Search Results

Search found 6033 results on 242 pages for 'partition magic'.

Page 47/242 | < Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >

  • Mysql Real Escape String PHP Function Adding "\" to My Field Entry

    - by Jascha
    Hello, I am submitting a form to my mySql database using PHP. I am sending the form data through the mysql_real_escape_string($content); function. When the entry shows up in my database (checking in myPhpAdmin) all of my double quotes and single quotes are escaped. I'm fairly certain this is a PHP configuration issue? so: $content = 'Hi, my name is Jascha and my "favorite" thing to do is sleep'; mysql_real_escape_string($content); $query = 'INSERT INTO DB...' comes up in my database as: Hi, my name is Jascha and my \"favorite" thing to do is sleep Who do I tell what to do? (I cannot access the php.ini). -J

    Read the article

  • Table Partitioning

    - by Ankur Gahlot
    How advantageous is it to use partitioning of tables as compared to normal approach ? Is there a sort of sample case or detailed comparative analysis that could statistically ( i know this is too strong a word, but it would really help if it is illustrated by some numbers ) emphasize on the utility of the process. Thanks, Ankur

    Read the article

  • Hard link not works under MacOS in GUI mode

    - by AntonAL
    Hi, i faced a little strange behavior, while using hard links. From terminal, i create a text file 1.txt and a hard link "to this file" nano 1.txt mkdir dir ln 1.txt ./dir/ I check the resulting hard link and see, that it's contents is the same, as of "original" file. less ./dir/1.txt I change the initial file ... nano 1.txt ... and see, that changes was reflected in hard-link less ./dir/1.txt I change content of hard-link (more correct, of course - file, being referenced with hard-link) ... nano ./dir/1.txt ... and see, that changes are reflected in initial file less 1.txt Until now, all going well... Now, I close terminal and start playing with created files (1.txt and ./dir/1.txt) from Finder. When i change on this two files with TextEdit, changes are not reflected in another file. Just like the hard link was teared off... Whats going on here ?

    Read the article

  • Powermock Slows Down Test Startup on Eclipse/Fedora 10 when on NTFS partition

    - by MrWiggles
    I've just started having a proper play with Powermock and noticed that it slows down test startup immensely. A quick look at top while it was running shows that mount.nfts-3g was taking up most of the CPU. I moved Eclipse and my source directory to ext3 partitions to see if that was a problem and the tests now startup quicker but there's still a noticeable delay. Is this normal with Powermock or am I missing something obvious?

    Read the article

  • using Linq to partition data into arrays

    - by user200295
    I have an array of elements where the element has a Flagged boolean value. 1 flagged 2 not flagged 3 not flagged 4 flagged 5 not flagged 6 not flagged 7 not flagged 8 flagged 9 not flagged I want to break it into arrays based on the flagged indicator output array 1 {1,2,3} array 2 {4,5,6,7} array 3 {8,9}

    Read the article

  • How to find the latest row for each group of data

    - by Jason
    Hi All, I have a tricky problem that I'm trying to find the most effective method to solve. Here's a simplified version of my View structure. Table: Audits AuditID | PublicationID | AuditEndDate | AuditStartDate 1 | 3 | 13/05/2010 | 01/01/2010 2 | 1 | 31/12/2009 | 01/10/2009 3 | 3 | 31/03/2010 | 01/01/2010 4 | 3 | 31/12/2009 | 01/10/2009 5 | 2 | 31/03/2010 | 01/01/2010 6 | 2 | 31/12/2009 | 01/10/2009 7 | 1 | 30/09/2009 | 01/01/2009 There's 3 query's that I need from this. I need to one to get all the data. The next to get only the history data (that is, everything but exclude the latest data item by AuditEndDate) and then the last query is to obtain the latest data item (by AuditEndDate). There's an added layer of complexity that I have a date restriction (This is on a per user/group basis) where certain user groups can only see between certain dates. You'll notice this in the where clause as AuditEndDate<=blah and AuditStartDate=blah Foreach publication, select all the data available. select * from Audits Where auditEndDate<='31/03/10' and AuditStartDate='06/06/2009'; foreach publication, select all the data but Exclude the latest data available (by AuditEndDate) select * from Audits left join (select AuditId as aid, publicationID as pid and max(auditEndDate) as pend from Audit where auditenddate <= '31/03/2009' /* user restrict / group by pid) Ax on Ax.pid=Audit.pubid where pend!=Audits.auditenddate AND auditEndDate<='31/03/10' and AuditStartDate='06/06/2009' / user restrict */ Foreach publication, select only the latest data available (by AuditEndDate) select * from Audits left join (select AuditId as aid, publicationID as pid and max(auditEndDate) as pend from Audit where auditenddate <= '31/03/2009'/* user restrict / group by pid) Ax on Ax.pid=Audit.pubid where pend=Audits.auditenddate AND auditEndDate<='31/03/10' and AuditStartDate='06/06/2009' / user restrict */ So at the moment, query 1 and 3 work fine, but query 2 just returns all the data instead of the restriction. Can anyone help me? Thanks jason

