Search Results

Search found 31328 results on 1254 pages for 'sql join'.

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 465/1254 | < Previous Page | 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472  | Next Page >

  • Is this a bug in Profiler or Entity Framework?

    - by AjarnMark
    Using Entity Framework 4 with stored procedures and SQL Server 2008 SP1... When running SQL Server Profiler (TSQL_SPs template), the lines that show my stored procedure call and its statements say that they executed in DatabaseID = 1 (Master) but it is actually happening in my application database (ID = 8). The procedures execute properly and return the data, and they only exist in my application database, so why does Profiler mark those lines as being in Master? Is this a bug in Profiler? Is it a bug in EF4? Note that running the same code against a SQL 2000 instance, Profiler correctly shows the application's database ID.

    Read the article

  • Grails - Self Join

    - by WaZ
    Hi, When I write the following class, I get the following compilation error: could not resolve property How can I achive the following: class Employee{ String Name String Email Employee Manager static hasMany = [desginations:Designation] static constraints = { Name(unique:true) Email(unique:true) } Thanks, Much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Join collection of objects into comma-separated string

    - by Helen Toomik
    In many places in our code we have collections of objects, from which we need to create a comma-separated list. The type of collection varies: it may be a DataTable from which we need a certain column, or a List<Customer>, etc. Now we loop through the collection and use string concatenation, for example: string text = ""; string separator = ""; foreach (DataRow row in table.Rows) { text += separator + row["title"]; separator = ", "; } Is there a better pattern for this? Ideally I would like an approach we could reuse by just sending in a function to get the right field/property/column from each object.

    Read the article

  • MongoDB-PHP: JOIN-like query

    - by mdm414
    Here are the objects: courses { "name" : "Biology", "_id" : ObjectId("4b0552b0f0da7d1eb6f126a1") } students { "name" : "Joe", "classes" : [ { "$ref" : "courses", "$id" : ObjectId("4b0552b0f0da7d1eb6f126a1") } ], "_id" : ObjectId("4b0552e4f0da7d1eb6f126a2") } Using the PHP Mongo Class, how do I get all the students that has a biology course? Thanks

    Read the article

  • sql query - how to count values in a row separately?

    - by n00b0101
    I have a table that looks something like this: id | firstperson | secondperson 1 | jane doe | 2 | bob smith | margie smith 3 | master shifu | madame shifu 4 | max maxwell | I'm trying to count all of the firstpersons + all of the secondpersons, if the secondpersons field isn't blank... Is there a way to do that?

    Read the article

  • Can I check wheter Linq 2 SQL's DataContext is tracking entities?

    - by Thomas Jespersen
    We want to throw an exception, if a user calls DataContext.SubmitChanges() and the DataContext is not tracking anything. That is... it is OK to call SubmitChanges if there are no inserts, updates or deletes. But we want to ensure that the developer didn't forget to attach the entity to the DataContext. Even better... is it possible to get a collection of all entities that the DataContext is tracking (including those that are not changed)? PS: The last question I asked were answered with: "do it this way instead"... please don't :-)

    Read the article

  • SqlBackup from my client app

    - by Robbert Dam
    I have an client app that runs on several machines, and connects to a single SQL database. On the client app, the user has the possiblity to use a local SQL (CE) database or connect to a remote SQL database. There is also a box where a backup location can be set. For the backup of the remote SQL database I use the following code: var bdi = new BackupDeviceItem(backupFile, DeviceType.File); var backup = new Backup { Database = "AppDb", Initialize = true }; backup.Devices.Add(bdi); var server = new Server(connection); backup.SqlBackup(server); When developing my application, I wasn't aware that the given backupFile is written on the machine where the SQL server runs! And not on the client machine. What I want is "dump" all the data from my database to a local file. (Why? Because users may enter a network location in the "backup location" box, and backing up SQL immediately to a network location fails. So need to write local first and then copy to the network in that case.) I there an alternative to the method above?

    Read the article

  • How can I dump my MS SQL Server Database Schema to a human readable & printable format?

    - by Kyle West
    I want to generate something like the following: LineItems Id ItemId OrderId Price Orders Id CustomerId DateCreated Customers Id FirstName LastName Email I don't need all the relationships, the diagram that will never print correctly, the metadata, anything. Just a list of the tables and their columns in a simple text format. Has anyone done this before? Is there a simple solution? Thanks, Kyle

    Read the article

  • How do I use Linq-to-sql to iterate db records?

