Search Results

Search found 7902 results on 317 pages for 'structure'.

Page 42/317 | < Previous Page | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >

  • A data structure based on the R-Tree: creating new child nodes when a node is full, but what if I ha

    - by Tom
    I realize my title is not very clear, but I am having trouble thinking of a better one. If anyone wants to correct it, please do. I'm developing a data structure for my 2 dimensional game with an infinite universe. The data structure is based on a simple (!) node/leaf system, like the R-Tree. This is the basic concept: you set howmany childs you want a node (a container) to have maximum. If you want to add a leaf, but the node the leaf should be in is full, then it will create a new set of nodes within this node and move all current leafs to their new (more exact) node. This way, very populated areas will have a lot more subdivisions than a very big but rarely visited area. This works for normal objects. The only problem arises when I have more than maxChildsPerNode objects with the exact same X,Y location: because the node is full, it will create more exact subnodes, but the old leafs will all be put in the exact same node again because they have the exact same position -- resulting in an infinite loop of creating more nodes and more nodes. So, what should I do when I want to add more leafs than maxChildsPerNode with the exact same position to my tree? PS. if I failed to explain my problem, please tell me, so I can try to improve the explanation.

    Read the article

  • Scan file contents into an array of a structure.

    - by ZaZu
    Hello, I have a structure in my program that contains a particular array. I want to scan a random file with numbers and put the contents into that array. This is my code : ( NOTE : This is a sample from a bigger program, so I need the structure and arrays as declared ) The contents of the file are basically : 5 4 3 2 5 3 4 2 #include<stdio.h> #define first 500 #define sec 500 struct trial{ int f; int r; float what[first][sec]; }; int trialtest(trial *test); main(){ trial test; trialtest(&test); } int trialtest(trial *test){ int z,x,i; FILE *fin; fin=fopen("randomfile.txt","r"); for(i=0;i<5;i++){ fscanf(fin,"%5.2f\t",(*test).what[z][x]); } fclose(fin); return 0; } But the problem is, whenever this I run this code, I get this error : (25) : warning 508 - Data of type 'double' supplied where a pointer is required I tried adding do{ for(i=0;i<5;i++){ q=fscanf(fin,"%5.2f\t",(*test).what[z][x]); } }while(q!=EOF); But that didnt work either, it gives the same error. Does anyone have a solution to this problem ?

    Read the article

  • What would be the Better db design for the old db structure?

    - by yawok
    i've a old database where i store the data of the holidays and dates in which they are celebrated.. id country hdate description link 1 Afghanistan 2008-01-19 Ashura ashura 2 Albania 2008-01-01 New Year Day new-year the flaws in the above structure is that, i repeat the data other than date for every festival and every year and every country.. For example, I store a new date for 2009 for ashura and afghanistan .. I tried to limit the redundancy and split the tables as countries (id,name) holidays (id, holiday, celebrated_by, link) // celebrated_by will store the id's of countries separated by ',' holiday_dates (holiday_id, date, year) // date will the full date and year will be as 2008 or 2009 Now i have some problems with the structure too.. consider that i store the holiday like Independence day , its common for more countries but will have different dates. so how to handle this and and the link will have to be different too.. And i need to list the countries which celebrates the same holiday and also when i describe about a single holiday i need to list all the other holidays that country would be celebrating.. And the most of all , i already have huge amount of data in the old tables and i need to split it to the new one once the new design is finalized... Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How should I change my Graph structure (very slow insertion)?

    - by Nazgulled
    Hi, This program I'm doing is about a social network, which means there are users and their profiles. The profiles structure is UserProfile. Now, there are various possible Graph implementations and I don't think I'm using the best one. I have a Graph structure and inside, there's a pointer to a linked list of type Vertex. Each Vertex element has a value, a pointer to the next Vertex and a pointer to a linked list of type Edge. Each Edge element has a value (so I can define weights and whatever it's needed), a pointer to the next Edge and a pointer to the Vertex owner. I have a 2 sample files with data to process (in CSV style) and insert into the Graph. The first one is the user data (one user per line); the second one is the user relations (for the graph). The first file is quickly inserted into the graph cause I always insert at the head and there's like ~18000 users. The second file takes ages but I still insert the edges at the head. The file has about ~520000 lines of user relations and takes between 13-15mins to insert into the Graph. I made a quick test and reading the data is pretty quickly, instantaneously really. The problem is in the insertion. This problem exists because I have a Graph implemented with linked lists for the vertices. Every time I need to insert a relation, I need to lookup for 2 vertices, so I can link them together. This is the problem... Doing this for ~520000 relations, takes a while. How should I solve this? Solution 1) Some people recommended me to implement the Graph (the vertices part) as an array instead of a linked list. This way I have direct access to every vertex and the insertion is probably going to drop considerably. But, I don't like the idea of allocating an array with [18000] elements. How practically is this? My sample data has ~18000, but what if I need much less or much more? The linked list approach has that flexibility, I can have whatever size I want as long as there's memory for it. But the array doesn't, how am I going to handle such situation? What are your suggestions? Using linked lists is good for space complexity but bad for time complexity. And using an array is good for time complexity but bad for space complexity. Any thoughts about this solution? Solution 2) This project also demands that I have some sort of data structures that allows quick lookup based on a name index and an ID index. For this I decided to use Hash Tables. My tables are implemented with separate chaining as collision resolution and when a load factor of 0.70 is reach, I normally recreate the table. I base the next table size on this http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/GoodHashTablePrimes.html. Currently, both Hash Tables hold a pointer to the UserProfile instead of duplication the user profile itself. That would be stupid, changing data would require 3 changes and it's really dumb to do it that way. So I just save the pointer to the UserProfile. The same user profile pointer is also saved as value in each Graph Vertex. So, I have 3 data structures, one Graph and two Hash Tables and every single one of them point to the same exact UserProfile. The Graph structure will serve the purpose of finding the shortest path and stuff like that while the Hash Tables serve as quick index by name and ID. What I'm thinking to solve my Graph problem is to, instead of having the Hash Tables value point to the UserProfile, I point it to the corresponding Vertex. It's still a pointer, no more and no less space is used, I just change what I point to. Like this, I can easily and quickly lookup for each Vertex I need and link them together. This will insert the ~520000 relations pretty quickly. I thought of this solution because I already have the Hash Tables and I need to have them, then, why not take advantage of them for indexing the Graph vertices instead of the user profile? It's basically the same thing, I can still access the UserProfile pretty quickly, just go to the Vertex and then to the UserProfile. But, do you see any cons on this second solution against the first one? Or only pros that overpower the pros and cons on the first solution? Other Solution) If you have any other solution, I'm all ears. But please explain the pros and cons of that solution over the previous 2. I really don't have much time to be wasting with this right now, I need to move on with this project, so, if I'm doing to do such a change, I need to understand exactly what to change and if that's really the way to go. Hopefully no one fell asleep reading this and closed the browser, sorry for the big testament. But I really need to decide what to do about this and I really need to make a change. P.S: When answering my proposed solutions, please enumerate them as I did so I know exactly what are you talking about and don't confuse my self more than I already am.

