I read that a checkdisk might solve it but in the end used EaseUS in Windows to shrink (resize) the ntfs partition and create a new one (ext3) from the space left. All seemed ok with that procedure: but resizing the partition and moving the data might have affected the grub file: or whatever the following message means, which I get when trying to start my pc: error: file not found grub rescue> Booting from a live cd I see, beside the shrinked windows partition and my old linux one, the newly created partition, containing a directory called lost+found that I cannot open. Can I fix the grub file and recover both my XP and Lubuntu installations?

    Read the article

  • sql group by with left join

    - by cometta
    fail statement:Error: ORA-00979: not a GROUP BY expression select org_division.name , org_department.name , org_surveylog.division_code as divisionCode,org_surveylog.department_code as departmentCode , max(org_surveylog.actiondate) from org_surveylog left join org_division on (org_surveylog.division_code= org_division.division_code and org_surveylog.SURVEY_NUM= org_division.survey_num) left join org_department on (org_surveylog.department_code = org_department.department_code and org_surveylog.SURVEY_NUM = org_department.survey_num) group by org_surveylog.division_code,org_surveylog.department_code but below is ok select org_surveylog.division_code as divisionCode,org_surveylog.department_code as departmentCode , max(org_surveylog.actiondate) from org_surveylog left join org_division on (org_surveylog.division_code= org_division.division_code and org_surveylog.SURVEY_NUM= org_division.survey_num) left join org_department on (org_surveylog.department_code = org_department.department_code and org_surveylog.SURVEY_NUM = org_department.survey_num) group by org_surveylog.division_code,org_surveylog.department_code how to use group by with left join when i need to show value of org_division.name , org_department.name ?

    Read the article

  • Join map and refer to its key/value in HQL

    - by alamar
    Suppose I have a map: <map name="externalIds" table="album_external_ids"> <key column="album_id" not-null="true"/> <map-key-many-to-many class="Major" column="major_id"/> <element column="external_id" type="string" not-null="true"/> </map> How do I make a HQL meaning "select entities where map key's id == :foo and map value == :bar"? I can join it using select album from Album album join album.externalIds ids But how would I then refer to ids' key and value? ids.key.id = :foo and ids.value = :bar doesn't work, and hibernate doc is silent on this topic. Naive approaches that didn't work: select album from Album album join album.externalIds externalId where index(externalId).id = :foo and externalId = :bar and select album from Album album join album.externalIds externalId join index(externalId) major where major.id = :foo and externalId = :bar

    Read the article

  • Range partition skip check

    - by user289429
    We have large amount of data partitioned on year value using range partition in oracle. We have used range partition but each partition contains data only for one year. When we write a query targeting a specific year, oracle fetches the information from that partition but still checks if the year is what we have specified. Since this year column is not part of the index it fetches the year from table and compares it. We have seen that any time the query goes to fetch table data it is getting too slow. Can we somehow avoid oracle comparing the year values since we for sure know that the partition contains information for only one year.

    Read the article

  • Multiple Table Join in Linq C# Dynamically

    - by kmkperumal
    I have 3 data table a,b,c In this I need to write Join Query Dynamically using linQ. The Selecting columns given by customer and Condition columns also given customer at run time. So i need to create Querys dynamically.Please check below example.Because i dont which table they want and which column also For example Select a.c1,a.c2,b.c1,b.c2 From a Left Join b on a.c1=b.c1 2.Select c.c1,c.c2,a.c1,a.c2 From c Left Join a on c.c3=a.c1 3.Select a.c1,a.c2,b.c1,b.c2,c.c1,c.c2 From a Left Join b on a.c2=b.c2 Left join c on c.c1=a.c1 Like i need create different set of query's. Please help me on this.

    Read the article

  • Fluent Nhibernate left join

    - by Ronnie
    I want to map a class that result in a left outer join and not in an innner join. My composite user entity is made by one table ("aspnet_users") and an some optional properties in a second table (like FullName in "users"). public class UserMap : ClassMap<User> { public UserMap() { Table("aspnet_Users"); Id(x => x.Id, "UserId").GeneratedBy.Guid(); Map(x => x.UserName, "UserName"); Map(x => x.LoweredUserName, "LoweredUserName"); Join("Users",mm=> { mm.Map(xx => xx.FullName); }); } } this mapping result in an inner join select so no result come out is second table as no data. I'd like to generate an left join. Is this possible only at query level?

    Read the article

  • Jointure in linq with a regular expression

    - by Graveen
    I'm actually using a join in linqtosql (via dblinq). I'm trying to include a regular expression in the join part of the linq query. from i in collectiona join j in collectionb on Regex.IsMatch(i.name, j.jokered_name) equals true (...) I agree i can push the RegExp check in the where part of the linq query, but i was wondering if it is possible in the join part ? The above code wants an "i equals j" code structure. One thing i think to perform is overriding Equals() which 'll contains the RegEx.IsMatch() stuff and put a simple i equals j in the join part. Any suggestions about my problem ?

    Read the article

  • Joining two select queries and ordering results

    - by user1
    Basically I'm just unsure as to why this query is failing to execute: (SELECT replies.reply_post, replies.reply_content, replies.reply_date AS d, members.username FROM (replies) AS a INNER JOIN members ON replies.reply_by = members.id) UNION (SELECT posts.post_id, posts.post_title, posts.post_date AS d, members.username FROM (posts) as b WHERE posts.post_set = 0 INNER JOIN members ON posts.post_by = members.id) ORDER BY d DESC LIMIT 5 I'm getting this error: #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'a INNER JOIN members ON replies.re' at line 2 All I'm trying to do is select the 5 most recent rows (dates) from these two tables. I've tried Join, union etc and I've seen numerous queries where people have put another query after the FROM statement and that just makes no logical sense to me as to how that works? Am I safe to say that you can join the same table from two different but joined queries? Or am I taking completely the wrong approach, because frankly I can't seem see how this query is failing despite reading the error message. (The two queries on there own work fine)

    Read the article

  • Need HP recovery partition info

    - by ggambett
    I'm configuring a new HP Pavillion DV4 with a 320 GB disk. I made the recovery DVDs, then did a couple other things (including deleting the recovery partition), and finally decided to restore the system. Unfortunately, the recovery process fails; the three DVDs are read (the recovery program says "Reformatting the Windows partition" and "Copying files required to restore the hard drive") but after it finishes reading the 3rd, and the progress bar reaches 100%, it fails with error 0xe0f00013 - Googling it didn't return anything at all. I'm afraid this may be because I deleted the partitions. So, I'm kindly asking for one of the following, in order of preference, from a HP Pavillion DV4 with a 320 GB hard disk or a similar enough one : 1) A dump of the MBR 2) The type and size of all the partitions in a "new" system so I can try to make a partition table resembling the original one. BTW, I thought the recovery DVDs were supposed to work even if the entire disk was wiped - isn't that the case? Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >