Search Results

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

Page 472/1254 | < Previous Page | 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479  | Next Page >

  • How to join list of strings?

    - by satsurae
    Hi all, This is probably seriously easy to solve for most of you but I cannot solve this simply putting str() around it can I? I would like to convert this list: ['A','B','C'] into 'A B C'. Thanks in advance!!

    Read the article

  • What is the fastest way to compare 2 rows in SQL?

    - by Swoosh
    I have 2 different databases. Upon changing something in the big one (i don't have access to), i get some rows imported in my databases in a similar HUGE table. I have a job checking for records in this table, and if any, execute a stored procedure, process and delete from table. Performance. (Huge amount of data) I would like to know what is the fastest way to know if something has changed using let's say 2 imported rows with 100 columns each. Don't have FK-s, don't need. Chances are, that even though I have records in my table, nothing has actually changed. Also. Let's say there is actually changed something. Is it possible for example to check only for changes inside datetime columns? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to correctly do SQL UPDATE with weighted subselect?

    - by luminarious
    I am probably trying to accomplish too much in a single query, but have I an sqlite database with badly formatted recipes. This returns a sorted list of recipes with relevance added: SELECT *, sum(relevance) FROM ( SELECT *,1 AS relevance FROM recipes WHERE ingredients LIKE '%milk%' UNION ALL SELECT *,1 AS relevance FROM recipes WHERE ingredients LIKE '%flour%' UNION ALL SELECT *,1 AS relevance FROM recipes WHERE ingredients LIKE '%sugar%' ) results GROUP BY recipeID ORDER BY sum(relevance) DESC; But I'm now stuck with a special case where I need to write the relevance value to a field on the same row as the recipe. I figured something along these lines: UPDATE recipes SET relevance=(SELECT sum(relevance) ...) But I have not been able to get this working yet. I will keep trying, but meanwhile please let me know how you would approach this?

    Read the article

  • Format a money field in SQL without converting to varchar?

    - by sdmadsen
    I need to be able to display a money field as $XX,XXX.XX, but without converting to varchar using total_eval = '$' + CONVERT(varchar(19),total_eval.opvValueMoney,1) My project uses sorting of the information after I pull this to sort the column and it doesn't sort correctly when the column is a varchar. Is there anyway to do this?

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to store categorical references in SQL tables?

    - by jlafay
    I'm wanting to store a wide array of categorical data in MySQL database tables. Let's say that for instance I want to to information on "widgets" and want to categorize attributes in certain ways, i.e. shape category. For instance, the widgets could be classified as: round, square, triangular, spherical, etc. Should these categories be stored within a table to reference them best from an application? Another possibility, I would imagine, would be to add a column to widgets that contained a shape column that contained a tiny int. That way my application could search shapes by that and then use a coordinating enum type that would map the shape int meanings. Which would be best? Or is there another solution that I'm not thinking of yet?

    Read the article

  • Problem in Union Join For MySQL Query

    - by Mac Taylor
    hey guys i managed to select from a table that saves my latest posts but i need to have double condition in selection here is my code : $sql_query = "SELECT b.*,u.username AS MY_Sender FROM TABLE_users u,TABLE_blogs b Where b.reciever = '0' AND u.user_id = b.sender UNION SELECT b.*,u.username AS MY_reciever FROM TABLE_users u,TABLE_blogs b Where b.reciever != '0' AND u.user_id = b.reciever ORDER BY bid DESC LIMIT 0,7 "; but MY_reciever is Null and empty Am i wrong in using UNION for this need ?!

    Read the article

  • mysql joins - how to find all children that belongs to ALL parents

    - by kimsia
    I have three mysql tables items the columns are id, title items_in_categories the columns are id, item_id, category_id categories the columns are id, title I want to find all the items that belong to ALL the stated categories. Not any one category, but ALL categories Eg, if I want to search all the items that belongs to category id 3 and 5 I would like to use as simple a way as possible. I have tried AND and a nested NOT EXISTS as stated in the mysql manual. Nothing worked.

    Read the article

  • odp.net SQL query retrieve set of rows from two input arrays.

    - by Karl Trumstedt
    I have a table with a primary key consisting of two columns. I want to retrieve a set of rows based on two input arrays, each corresponding to one primary key column. select pkt1.id, pkt1.id2, ... from PrimaryKeyTable pkt1, table(:1) t1, table(:2) t2 where pkt1.id = t1.column_value and pkt1.id2 = t2.column_value I then bind the values with two int[] in odp.net. This returns all different combinations of my resulting rows. So if I am expecting 13 rows I receive 169 rows (13*13). The problem is that each value in t1 and t2 should be linked. Value t1[4] should be used with t2[4] and not all the different values in t2. Using distinct solves my problem, but I'm wondering if my approach is wrong. Anyone have any pointers on how to solve this the best way? One way might be to use a for-loop accessing each index in t1 and t2 sequentially, but I wonder what will be more efficient. Edit: actually distinct won't solve my problem, it just did it based on my input-values (all values in t2 = 0)

    Read the article

  • Is a full list returned first and then filtered when using linq to sql to filter data from a databas

    - by RJ
    This is probably a very simple question that I am working through in an MVC project. Here's an example of what I am talking about. I have an rdml file linked to a database with a table called Users that has 500,000 rows. But I only want to find the Users who were entered on 5/7/2010. So let's say I do this in my UserRepository: from u in db.GetUsers() where u.CreatedDate = "5/7/2010" select u (doing this from memory so don't kill me if my syntax is a little off, it's the concept I am looking for) Does this statement first return all 500,000 rows and then filter it or does it only bring back the filtered list?

    Read the article

  • Multiple SQL Standard Instances on 4 Processor/32-core Server

    - by Theowood
    We have a large 4 processor/32-core server with 192GB of memory available in the data center and over twenty small SQL Standard databases to consolidate. They are a mix of SQL 2012 and 2008 R2 for 3rd-party apps. Is there any issue with simply installing two instances of SQL Standard on the server - one for 2012 and one for 2008 R2 ? Each instance will use up to 64GB out of the 192GB and 16 cores. If we did this with Enterprise, the licensing would be a fortune and the Enterprise features are not needed.

    Read the article

  • Using CONNECT BY to get all parents and one child in Hierarchy through SQL query in Oracle

    - by s khan
    I was going through some previous posts on CONNECT BY usage. What I need to find is that what to do if I want to get all the parents (i.e, up to root) and just one child for a node, say 4. It seems Like I will have to use union of the following two:- SELECT * FROM hierarchy START WITH id = 4 CONNECT BY id = PRIOR parent union SELECT * FROM hierarchy WHERE LEVEL =<2 START WITH id = 4 CONNECT BY parent = PRIOR id Is there a better way to do this, some workaround that is more optimized?

    Read the article

  • Hibernate inserting into join table

    - by Karl
    I got several entities. Two of them got a many-to-many relation. When I do a bigger operation on these entities it fails with this exception: org.hibernate.exception.ConstraintViolationException: could not insert collection rows: I execute the operation i a @Transactional context. I don't do any explicit flushing i my daos. The flush is triggered by a query. In the queue are 15 elements (all of the same structure). one of them always fails (but it's always a different one (I checked) and always at a different position). Does anybody have a hint for me for what I might do wrong? My Mapping: @ManyToMany(targetEntity = CategoryImpl.class) protected Set<Category> categories = new HashSet<Category>();

    Read the article

  • What's SQL table name for table between 'Users' and 'UserTypes' ?

    - by Space Cracker
    i have tow tables in my database : Users : contain user information UserTypes : contain the names of user types ( student , teacher , specialist ) - I can't rename it to 'Types' as we have a table with this name relation between Users and UserTypes many to many .. so i'll create a table that have UserID(FK) with UserTypeID(FK) but I try to find best name for that table ... any suggestion please ?

    Read the article

  • In SQL, why is "Distinct" not used in a subquery, when looking for some items "not showing up" in th

    - by Jian Lin
    Usually when looking for some items not showing up in the other table, we can use: select * from gifts where giftID not in (select giftID from sentgifts); or select * from gifts where giftID not in (select distinct giftID from sentgifts); the second line is with "distinct" added, so that the resulting table is smaller, and probably let the search for "not in" faster too. So, won't using "distinct" be desirable? Often than not, I don't see it being used in the subquery in such a case. Is there advantage or disadvantage of using it? thanks.