    - by Seth Spearman
    I asked on SO a few days ago what was the simplest quickest way to build a wrapper around a recently completed database. I took the advice and used sqlmetal to build linq classes around my database design. Now I am having two problems. One, I don't know LINQ. And, two, I have been shocked to realize how hard it is to learn. I have a book on LINQ (Linq In Action by Manning) and it has helped some but at the end of the day it is going to take me a couple of weeks to get traction and I need to make some progress on my project today. So, I am looking for some help getting started. Click HERE To see my simple database schema. Click HERE to see the vb class that was generated for the schema. My needs are simple. I have a console app. The main table is the SupplyModel table. Most of the other tables are child tables of the SupplyModel table. I want to iterate through each of Supply Model records. I want to grab the data for a supply model and then DoStuff with the data. And I also need to iterate through the child records, for each supply model, for example the NumberedInventories and DoStuff with that as well. I need help doing this in VB rather than C# if possible. I am not looking for the whole solution...if you can supply a couple of code-snippets to get me on my way that would be great. Thanks for your help. Seth

    Read the article

  • How can I dump my SQL Server Database Schema to a human readable & printable format?

    - by Kyle West
    I want to generate something like the following: LineItems Id ItemId OrderId Price Orders Id CustomerId DateCreated Customers Id FirstName LastName Email I don't need all the relationships, the diagram that will never print correctly, the metadata, anything. Just a list of the tables and their columns in a simple text format. Has anyone done this before? Is there a simple solution? Thanks, Kyle

    Read the article

  • sql-server: how can I list distinct value of table in a single row, separated by comma

    - by RedsDevils
    I have the following Table: CREATE TABLE TEMP (ID INT,SEGMENT CHAR(1),SEGOFF INT,CHECKED SMALLDATETIME) INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (1,'A',0,'2009-05-01') INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (2,'B',1,'2009-05-01') INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (3,'C',0,'2009-05-01') INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (4,'A',0,'2009-05-02') INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (5,'B',2,'2009-05-02') INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (6,'C',1,'2009-05-02') INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (7,'A',1,'2009-05-03') INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (8,'B',0,'2009-05-03') INSERT INTO TEMP VALUES (9,'C',2,'2009-05-03') I would like to show Distinct SEGEMENT in Single row separated by comma (e.g: A,B,C) I try as Follow: DECLARE @SEGMENTList varchar(100) SELECT @SEGMENTList = COALESCE(@SEGMENTList + ', ', '') + SEGMENT FROM TEST SELECT @SEGMENTList It shows A, B, C, A, B, C, A, B, C What do I need to change my query? Thanks all!

    Read the article

  • sql-server: how to select from dupilcate rows from table?

    - by RedsDevils
    Hi All, I have the following table. CREATE TABLE TEST(ID TINYINT NULL, COL1 CHAR(1)) INSERT INTO TEST(ID,COL1) VALUES (1,'A') INSERT INTO TEST(ID,COL1) VALUES (2,'B') INSERT INTO TEST(ID,COL1) VALUES (1,'A') INSERT INTO TEST(ID,COL1) VALUES (1,'B') INSERT INTO TEST(ID,COL1) VALUES (1,'B') INSERT INTO TEST(ID,COL1) VALUES (2,'B') I would like to select duplicate rows from that table. How Can I select? I try like the following: SELECT TEST.ID,TEST.COL1 FROM TEST WHERE TEST.ID IN (SELECT ID FROM TEST WHERE TEST.COL1 IN (SELECT COL1 FROM TEST WHERE TEST.ID IN (SELECT ID FROM TEST GROUP BY ID HAVING COUNT(*) > 1) GROUP BY COL1 HAVING COUNT(*) > 1) GROUP BY ID HAVING COUNT(*) > 1) Where's the Error? Can you modify that? Help me! Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Extending EF4 SQL Generation

    - by Basiclife
    Hi, We're using EF4 in a fairly large system and occasionally run into problems due to EF4 being unable to convert certain expressions into SQL. At present, we either need to do some fancy footwork (DB/Code) or just accept the performance hit and allow the query to be executed in-memory. Needless to say neither of these is ideal and the hacks we've sometimes had to use reduce readability / maintainability. What we would ideally like is a way to extend the SQL generation capabilities of the EF4 SQL provider. Obviously there are some things like .Net method calls which will always have to be client-side but some functionality like date comparisons (eg Group by weeks in Linq to Entities ) should be do-able. I've Googled but perhaps I'm using the wrong terminology as all I get is information about the new features of EF4 SQL Generation. For such a flexible and extensible framework, I'd be surprised if this isn't possible. In my head, I'm imagining inheriting from the [SQL 2008] provider and extending it to handle additional expressions / similar in the expression tree it's given to convert to SQL. Any help/pointers appreciated. We're using VS2010 Ultimate, .Net 4 (non-client profile) and EF4. The app is in ASP.Net and is running in a 64-Bit environment in case it makes a difference.