    Read the article

  • ideas for algorithm? sorting a list randomly with emphasis on variety

    - by Steve Eisner
    I have a table of items with [ID,ATTR1,ATTR2,ATTR3]. I'd like to select about half of the items, but try to get a random result set that is NOT clustered. In other words, there's a fairly even spread of ATTR1 values, ATTR2 values, and ATTR3 values. This does NOT necessarily represent the data as a whole, in other words, the total table may be generally concentrated on certain attribute values, but I'd like to select a subset with more variety. The attributes are not inter-related, so there's not really a correlation between ATTR1 and ATTR2. Any ideas for an efficient algorithm? Thanks! I don't really even know how to search for this :)

    Read the article

  • Losing partitions after every reboot

    - by Winston Smith
    I have an Acer laptop with one hard disk, which up until yesterday had 4 partitions: Recovery Partition (13GB) C: (140GB) D: (130GB) OEM Partition (10GB) I read that the OEM partition has all the stuff needed to restore the laptop to the factory settings, but since I'd already created restore disks and I needed the space, I wanted to get rid of it. Yesterday, I used diskpart to do that. In diskpart, I selected the OEM partition and issued the delete partition override command which removed it. Then I extended the D: partition into the unused space using windows disk management. Everything worked fine, until I rebooted my laptop, at which point the D: drive vanished. Looking in windows disk management again, I can see that there's an OEM partition of 140GB, which is obviously my D: drive. So I used EASEUS Partition Master and assigned a drive letter to the 'OEM' partition and I was able to access my files again. However, every time I reboot, it reverts back. How do I fix this permanently?

    Read the article

  • Excess errors on model from somewhere

    - by gmile
    I have a User model, and use an acts_as_authentic (from authlogic) on it. My User model have 3 validations on username and looks as following: User < ActiveRecord::Base acts_as_authentic validates_presence_of :username validates_length_of :username, :within => 4..40 validates_uniqueness_of :username end I'm writing a test to see my validations in action. Somehow, I get 2 errors instead of one when validating a uniqueness of a name. To see excess error, I do the following test: describe User do before(:each) do @user = Factory.build(:user) end it "should have a username longer then 3 symbols" do @user2 = Factory(:user) @user.username = @user2.username @user.save puts @user.errors.inspect end end I got 2 errors on username: @errors={"username"=>["has already been taken", "has already been taken"]}. Somehow the validation passes two times. I think authlogic causes that, but I don't have a clue on how to avoid that. Another case of problem is when I set username to nil. Somehow I get four validation errors instead of three: @errors={"username"=>["is too short (minimum is 3 characters)", "should use only letters, numbers, spaces, and .-_@ please.", "can't be blank", "is too short (minimum is 4 characters)"]} I think authlogic is one that causes this strange behaviour. But I can't even imagine on how to solve that. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How to partition a plane

    - by puls200
    Let's say I have a fixed number (X) of points, e.g. coordinates within a given plane (I think you can call it a 2-D point cloud). These points should be partitioned into Y polygons where Y < X. The polygons should not overlap. It would be wonderful if the polygons were konvex (like a Voronoi diagram). Imagine it like locations forming countries. For example, I have 12 points and want to create 3 polygons with 4 points each. I thought about creating a grid which covers the points. Then iterate across the points, assigning them to the closest grid cells. Maybe I miss the obvious? I am sure there are better solutions. Thanks, Daniel I just found an optimization (kmeans++) .Maybe this will yield better results..

    Read the article

  • using empty on inaccessible object with __isset and __get

    - by David
    <?php class Magic_Methods { protected $meta; public function __construct() { $this->meta = (object) array( 'test' => 1 ); } public function __isset($name) { echo "pass isset {$name} \n"; return isset($this->$name); } public function __get($name) { echo "pass get {$name} \n"; return $this->$name; } } $mm = new Magic_Methods(); $meta = empty($mm->meta->notExisting); var_dump($meta); echo "||\n"; $meta = empty($mm->meta); var_dump($meta); The snippet above does not work as expected for me. Why would the first empty() ommit the __isset? I get this: pass get meta bool(true) || pass isset meta pass get meta bool(false) I would expected identical results or another pass at the __isset, but not a direct call to __get. Or am I missing something here?