    Read the article

  • SQL: Using a CASE Statement to update a 1000 rows at once, how??

    - by SoLoGHoST
    Ok, I would like to use a CASE STATEMENT for this, but I am lost with this. Basically, I need to update a ton of rows, but just on the "position" column. I need to update all "position" values from 0 - count(position) for each id_layout_position column per id_layout column. Here's what I got for a regular update, but I don't wanna throw this into a foreach loop, as it would take forever to do it. I'm using SMF (Simple Machines Forums), so it might look a little different, but the idea is the same, and CASE statements are supported... $smcFunc['db_query']('', ' UPDATE {db_prefix}dp_positions SET position = {int:position} WHERE id_layout_position = {int:id_layout_position} AND id_layout = {int:id_layout}', array( 'position' => $position++, 'id_layout_position' => (int) $id_layout_position, 'id_layout' => (int) $id_layout, ) ); Anyways, I need to apply some sort of CASE on this so that I can auto-increment by 1 all values that it finds and update to the next possible value. I know I'm doing this wrong, even in this QUERY. But I'm totally lost when it comes to CASES. Here's an example of a CASE being used within SMF, so you can see this and hopefully relate: $conditions = ''; foreach ($postgroups as $id => $min_posts) { $conditions .= ' WHEN posts >= ' . $min_posts . (!empty($lastMin) ? ' AND posts <= ' . $lastMin : '') . ' THEN ' . $id; $lastMin = $min_posts; } // A big fat CASE WHEN... END is faster than a zillion UPDATE's ;). $smcFunc['db_query']('', ' UPDATE {db_prefix}members SET id_post_group = CASE ' . $conditions . ' ELSE 0 END' . ($parameter1 != null ? ' WHERE ' . (is_array($parameter1) ? 'id_member IN ({array_int:members})' : 'id_member = {int:members}') : ''), array( 'members' => $parameter1, ) ); Before I do the update, I actually have a SELECT which throws everything I need into arrays like so: $disabled_sections = array(); $positions = array(); while ($row = $smcFunc['db_fetch_assoc']($request)) { if (!isset($disabled_sections[$row['id_group']][$row['id_layout']])) $disabled_sections[$row['id_group']][$row['id_layout']] = array( 'info' => $module_info[$name], 'id_layout_position' => $row['id_layout_position'] ); // Increment the positions... if (!is_null($row['position'])) { if (!isset($positions[$row['id_layout']][$row['id_layout_position']])) $positions[$row['id_layout']][$row['id_layout_position']] = 1; else $positions[$row['id_layout']][$row['id_layout_position']]++; } else $positions[$row['id_layout']][$row['id_layout_position']] = 0; } Thanks, I know if anyone can help me here it's definitely you guys and gals... Anyways, here is my question: How do I use a CASE statement in the first code example, so that I can update all of the rows in the position column from 0 - total # of rows found, that have that id_layout value and that id_layout_position value, and continue this for all different id_layout values in that table? Can I use the arrays above somehow? I'm sure I'll have to use the id_layout and id_layout_position values for this right? But how can I do this?

    Read the article

  • SQL: Is it quicker to insert sorted data into a table?

    - by AngryWhenHungry
    A table in Sybase has a unique varchar(32) column, and a few other columns. It is indexed on this column too. At regular intervals, I need to truncate it, and repopulate it with fresh data from other tables. insert into MyTable select list_of_columns from OtherTable where some_simple_conditions order by MyUniqueId If we are dealing with a few thousand rows, would it help speed up the insert if we have the order by clause for the select? If so, would this gain in time compensate for the extra time needed to order the select query? I could try this out, but currently my data set is small and the results don't say much.

    Read the article

  • PHP: Doctrine: order joined records

    - by Sebastian Bechtel
    Hi, I'm new to doctrine: I have a problem with the sorting of joined records. A sample. I've got an Article model which is associated with a Source model in 1 <- n. The source model has a property called 'position' with an integer value. Now I want to fetch an article with it's sources orderes by the position. My DQL looks like this: $q = Doctrine_Query::create() ->select('a.title, s.content') ->from('Article a') ->leftJoin('a.Source s') ->where('a.id = ?') ->orderBy('s.position'); The result doesn't change if I edit the position. Best regards, Sebastian

    Read the article

  • Marking up table joins in the Microstrategy project metadata with the architect tool?