    Read the article

  • PHP: How to automate building a 100 <UL>/<LI> menuitems, while keeping the Menu Structure File Flat / Simply Managable?

    - by Sam
    Above: current "stupid" menu. (entire ul/li menu for javascript menu system) + (some li lines as page-specific submenu) Hi folks! With passion for automation and elegancy, but limited knowledge/knowhow, im stuck with "my hands in my hair" as we Dutch say, for my current menu system works perfectly, but is a pain in the a*s to update! So, i would appreciate it greatly, if you can suggest how to automate this in php: how to let the php generate the html menu code basing on a flat menu input file with TABS indented. OLD SITUATION <ul> <!-- about 100 of these <li>....</li> lines --> <li><a href="carrot.php"><p class="mnu" style="background-position:0 -820px"><? echo __("carrot juice") ?></p></a></li> <!-- lots of data, with only little bit thats really the menu itself--> </ul a javascript file reads a ul/li structure as input to build menu of format in that ul/li, the items with a hyperlink and sprite-bg position represent webpages, (inside LI) while items without hyperlink and sprite-bg are just headers of that menusection, (inside H6) to highlight the current page in the menu, the javascript menumaker uses an id number. this number corresponds to the consequtive li that is a webpage, skips h6 headers correctly. these h6 headers are only there for when importing sections of the same menu as submenu. non-li headers are not shown in menu, nore counted by the javascript menu for their ID. to know which page should be shown, i have to count from ID 0, the li items till finding the current webpage in the li structure and then manually put it in each webpage! BUT: changing an item in li order, means stupidly re-counting their entire li again! each webpage has an icon (= sprite bg-position numer), which is also used in the webpage. INTENDED RESULT I dream of, once setting what the current webpage is (e.g carrot.php) the menu system automatically "finds" and "counts" the li's and returns the id nr (for proper highlight of main menu); generates the entire menu html, and depending on which headings are set for submenu, (e.g. meals, drinks) generates those submenu (entire section below each given header); ginally adds h5 highlight inside the li of that submenu item. For the menu, i wish an easily readable, simple plain txt menu that is indented with tabs, (each tab is one depth for example) and further tabs follow for url and sprite position of icon. MY DREAM MENU-MANAGEMENT FILE |>TAB SEPARATED/INDENTED FLATMENU FILE |MUST BE CALCULATED BY PHP: |>MENUTEXT============URL=============SPRITE=====|ID===TAG================== |>about "#" -520 |00 li |> INFORMATION |—— h6 |> physical state "physical.php" -920 |01 li |> mental health "mental.php" -10 |02 li |> |>apetite "#" -1290 |03 li |> meals "#" -600 |04 li |> COLD MEAL |—— h6 |> egg salade "salad.php" -1040 |05 li |> salmon fish "salmon.php" -540 |06 li |> HOT MEAL |—— h6 |> spare ribs "spareribs.php" -120 |07 li |> di macaroni "macaroni.php" -870 |08 li |> |> drinks "#" -230 |09 li |> JUCY DRINK |—— h6 |> carrot juice "carrot.php" -820 |10 li |> mango hive "mango.php" -270 |11 li DESIRED CHRONOLOGY php outputs the entire ul/li html so the javascript can show the menu: webpage items go inside li tags, and header items go inside h6 tags, e.g. <h6>JUCY DRINK</h6> Each website page has a url filename [eg: salad.php]. Based on this given fact, the php menu generator detects the pagename, gives the IDnr of the position of that page according to the li-item nr and sets variable for javascript to highlight current menu item. the menu items below the specified headers are loaded as submenu in which the current page.php is wrapped inside h5 to highlight current page in submenu: e.g. (<li><h5><a href="carrot.php"><p>..etc..</p></h5></li> Question Which methods / steps / (chronological)ways are there for doing this? I am no good in php programming, but am learning it so please dont write any code without a line of comment why I should use that method etc. Where do I start? If I am unclear in my question, please ask. Thanks. Much appreciated!! Concrete Task List from the provided Comments/Answers, sofar: (RobertB) First, get some PHP code working that can read through a tab-delimited file and put the data into an appropriate data structure. NOW WORKING AT THIS

    Read the article

  • how to get ip address from sock structure in c ?

    - by REALFREE
    I'm writing simple server/client and trying to get client ip address and save it on server side to decide which client should get into critical section. I googled it several times but couldn't find proper way to get ip address from sock structure. I believe this is a way to get ip from sock struct after server accept request from client more specifically in c after server execute csock = accept(ssock, (struct sockaddr *)&client_addr, &clen) Thanks

    Read the article

  • Can this Query be corrected or different table structure needed? (database dumps provided)

    - by sandeepan
    This is a bit lengthy but I have provided sufficient details and kept things very clear. Please see if you can help. (I will surely accept answer if it solves my problem) I am sure a person experienced with this can surely help or suggest me to decide the tables structure. About the system:- There are tutors who create classes A tags based search approach is being followed Tag relations are created/edited when new tutors registers/edits profile data and when tutors create classes (this makes tutors and classes searcheable).For simplicity, let us consider only tutor name and class name are the fields which are matched against search keywords. In this example, I am considering - tutor "Sandeepan Nath" has created a class called "first class" tutor "Bob Cratchit" has created a class called "new class" Desired search results- AND logic to be appied on the search keywords and match against class and tutor data(class name + tutor name), in other words, All those classes be shown such that all the search terms are present in the class name or its tutor name. Example to be clear - Searching "first class" returns class with id_wc = 1. Working Searching "Sandeepan class" should also return class with id_wc = 1. Not working in System 2. Problem with profile editing and searching To tell in one sentence, I am facing a conflict between the ease of profile edition (edition of tag relations when tutor profiles are edited) and the ease of search logic. In the beginning, we had one table structure and search was easy but tag edition logic was very clumsy and unmaintainable(Check System 1 in the section below) . So we created separate tag relations tables to make profile edition simpler but search has become difficult. Please dump the tables so that you can run the search query I have given below and see the results. System 1 (previous system - search easy - profile edition difficult):- Only one table called All_Tag_Relations table had the all the tag relations. The tags table below is common to both systems 1 and 2. CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `all_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `all_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 1, 1, NULL), (2, 2, 1, NULL), (3, 1, 1, 1), (4, 2, 1, 1), (5, 3, 1, 1), (6, 4, 1, 1), (7, 6, 2, NULL), (8, 7, 2, NULL), (9, 6, 2, 2), (10, 7, 2, 2), (11, 5, 2, 2), (12, 4, 2, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `tag` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`), FULLTEXT KEY `tag_5` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=8 ; INSERT INTO `tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); Please note that for every class, the tag rels of its tutor have to be duplicated. Example, for class with id_wc=1, the tag rel records with id_tag_rel = 3 and 4 are actually extras if you compare with the tag rel records with id_tag_rel = 1 and 2. System 2 (present system - profile edition easy, search difficult) Two separate tables Tutors_Tag_Relations and Webclasses_Tag_Relations have the corresponding tag relations data (Please dump into a separate database)- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tutors_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `tutors_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`) VALUES (1, 1, 1), (2, 2, 1), (3, 6, 2), (4, 7, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `webclasses_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `webclasses_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `webclasses_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 3, 1, 1), (2, 4, 1, 1), (3, 5, 2, 2), (4, 4, 2, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `tag` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`), FULLTEXT KEY `tag_5` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=8 ; INSERT INTO `tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `all_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; insert into All_Tag_Relations select NULL,id_tag,id_tutor,NULL from Tutors_Tag_Relations; insert into All_Tag_Relations select NULL,id_tag,id_tutor,id_wc from Webclasses_Tag_Relations; Here you can see how easily tutor first name can be edited only in one place. But search has become really difficult, so on being advised to use a Temporary table, I am creating one at every search request, then dumping all the necessary data and then searching from it, I am creating this All_Tag_Relations table at search run time. Here I am just dumping all the data from the two tables Tutors_Tag_Relations and Webclasses_Tag_Relations. But, I am still not able to get classes if I search with tutor name This is the query which searches "first class". Running them on both the systems shows correct results (returns the class with id_wc = 1). SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =3)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =3 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 But, searching for "Sandeepan class" works only with the 1st system Here is the query which searches "Sandeepan class" SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =1)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =1 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 Can anybody alter this query and somehow do a proper join or something to get correct results. That solves my problem in a nice way. As you can figure out, the reason why it does not work in system 2 is that in system 1, for every class, one additional tag relation linking class and tutor name is present. e.g. for class first class, (records with id_tag_rel 3 and 4) which returns the class on searching with tutor name. So, you see the trade-off between the search and profile edition difficulty with the two systems. How do I overcome both. I have to reach a conclusion soon. So far my reasoning is it is definitely not good from a code maintainability point of view to follow the single tag rel table structure of system one, because in a real system while editing a field like "tutor qualifications", there can be as many records in tag rels table as there are words in qualification of a tutor (one word in a field = one tag relation). Now suppose a tutor has 100 classes. When he edits his qualification, all the tag rel rows corresponding to him are deleted and then as many copies are to be created (as per the new qualification data) as there are classes. This becomes particularly difficult if later more searcheable fields are added. The code cannot be robust. Is the best solution to follow system 2 (edition has to be in one table - no extra work for each and every class) and somehow re-create the all_tag_relations table like system 1 (from the tables tutor_tag_relations and webclasses_tag_relations), creating the extra tutor tag rels for each and every class by a tutor (which is currently missing in system 2's temporary all_tag_relations table). That would be a time consuming logic script. I doubt that table can be recreated without resorting to PHP sript (mysql alone cannot do that). But the problem is that running all this at search time will make search definitely slow. So, how do such systems work? How are such situations handled? I thought about we can run a cron which initiates that PHP script, say every 1 minute and replaces the existing all_tag_relations table as per new tag rels from tutor_tag_relations and webclasses_tag_relations (replaces means creates a new table, deletes the original and renames the new one as all_tag_relations, otherwise search won't work during that period- or is there any better way to that?). Anyway, the result would be that any changes by tutors will reflect in search in the next 1 minute and not immediately. An alternateve would be to initate that PHP script every time a tutor edits his profile. But here again, since many users may edit their profiles concurrently, will the creation of so many tables be a burden and can mysql make the server slow? Any help would be appreciated and working solution will be accepted as answer. Thanks, Sandeepan

    Read the article

  • Can this Query can be corrected or different table structure needed? (question is clear, detailed, d

    - by sandeepan
    This is a bit lengthy but I have provided sufficient details and kept things very clear. Please see if you can help. (I will surely accept answer if it solves my problem) I am sure a person experienced with this can surely help or suggest me to decide the tables structure. About the system:- There are tutors who create classes A tags based search approach is being followed Tag relations are created/edited when new tutors registers/edits profile data and when tutors create classes (this makes tutors and classes searcheable).For simplicity, let us consider only tutor name and class name are the fields which are matched against search keywords. In this example, I am considering - tutor "Sandeepan Nath" has created a class called "first class" tutor "Bob Cratchit" has created a class called "new class" Desired search results- AND logic to be appied on the search keywords and match against class and tutor data(class name + tutor name), in other words, All those classes be shown such that all the search terms are present in the class name or its tutor name. Example to be clear - Searching "first class" returns class with id_wc = 1. Working Searching "Sandeepan class" should also return class with id_wc = 1. Not working in System 2. Problem with profile editing and searching To tell in one sentence, I am facing a conflict between the ease of profile edition (edition of tag relations when tutor profiles are edited) and the ease of search logic. In the beginning, we had one table structure and search was easy but tag edition logic was very clumsy and unmaintainable(Check System 1 in the section below) . So we created separate tag relations tables to make profile edition simpler but search has become difficult. Please dump the tables so that you can run the search query I have given below and see the results. System 1 (previous system - search easy - profile edition difficult):- Only one table called All_Tag_Relations table had the all the tag relations. The tags table below is common to both systems 1 and 2. CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `all_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `all_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 1, 1, NULL), (2, 2, 1, NULL), (3, 1, 1, 1), (4, 2, 1, 1), (5, 3, 1, 1), (6, 4, 1, 1), (7, 6, 2, NULL), (8, 7, 2, NULL), (9, 6, 2, 2), (10, 7, 2, 2), (11, 5, 2, 2), (12, 4, 2, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `tag` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`), FULLTEXT KEY `tag_5` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=8 ; INSERT INTO `tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); Please note that for every class, the tag rels of its tutor have to be duplicated. Example, for class with id_wc=1, the tag rel records with id_tag_rel = 3 and 4 are actually extras if you compare with the tag rel records with id_tag_rel = 1 and 2. System 2 (present system - profile edition easy, search difficult) Two separate tables Tutors_Tag_Relations and Webclasses_Tag_Relations have the corresponding tag relations data (Please dump into a separate database)- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tutors_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `tutors_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`) VALUES (1, 1, 1), (2, 2, 1), (3, 6, 2), (4, 7, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `webclasses_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `webclasses_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; INSERT INTO `webclasses_tag_relations` (`id_tag_rel`, `id_tag`, `id_tutor`, `id_wc`) VALUES (1, 3, 1, 1), (2, 4, 1, 1), (3, 5, 2, 2), (4, 4, 2, 2); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `tags` ( `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `tag` varchar(255) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag`), UNIQUE KEY `tag` (`tag`), KEY `id_tag` (`id_tag`), KEY `tag_2` (`tag`), KEY `tag_3` (`tag`), KEY `tag_4` (`tag`), FULLTEXT KEY `tag_5` (`tag`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=8 ; INSERT INTO `tags` (`id_tag`, `tag`) VALUES (1, 'Sandeepan'), (2, 'Nath'), (3, 'first'), (4, 'class'), (5, 'new'), (6, 'Bob'), (7, 'Cratchit'); CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `all_tag_relations` ( `id_tag_rel` int(10) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `id_tag` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `id_tutor` int(10) DEFAULT NULL, `id_wc` int(10) unsigned DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id_tag_rel`), KEY `All_Tag_Relations_FKIndex1` (`id_tag`), KEY `id_wc` (`id_wc`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; insert into All_Tag_Relations select NULL,id_tag,id_tutor,NULL from Tutors_Tag_Relations; insert into All_Tag_Relations select NULL,id_tag,id_tutor,id_wc from Webclasses_Tag_Relations; Here you can see how easily tutor first name can be edited only in one place. But search has become really difficult, so on being advised to use a Temporary table, I am creating one at every search request, then dumping all the necessary data and then searching from it, I am creating this All_Tag_Relations table at search run time. Here I am just dumping all the data from the two tables Tutors_Tag_Relations and Webclasses_Tag_Relations. But, I am still not able to get classes if I search with tutor name This is the query which searches "first class". Running them on both the systems shows correct results (returns the class with id_wc = 1). SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =3)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =3 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 But, searching for "Sandeepan class" works only with the 1st system Here is the query which searches "Sandeepan class" SELECT wtagrels.id_wc,SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =1)) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( wtagrels.id_tag =4)) AS key_2_total_matches FROM all_tag_relations AS wtagrels WHERE ( wtagrels.id_tag =1 OR wtagrels.id_tag =4 ) GROUP BY wtagrels.id_wc HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 LIMIT 0, 20 Can anybody alter this query and somehow do a proper join or something to get correct results. That solves my problem in a nice way. As you can figure out, the reason why it does not work in system 2 is that in system 1, for every class, one additional tag relation linking class and tutor name is present. e.g. for class first class, (records with id_tag_rel 3 and 4) which returns the class on searching with tutor name. So, you see the trade-off between the search and profile edition difficulty with the two systems. How do I overcome both. I have to reach a conclusion soon. So far my reasoning is it is definitely not good from a code maintainability point of view to follow the single tag rel table structure of system one, because in a real system while editing a field like "tutor qualifications", there can be as many records in tag rels table as there are words in qualification of a tutor (one word in a field = one tag relation). Now suppose a tutor has 100 classes. When he edits his qualification, all the tag rel rows corresponding to him are deleted and then as many copies are to be created (as per the new qualification data) as there are classes. This becomes particularly difficult if later more searcheable fields are added. The code cannot be robust. Is the best solution to follow system 2 (edition has to be in one table - no extra work for each and every class) and somehow re-create the all_tag_relations table like system 1 (from the tables tutor_tag_relations and webclasses_tag_relations), creating the extra tutor tag rels for each and every class by a tutor (which is currently missing in system 2's temporary all_tag_relations table). That would be a time consuming logic script. I doubt that table can be recreated without resorting to PHP sript (mysql alone cannot do that). But the problem is that running all this at search time will make search definitely slow. So, how do such systems work? How are such situations handled? I thought about we can run a cron which initiates that PHP script, say every 1 minute and replaces the existing all_tag_relations table as per new tag rels from tutor_tag_relations and webclasses_tag_relations (replaces means creates a new table, deletes the original and renames the new one as all_tag_relations, otherwise search won't work during that period- or is there any better way to that?). Anyway, the result would be that any changes by tutors will reflect in search in the next 1 minute and not immediately. An alternateve would be to initate that PHP script every time a tutor edits his profile. But here again, since many users may edit their profiles concurrently, will the creation of so many tables be a burden and can mysql make the server slow? Any help would be appreciated and working solution will be accepted as answer. Thanks, Sandeepan

    Read the article

  • How can I structure and recode messy categorical data in R?