    Read the article

  • RSpec: in-depth differences between before(:all) and before(:each)

    - by gmile
    Ok, so I've ran into a very strange issue, directly connected with before blocks. I'm doing a integration testing via Watir and RSpec. For a simple test to check if user can perform a login I'm creating a 'user' record in the db by means of factory_girl. So I put the following code: before(:each) do @user = Factory(:user) end if "should perform a login" do # do stuff end In do stuff I call a browser and see how the user tries to login. Unfortunately, somehow he cannot do that — "Username isn't valid". After some investigation I discovered that if I put the code for creating user in before(:all) block, everything magically works. How's that? What's the difference between :all and :each in this context? Also, If I put the code for creating user actually in the test body, it still doesn't work (i.e. user somehow isn't added to the DB or something).

    Read the article

  • override __set in __construct() in php?

    - by user151841
    I have a class based on database values. I'm using __set to automatically sync database values with the class properties. Set checks an array of database fields that it is allowed to update in the database. The field 'id' isn't in the list, so __set will throw an exception if you try to do $objDbRow->id = 5;. However, there is one time when I do want to set the id property of the object, and that's on instantiation. So in __constuct, I have $this->id = $id (where $id is passed to __construct). However, __set seems to be intercepting the setting here, because an exception is being thrown on construction. What's the way to get around this? I suppose I also have a boolean flag, like $instantiated, that __set() would check before it does it's field whitelist checking. But that feels inelegant.

    Read the article

  • Is correct name enough to make it happen?

    - by Knowing me knowing you
    Guys, I've just dipped in to limits.h by MS. I tried to check what's the return type for max() fnc and to my surprise I see something like this: // TEMPLATE CLASS numeric_limits template<class _Ty> class numeric_limits : public _Num_base { // numeric limits for arbitrary type _Ty (say little or nothing) public: static _Ty (__CRTDECL min)() _THROW0() { // return minimum value return (_Ty(0)); } static _Ty (__CRTDECL max)() _THROW0() { // return maximum value return (_Ty(0));//EXACTLY THE SAME WHAT IN min<<------------------ } //... other stuff }; so how is it possiple that in both min and max return does exactly the same? So does it mean if I would write makeSanwich() return (_Ty(0)) it would make a sandwich for me? How is it possible that having this same code just fnc names different we are getting different results?

    Read the article

  • php: avoiding __get in certain circumstances?

    - by user151841
    I have a class where I'm using __set. Because I don't want it to set just anything, I have an array of approved variables that it checks before it will actually set a class property. However, on construct, I want the __construct method to set several class properties, some of which are not in the approved list. So when construct happens, and I do $this->var = $value, I of course get my exception that I'm not allowed to set that variable. Can I get around this somehow?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with three Windows partitions in dual boot installation

    - by Tim
    For dual-boot installation of Ubuntu after Windows. Quoted from ubuntuguide If a Windows boot partition exists as a second NTFS partition, it should be left alone. If there is a Windows recovery partition also installed, it can also be left alone as long as there are only two NTFS partitions total on the hard drive (i.e. there is no NTFS boot partition as well). If there are a total of 3 NTFS partitions on the hard drive, then the third Windows NTFS partition (the recovery partition) should be removed after creating Recovery CDs from it (see here). In the last case where Windows has three partitions, I was wondering why it says the recovery partition shall be removed? Is it possible to keep the three and create another extended partition with several logical partitions for installing Ubuntu and dual-booting the two OSes? I plan to dual-boot install Ubuntu 10.04 with existing Windows 7. Following is the layout of the current partitions of my hard drive viewed from Windows 7: So must I remove the Lenovo_Recovery (Q:) partition for the same reason you give for the first question? Thanks and regards!

    Read the article

  • Can I safely delete the Ubuntu 12.04 partition and use the unallocated space for my Elementary OS?