    Read the article

  • Left Join 3 Tables and Show True or False on Empty Cells

    - by Jason Shultz
    Ok, this may be confusing so I hope I explain it correctly. I have 4 tables: business photos video category I want to display "featured" businesses on the home page (or elsewhere) and I want to show a Yes or No in the table row based upon whether or not there are photos or videos for that business. Example: Joes Crab Shack has no videos or photos but is featured. So, when his row is echoed out it will show the Business Name and Business Owner but there will be no data in the photo or video cells thus in the video and photos column it will say No. Otherwise, if the opposite was true, it would say Yes. Here's my pastebin

    Read the article

  • What are appropriate ways to represent relationships between people in a database table?

    - by Emilio
    I've got a table of people - an ID primary key and a name. In my application, people can have 0 or more real-world relationships with other people, so Jack might "work for" Jane and Tom might "replace" Tony and Bob might "be an employee of" Rob and Bob might also "be married to" Mary. What's the best way to represent this in the database? A many to many intersect table? A series of self joins? A relationship table with one row per relationship pair and type, where I insert records for the relationship in both directions?

    Read the article

  • Many-to-Many Relationships in MySQL

    - by Kaji
    I've been reading up on foreign keys and joins recently, and have been pleasantly surprised that many of the basic concepts are things I'm already putting into practice. For example, with one project I'm currently working on, I'm organizing word lists, and have a table for the sets, like so: `words` Table `word_id` `headword` `category_id` `categories` Table `category_id` `category_name` Now, generally speaking this would be a one-to-many relationship, with several words being placed under a single category with the foreign key category_id. Let's assume for a moment, however, that a user chooses to add another category to a word, making it many-to-many—Is there a way to set up my words table to handle additional categories for words without creating extra columns like category_2, category_3, etc.?

    Read the article

  • mysql prevent displaying a row ONE which has reference in another row TWO but no reference in row THREE

    - by Jayapal Chandran
    I have a table like the following id | name | pid 1 | sam | NULL 2 | sams ref | 1 3 | pam | NULL For the first time the first row gets inserted which will have pid as null I insert a row which is related to the first row and then i insert a row which is new and which may be referred by another row in future. now i want only the third row to be displayed and not the first and second row as the second row contains the reference of first row. so if any row has a reference to another row then both the rows should not be displayed. Only rows which is not having any reference should be displayed. BESIDES, IS IT A GOOD PRACTICE? PLEASE ADVICE ON THIS. Edited When i updated in server the query is always giving empty result. here is what i have and this one When pid is NULL then that row should appear but when another entry in the same table with pid as its parent id or any other rows id appears then both the rows should not appear. so if any pid has been referred then both the rows should not appear. here only one row will refer another row and not more than that. in my localhost i have mysql version 5.0.1 or something like that but when i installed xampp in another system it had 5.5 and in the live server it was 5.3 so in version around 5.0 the query is returning rows but in higher versions it is returning empty rows. so now i this case how to make a query?

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to store sort order in SQL?

    - by Duracell
    The guys at the top want sort order to be customizable in our app. So I have a table that effectively defines the data type. What is the best way to store our sort order. If I just created a new column called 'Order' or something, every time I updated the order of one row I imagine I would have to update the order of every row to ensure posterity. Is there a better way to do it?

    Read the article

  • MySql Query lag time / deadlock?

    - by Click Upvote
    When there are multiple PHP scripts running in parallel, each making an UPDATE query to the same record in the same table repeatedly, is it possible for there to be a 'lag time' before the table is updated with each query? I have basically 5-6 instances of a PHP script running in parallel, having been launched via cron. Each script gets all the records in the items table, and then loops through them and processes them. However, to avoid processing the same item more than once, I store the id of the last item being processed in a seperate table. So this is how my code works: function getCurrentItem() { $sql = "SELECT currentItemId from settings"; $result = $this->db->query($sql); return $result->get('currentItemId'); } function setCurrentItem($id) { $sql = "UPDATE settings SET currentItemId='$id'"; $this->db->query($sql); } $currentItem = $this->getCurrentItem(); $sql = "SELECT * FROM items WHERE status='pending' AND id > $currentItem'"; $result = $this->db->query($sql); $items = $result->getAll(); foreach ($items as $i) { //Check if $i has been processed by a different instance of the script, and if so, //leave it untouched. if ($this->getCurrentItem() > $i->id) continue; $this->setCurrentItem($i->id); // Process the item here } But despite of all the precautions, most items are being processed more than once. Which makes me think that there is some lag time between the update queries being run by the PHP script, and when the database actually updates the record. Is it true? And if so, what other mechanism should I use to ensure that the PHP scripts always get only the latest currentItemId even when there are multiple scripts running in parrallel? Would using a text file instead of the db help?

    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 | 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472  | Next Page >