    - by briandk
    I'm struggling with how to best structure categorical data that's messy, and comes from a dataset I'll need to clean. The Coding Scheme I'm analyzing data from a university science course exam. We're looking at patterns in student responses, and we developed a coding scheme to represent the kinds of things students are doing in their answers. A subset of the coding scheme is shown below. Note that within each major code (1, 2, 3) are nested non-unique sub-codes (a, b, ...). What the Raw Data Looks Like I've created an anonymized, raw subset of my actual data which you can view here. Part of my problem is that those who coded the data noticed that some students displayed multiple patterns. The coders' solution was to create enough columns (reason1, reason2, ...) to hold students with multiple patterns. That becomes important because the order (reason1, reason2) is arbitrary--two students (like student 41 and student 42 in my dataset) who correctly applied "dependency" should both register in an analysis, regardless of whether 3a appears in the reason column or the reason2 column. How Can I Best Structure Student Data? Part of my problem is that in the raw data, not all students display the same patterns, or the same number of them, in the same order. Some students may do just one thing, others may do several. So, an abstracted representation of example students might look like this: Note in the example above that student002 and student003 both are coded as "1b", although I've deliberately shown the order as different to reflect the reality of my data. My (Practical) Questions Should I concatenate reason1, reason2, ... into one column? How can I (re)code the reasons in R to reflect the multiplicity for some students? Thanks I realize this question is as much about good data conceptualization as it is about specific features of R, but I thought it would be appropriate to ask it here. If you feel it's inappropriate for me to ask the question, please let me know in the comments, and stackoverflow will automatically flood my inbox with sadface emoticons. If I haven't been specific enough, please let me know and I'll do my best to be clearer.

    Read the article

  • Does this data structure have a name? Sort of a "linked matrix"?

    - by Bob
    Let's say I wanted similar functionality to a doubly linked list but needed a matrix instead so that each node was structured like this: public class Node { Node Up, Down, Left, Right; object Value; } Is there a name for such a structure? I've looked through this Wikipedia listing of data structures but didn't see anything similar. Unless I just missed it.

    Read the article

  • What is the right way to structure HTML and CSS?

    - by Meke
    So, I'm a script monkey at the core. Lately I seem to get stuffed into doing design too for some odd reason and, well, let's just say I should probably have studied better. Either way - What I ask is, what's the Right way to structure a website? This one has a header with links, then a block with tabs, right under another block which consists of two parts and under those a few others who I'm not at yet. However, the thing is, I need to make a block that consists of two parts that are in the same box but structured independently. I'll try to draw it up. Browser window..................-[]X ------------------------------------ |.................Header Links Here| ||Tab|Tab|Tab|_____________........| ||Tab content.............|Small...| ||........................|Section.| ||---Line signing new section------| ||........................|Another.| ||..Content Area..........|Small...| ||........................|Section.| ------------------------------------ My issue is in the division of small sections and tab/content areas. I tried using floats, making them as tables, aligning and whatnot. The putting float:left on both tables worked. Kinda. Until I tried to resize the window. So, how do you PROPERLY structure a site like this? three divs and tables? Something else? I'll clarify this again: It's the Code to use to create the look above that I'm trying to figure out the proper way to do, not the design As requested here's the current structure I have <div class="container"> <div class="topBlock"> //Header Links Here </div> <div class="inputBlock"> <ul id="tabs"> <li><a href="#strict">Strict</a></li> <li><a href="#flex">Flex</a></li> <li><a href="#multiStep">Multi-Step</a></li> </ul> <div id="strict" class="tabContent"> <table class="tableLeft"> <tr> <td>From</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockFrom" type="text" placeholder="FROM"/></td> </tr> <tr> <td>To</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockTo" type="text" placeholder="TO"/></td> </tr> </table> <table class="tableRight"> <tr> <td>Leave</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockLeave" type="text" name="leave" placeholder="LEAVE"/></td> <td><input id="inputBlockOne" type="radio" name="one"/></td> <td>One</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Return</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockReturn" type="text" name="return" placeholder="RETURN"/></td> <td><input id="inputBlockBut" type="radio" name="one" checked/></td> <td>Return</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input id="inputBlockSubmit" type="submit" value="Search"/></td> </tr> </table> </div> <div id="flex" class="tabContent"> Test Two </div> <div id="multiStep" class="tabContent"> Test Three </div> </div> <div class="mapBlock tabContent"> <table class="tableLeft"> <tr><td> <div id="map" class="google_map"></div> </td></tr> </table> <table class="tableRight smallTable"> <tr> <td>Distance</td> </tr> <tr> <td>[-------------|------------]</td> //Slider to be </tr> </table> <table class="tableRight smallTable"> <tr> <td>Choice / Choice</td> </tr> </table> <table class="tableRight"> <tr> <td>Show:</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input type="radio"/></td> <td>Price</td> <td><input type="radio"/></td> <td>Button!</td> </tr> <tr> <td><input type="radio"/></td> </tr> <tr> <td><input type="radio"/></td> </tr> </table> </div> </div> </body> Sorry if it's messed up in the whitespacing somewhere.. The CSS: body { font-size: 80%; font-family: 'Lucida Grande', Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif; background-color: #e2edff; } .container { margin: 5px 5px 5px 5px; padding: 5px 5px 5px 5px; } .pageBlock { /* To future me: This class is for One Full Screen ideas */ min-height: 300px; } .topBlock { text-align: right; color: #000000; } .topBlock a { text-decoration: none; color: #000000; } .tableLeft { width: 75%; float: left; border-right: dotted 2px black; } .tableRight { float: left; overflow: auto; } .smallTable { border-bottom: 1px dotted #c9c3ba; } .google_map { height: 270px; width: 100%; }