    - by ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells
    Hi, I am evaluating Microstrategy 9.0.1 and attempting to build a prototype metadata layer using its Architect tool. The tool doesn't seem to have any specific means to mark up joins in the way that the editing tools for SSRS data source views or Business Objects universes do. How does this work in Microstrategy - I have never used this before and may be making invalid assumptions based on other systems I have seen. If one does do this with MicroStrategy, how is it done?

    Read the article

  • Many to many self join through junction table

    - by Peter
    I have an EF model that can self-reference through an intermediary class to define a parent/child relationship. I know how to do a pure many-to-many relationship using the Map command, but for some reason going through this intermediary class is causing problems with my mappings. The intermediary class provides additional properties for the relationship. See the classes, modelBinder logic and error below: public class Equipment { [Key] public int EquipmentId { get; set; } public virtual List<ChildRecord> Parents { get; set; } public virtual List<ChildRecord> Children { get; set; } } public class ChildRecord { [Key] public int ChildId { get; set; } [Required] public int Quantity { get; set; } [Required] public Equipment Parent { get; set; } [Required] public Equipment Child { get; set; } } I've tried building the mappings in both directions, though I only keep one set in at a time: modelBuilder.Entity<ChildRecord>() .HasRequired(x => x.Parent) .WithMany(x => x.Children ) .WillCascadeOnDelete(false); modelBuilder.Entity<ChildRecord>() .HasRequired(x => x.Child) .WithMany(x => x.Parents) .WillCascadeOnDelete(false); OR modelBuilder.Entity<Equipment>() .HasMany(x => x.Parents) .WithRequired(x => x.Child) .WillCascadeOnDelete(false); modelBuilder.Entity<Equipment>() .HasMany(x => x.Children) .WithRequired(x => x.Parent) .WillCascadeOnDelete(false); Regardless of which set I use, I get the error: The foreign key component 'Child' is not a declared property on type 'ChildRecord'. Verify that it has not been explicitly excluded from the model and that it is a valid primitive property. when I try do deploy my ef model to the database. If I build it without the modelBinder logic in place then I get two ID columns for Child and two ID columns for Parent in my ChildRecord table. This makes sense since it tries to auto create the navigation properties from Equipment and doesn't know that there are already properties in ChildRecord to fulfill this need. I tried using Data Annotations on the class, and no modelBuilder code, this failed with the same error as above: [Required] [ForeignKey("EquipmentId")] public Equipment Parent { get; set; } [Required] [ForeignKey("EquipmentId")] public Equipment Child { get; set; } AND [InverseProperty("Child")] public virtual List<ChildRecord> Parents { get; set; } [InverseProperty("Parent")] public virtual List<ChildRecord> Children { get; set; } I've looked at various other answers around the internet/SO, and the common difference seems to be that I am self joining where as all the answers I can find are for two different types. Entity Framework Code First Many to Many Setup For Existing Tables Many to many relationship with junction table in Entity Framework? Creating many to many junction table in Entity Framework

    Read the article

  • How to dynamically write the query in SQL Server 2008?

    - by user1237131
    How to write the dynamically the below query? Table empid designation interestes 1 developer,tester cricket,chess 1 developer chess 1 techlead cricket Condition: IF empid = 1 AND (designation LIKE '%developer%' OR designationLIKE '%techlead%') OR (interests LIKE '%cricket%'). How to write the above query dynamically if designations need to send more than 2,and also same on interstes . please tell me ... EDIT stored procedure code: ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[usp_GetDevices] @id INT, @designation NVARCHAR (MAX) AS BEGIN declare @idsplat varchar(MAX) set @idsplat = @UserIds create table #u1 (id1 varchar(MAX)) set @idsplat = 'insert #u1 select ' + replace(@idsplat, ',', ' union select ') exec(@idsplat) Select id FROM dbo.DevicesList WHERE id=@id AND designation IN (select id1 from #u1) END

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479  | Next Page >