    - by d4ryl3
    I have this setup: I've decided to switch to Elementary OS Luna (fork of Ubuntu 12.04) as my main Linux distro. Now I need to delete my Ubuntu partition so I could add capacity to my eOS which only has 10Gb. Currently my eOS is in /dev/sda9, and Ubuntu in /dev/sda8/. I forgot where my bootloader is installed, so I ran bootinfoscript, which returned this: `============================= Boot Info Summary: =============================== = Grub2 (v1.99) is installed in the MBR of /dev/sda and looks at sector 1 of the same hard drive for core.img. core.img is at this location and looks in partition 94 for . sda1: __________________________________________ File system: ntfs Boot sector type: Windows Vista/7: NTFS Boot sector info: No errors found in the Boot Parameter Block. Operating System: Boot files: /bootmgr /Boot/BCD sda2: __________________________________________ File system: ntfs Boot sector type: Windows Vista/7: NTFS Boot sector info: No errors found in the Boot Parameter Block. Operating System: Windows 7 Boot files: /bootmgr /Boot/BCD /Windows/System32/winload.exe sda3: __________________________________________ File system: ntfs Boot sector type: Windows Vista/7: NTFS Boot sector info: No errors found in the Boot Parameter Block. Operating System: Boot files: /bootmgr /boot/bcd sda4: __________________________________________ File system: Extended Partition Boot sector type: - Boot sector info: sda5: __________________________________________ File system: ntfs Boot sector type: Windows Vista/7: NTFS Boot sector info: According to the info in the boot sector, sda5 starts at sector 2048. Operating System: Boot files: sda6: __________________________________________ File system: swap Boot sector type: - Boot sector info: sda7: __________________________________________ File system: ext4 Boot sector type: Grub2 (v1.99) Boot sector info: Grub2 (v1.99) is installed in the boot sector of sda7 and looks at sector 851823520 of the same hard drive for core.img, but core.img can not be found at this location. Operating System: Boot files: /grub/grub.cfg /extlinux/extlinux.conf sda8: __________________________________________ File system: ext4 Boot sector type: Grub2 (v1.99) Boot sector info: Grub2 (v1.99) is installed in the boot sector of sda8 and looks at sector 860224256 of the same hard drive for core.img. core.img is at this location and looks for (,msdos9)/boot/grub on this drive. Operating System: Ubuntu 13.04 Boot files: /etc/fstab sda9: __________________________________________ File system: ext4 Boot sector type: - Boot sector info: Operating System: elementary OS Luna Boot files: /boot/grub/grub.cfg /etc/fstab /boot/grub/core.img` I need advice as to how to proceed. I mean, could I simply delete /dev/sda7/ and /dev/sda8/? Please help, thank you.

    Read the article

  • What are the appropriate mount options for a shared NTFS partition on an SSD in a dual boot Ubuntu/Windows setup?

    - by Andreas Jonsson
    I have Ubuntu 13.10 and Windows 7 installed in dual boot on a single SSD. In addition they share an NTFS partition where I put all my data and documents. What is the optimal way to mount this NTFS partition in /etc/fstab (considering performance and minimizing wear of the SSD)? Similar questions have been asked, but I could not find answers to this particular scenario. As I understand it, the mount option 'discard' is not supported for NTFS and so should not be used (although it is recommended here). Another often quoted mount option is 'noatime'. I use it for my ext4 partitions. Does it apply to NTFS? My current /etc/fstab line is: UUID=XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX /dos ntfs defaults,nls=utf8,uid=1000,gid=1000 0 0

    Read the article

  • How large of a swap partition is needed to hibernate?

    - by Closure Cowboy
    I've read this question, but it doesn't definitively answer my question. If I want my computer to be able to hibernate, do I need to have a swap partition as large as my RAM, or will Ubuntu wisely be able to hibernate if the swap partition can fit the currently-in-use RAM? I'm about to install Ubuntu on a computer with a lot of RAM, and a relatively small hard drive, so I don't want to use more hard drive space than necessary. I wanted to avoid giving my actual specifications to keep this question more general, though I'll give them if necessary.

    Read the article

  • Recovery from hell - undeleting partition overwritten by Xubuntu 12.10 installer?

    - by DaimyoKirby
    This is turning into a nightmare - following my initial recovery of my two partitions, I went to install Xubuntu 12.10 (again). At this time I had two partitions - one of ~39 GB had Zorin OS 6 installed on it, and another of ~33 GB had nothing installed, just a few files in it that I had manually backed up (moved) there. When I got to the partitioning step, I chose "Replace Zorin OS 6 with Xubuntu 12.10", along with LVM, naturally thinking that the installer wouldn't touch the second partition, since Zorin wasn't installed on it. I was dead wrong. Upon booting my newly installed Xubuntu 12.10, I found in gparted that there were only two partitions - ~255MB, which appears to have the boot stuff in it (it's flagged boot in gparted), and another of ~74 GB. Question: Is there any way to salvage my old files on the non-Zorin ext3 partition? I'm really upset I made such a dumb move (again...), and any and all help is appreciated very, very much!

    Read the article

  • How do I move my LVM 250 GB root partition to a new 120GB hard disk?

    - by Dennis Schma
    I have the following situation: My current Ubuntu installation is running from an external HDD (250 GB) because I was to lazy to buy an new internal hdd. Now i've got a new internal (120GB) and i want to move everything to the internal. Installing Ubuntu new is out of disscussion because its to peronalized. Luckily (i hope so) the root partition is partitioned with LVM, so i hope i can move the partition to the smaller internal HDD. Is this possible? And where do i find help?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54  | Next Page >