    Read the article

  • How can I allow only one Fix Folder-Structure with .htaccess? Anything else 301

    - by elmaso
    Hello, how can I allow only one Folder-Structure with .htaccess like that: http://www.example.com/**dynamicword**+FIXEDWORD1+FIXEDWORD2/ the dynamicword is not fix, anything else is 301: http://www.example.com/**dynamicword**+FIXEDWORD1+mistype/mistype/ --> 301 http://www.example.com/**dynamicword**+FIXEDWORD1+mistype/mistype --> 301 http://www.example.com/**dynamicword**+FIXEDWORD1+FIXEDWORD2/mistype --> 301 Is that possible?

    Read the article

  • Would anybody mind taking a look at my XML structure?

    - by Bill H
    I am relatively new to this but I was hoping somebody could offer up a good critique of this XML structure I put together. I am not looking for anything in depth but rather if somebody notices anything inherently wrong with the structure (or any tips to make it better) I'd greatly appreciate it. We have a large amount of products that we wholesale out and our customers were looking for a data feed to incorporate our products into their websites. <product modified=""> <id></id> <title></title> <description></description> <upc></upc> <quantity></quantity> <images> <image width="" height=""></image> <image width="" height=""></image> <image width="" height=""></image> </images> <category> <name></name> <subcategory></subcategory> </category> <sale expiration="">yes</sale> <msrp></msrp> <cube></cube> <weight></weight> <pricing> <tier> <pack><pack> <price></price> </tier> <tier> <pack><pack> <price></price> </tier> <tier> <pack><pack> <price></price> </tier> </pricing> </product> We sell in 3 different pack sizes hence the pricing node.

    Read the article

  • How can I create the XML::Simple data structure using a Perl XML SAX parser?

    - by DVK
    Summary: I am looking a fast XML parser (most likely a wrapper around some standard SAX parser) which will produce per-record data structure 100% identical to those produced by XML::Simple. Details: We have a large code infrastructure which depends on processing records one-by-one and expects the record to be a data structure in a format produced by XML::Simple since it always used XML::Simple since early Jurassic era. An example simple XML is: <root> <rec><f1>v1</f1><f2>v2</f2></rec> <rec><f1>v1b</f1><f2>v2b</f2></rec> <rec><f1>v1c</f1><f2>v2c</f2></rec> </root> And example rough code is: sub process_record { my ($obj, $record_hash) = @_; # do_stuff } my $records = XML::Simple->XMLin(@args)->{root}; foreach my $record (@$records) { $obj->process_record($record) }; As everyone knows XML::Simple is, well, simple. And more importantly, it is very slow and a memory hog—due to being a DOM parser and needing to build/store 100% of data in memory. So, it's not the best tool for parsing an XML file consisting of large amount of small records record-by-record. However, re-writing the entire code (which consist of large amount of "process_record"-like methods) to work with standard SAX parser seems like an big task not worth the resources, even at the cost of living with XML::Simple. I'm looking for an existing module which will probably be based on a SAX parser (or anything fast with small memory footprint) which can be used to produce $record hashrefs one by one based on the XML pictured above that can be passed to $obj->process_record($record) and be 100% identical to what XML::Simple's hashrefs would have been. I don't care much what the interface of the new module is; e.g whether I need to call next_record() or give it a callback coderef accepting a record.

    Read the article

  • What database table structure should I use for versions, codebases, deployables?

    - by Zac Thompson
    I'm having doubts about my table structure, and I wonder if there is a better approach. I've got a little database for version control repositories (e.g. SVN), the packages (e.g. Linux RPMs) built therefrom, and the versions (e.g. 1.2.3-4) thereof. A given repository might produce no packages, or several, but if there are more than one for a given repository then a particular version for that repository will indicate a single "tag" of the codebase. A particular version "string" might be used to tag a version of the source code in more than one repository, but there may be no relationship between "1.0" for two different repos. So if packages P and Q both come from repo R, then P 1.0 and Q 1.0 are both built from the 1.0 tag of repo R. But if package X comes from repo Y, then X 1.0 has no relationship to P 1.0. In my (simplified) model, I have the following tables (the x_id columns are auto-incrementing surrogate keys; you can pretend I'm using a different primary key if you wish, it's not really important): repository - repository_id - repository_name (unique) ... version - version_id - version_string (unique for a particular repository) - repository_id ... package - package_id - package_name (unique) - repository_id ... This makes it easy for me to see, for example, what are valid versions of a given package: I can join with the version table using the repository_id. However, suppose I would like to add some information to this database, e.g., to indicate which package versions have been approved for release. I certainly need a new table: package_version - version_id - package_id - package_version_released ... Again, the nature of the keys that I use are not really important to my problem, and you can imagine that the data column is "promotion_level" or something if that helps. My doubts arise when I realize that there's really a very close relationship between the version_id and the package_id in my new table ... they must share the same repository_id. Only a small subset of package/version combinations are valid. So I should have some kind of constraint on those columns, enforcing that ... ... I don't know, it just feels off, somehow. Like I'm including somehow more information than I really need? I don't know how to explain my hesitance here. I can't figure out which (if any) normal form I'm violating, but I also can't find an example of a schema with this sort of structure ... not being a DBA by profession I'm not sure where to look. So I'm asking: am I just being overly sensitive?

    Read the article

  • Is there any workaround for making a structure member somehow 'private' in C ?

    - by nomemory
    I am developing a simple library in C, for my own + some friends personal use. I am currently having a C structure with some members that should be somehow hidden from the rest of the application, as their use is only internal. Modifying by accident one of this members will probably make the library 'go wild'. Is there any 'workaround' to hide those members so that they can't be accessible ?

    Read the article

  • Are there any platforms where using structure copy on an fd_set (for select() or pselect()) causes p

    - by Jonathan Leffler
    The select() and pselect() system calls modify their arguments (the 'struct fd_set *' arguments), so the input value tells the system which file descriptors to check and the return values tell the programmer which file descriptors are currently usable. If you are going to call them repeatedly for the same set of file descriptors, you need to ensure that you have a fresh copy of the descriptors for each call. The obvious way to do that is to use a structure copy: struct fd_set ref_set_rd; struct fd_set ref_set_wr; struct fd_set ref_set_er; ... ...code to set the reference fd_set_xx values... ... while (!done) { struct fd_set act_set_rd = ref_set_rd; struct fd_set act_set_wr = ref_set_wr; struct fd_set act_set_er = ref_set_er; int bits_set = select(max_fd, &act_set_rd, &act_set_wr, &act_set_er, &timeout); if (bits_set > 0) { ...process the output values of act_set_xx... } } My question: Are there any platforms where it is not safe to do a structure copy of the struct fd_set values as shown? I'm concerned lest there be hidden memory allocation or anything unexpected like that. (There are macros/functions FD_SET(), FD_CLR(), FD_ZERO() and FD_ISSET() to mask the internals from the application.) I can see that MacOS X (Darwin) is safe; other BSD-based systems are likely to be safe, therefore. You can help by documenting other systems that you know are safe in your answers. (I do have minor concerns about how well the struct fd_set would work with more than 8192 open file descriptors - the default maximum number of open files is only 256, but the maximum number is 'unlimited'. Also, since the structures are 1 KB, the copying code is not dreadfully efficient, but then running through a list of file descriptors to recreate the input mask on each cycle is not necessarily efficient either. Maybe you can't do select() when you have that many file descriptors open, though that is when you are most likely to need the functionality.) There's a related SO question - asking about 'poll() vs select()' which addresses a different set of issues from this question.

    Read the article

  • Can you explicitly set a structure layout/alignment in C++ as you can in C#?

    - by Gary Willoughby
    In C# you have nice alignment attributes such as this: [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Explicit)] public struct Message { [FieldOffset(0)] public int a; [FieldOffset(4)] public short b; [FieldOffset(6)] public int c; [FieldOffset(22)] //Leave some empty space just for the heck of it. public DateTime dt; } Which gives you fine control on how you need your structure to be layed out in memory. Is there such a thing in standard C++?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >