Search Results

Search found 34305 results on 1373 pages for 'self referencing table'.

Page 474/1373 | < Previous Page | 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481  | Next Page >

  • mysql join Two tables to get records

    - by Saranya
    Hai guys, I have two tables Incharge and property. My property table has three fields 1stIncharge,2ndIncharge and 3rdIncharge. InchargeId is set as foreign key for all the above fields in the property table.. How to write a select statement that joins both the table.. I ve tried a bit but no result select P.Id,P.Name,P.1stIncharge,P.2ndIncharge,P.3rdIncharge,I.Id from Property as P join Incharge as I where (\\How to give condition here \\) Guys 3 fields P.1stIncharge, P.2ndIncharge, P.3rdIncharge has foreign key I.Id Edit: select P.Id,P.Name,P.1stIncharge,P.2ndIncharge,P.3rdIncharge,I1.Id from Property as P inner join Incharge as I1 on I1.Id=P.1stIncharge inner join Incharge as I2 on I2.Id=P.2ndIncharge inner join Incharge as I3 on I3.Id=P.3rdIncharge and this query working

    Read the article

  • Store data for songs MySQL DB

    - by Johan
    I'm storing a huge set of songs in a MySQL database. This is what I store in the 'songs' table: CREATE TABLE `songs` ( `song_id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment, `song_artist` varchar(255) NOT NULL, `song_track` varchar(255) NOT NULL, `song_mix` varchar(255) NOT NULL, `song_title` text NOT NULL, `song_hash` varchar(40) NOT NULL, `song_addtime` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL, `song_source` text NOT NULL, `song_file` varchar(255) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`song_id`) ) ENGINE=MyISAM AUTO_INCREMENT=1857 DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 Now I'd like to keep track of how many plays each song has, and other song-specific data that relates to the song. I don't want to keep adding fields to the 'songs' table for this. How can I store song related data a more efficient way? What's the best practice here?

    Read the article

  • sql locking on silverlight app

    - by immuner
    Hi, i am not sure if this is the correct term, but this is what id like to do: I have an application that uses a mssql database. This application can operate in 3 modes. mode 1) user does not alter, but only read the database mode 2) user can add rows (one at a time) onto a table in the database mode 3) user can alter several tables in the database (one person at a time) question 1) how can i ensure that when a user in in mode 3 that the database will "lock" and all logged in users who operate in mode 2 or mode 3 will not be able to change the database until he finishes? question 2) how can i ensure that while there are several users in mode 2, that there will be no conflict while they all update the table? my guess here, is that before adding a new row, you make a server query for the table's current unique keys and add the new entry. will this be safe enough though? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Aggregate Functions on subsets of data based on current row values with SQL

    - by aasukisuki
    Hopefully that title makes sense... Let's say I have an employee table: ID | Name | Title | Salary ---------------------------- 1 | Bob | Manager | 15285 2 | Joe | Worker | 10250 3 | Al | Worker | 11050 4 | Paul | Manager | 16025 5 | John | Worker | 10450 What I'd like to do is write a query that will give me the above table, along with an averaged salary column, based on the employee title: ID | Name | Title | Salary | Pos Avg -------------------------------------- 1 | Bob | Manager | 15285 | 15655 2 | Joe | Worker | 10250 | 10583 3 | Al | Worker | 11050 | 10583 4 | Paul | Manager | 16025 | 15655 5 | John | Worker | 10450 | 10583 I've tried doing this with a sub-query along the lines of: Select *, (select Avg(e2.salary) from employee e2 where e2.title = e.title) from employee e But I've come to realize that the sub-query is executed first, and has no knowledge of the table alias'd e I'm sure I'm missing something REALLY obvious here, can anyone point me in the right diretion?

    Read the article

  • MySQL - display rows of names and addresses grouped by name, where name occures more than once

    - by Stoob
    I have two tables, "name" and "address". I would like to list the last_name and joined address.street_address of all last_name in table "name" that occur more than once in table "name". The two tables are joined on the column "name_id". The desired output would appear like so: 213 | smith | 123 bluebird | 14 | smith | 456 first ave | 718 | smith | 12 san antonia st. | 244 | jones | 78 third ave # 45 | 98 | jones | 18177 toronto place | Note that if the last_name "abernathy" appears only once in table "name", then "abernathy" should not be included in the result. This is what I came up with so far: SELECT name.name_id, name.last_name, address.street_address, count(*) FROM `name` JOIN `address` ON name.name_id = address.name_id GROUP BY `last_name` HAVING count(*) > 1 However, this produces only one row per last name. I'd like all the last names listed. I know I am missing something simple. Any help is appreciated, thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to get equivalent of ResultSetMetaData without ResultSet

    - by javanix
    Hey Guys - I need to resolve a bunch of column names to column indexes (so as to use some of the nice ResultSetMetaData methods). However, the only way that I know how to get a ResultSetMetaData object is by calling getMetaData() on some ResultSet. The problem I have with that is that grabbing a ResultSet takes up uneccesary resources in my mind - I don't really need to query the data in the table, I just want some information about the table. Does anyone know of any way to get a RSMD object without getting a ResultSet (from a potentially huge table) first? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How do I normalise this database design?

    - by Ian Roke
    I am creating a rowing reporting and statistics system for a client where I have a structure at the moment similar to the following: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ID | Team | Coaches | Rowers | Event | Position | Time | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 18 | TeamName | CoachName1 | RowerName1 | EventName | 1 | 01:32:34 | | | | CoachName2 | RowerName2 | | | | | | | | RowerName3 | | | | | | | | RowerName4 | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is an example row of data but I would like to expand this out to a Rowers table and Coaches table and so on but I don't know how best to then link that back to the Entries table which is what this is. Has anybody got any words of wisdom they could share with me? Update A Team can have any number of Coaches and Rowers, a Rower can be in many Teams (Team A, B, C etc) and a Team can have many Coaches.

    Read the article

  • Join Query Help

    - by John
    Hello, The query below works well. It pulls data from two MySQL tables, "submission" and "login." I would like to also pull data from a third table called "comment" in the same database. The table "comment" has the following fields: commentid, loginid, submissionid, comment, datecommented Two of the fields in the table "login" are called "loginid" and "username." In the query below, I would like to count all "commentid" in "comment" where "loginid" equals the "loginid" in "login" where "username" equals "$profile." How can I do this? Thanks in advance, John $sqlStr1 = "SELECT l.username, l.loginid, s.loginid, s.submissionid, s.title, s.url, s.datesubmitted, s.displayurl, l.created, count(s.submissionid) countSubmissions FROM submission AS s INNER JOIN login AS l ON s.loginid = l.loginid WHERE l.username = '$profile'";

    Read the article

  • query optimization

    - by Gaurav
    I have a query of the form SELECT uid1,uid2 FROM friend WHERE uid1 IN (SELECT uid2 FROM friend WHERE uid1='.$user_id.') and uid2 IN (SELECT uid2 FROM friend WHERE uid1='.$user_id.') The problem now is that the nested query SELECT uid2 FROM friend WHERE uid1='.$user_id.' returns a very large number of ids(approx. 5000). The table structure of the friend table is uid1(int), uid2(int). This table is used to determine whether two users are linked together as friends. Any workaround? Can I write the query in a different way? Or is there some other way to solve this issue. I'm sure I am not the first person to face such a problem. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • sql select statement with a group by

    - by user85116
    I have data in 2 tables, and I want to create a report. Table A: tableAID (primary key) name Table B: tableBID (primary key) grade tableAID (foreign key, references Table A) There is much more to both tables, but those are the relevant columns. The query I want to run, conceptually, is this: select TableA.name, avg(TableB.grade) where TableB.tableAID = TableA.tableAID The problem of course is that I'm using an aggregate function (avg), and I can rewrite it like this: select avg(grade), tableAID from TableB group by tableAID but then I only get the ID of TableA, whereas I really need that name column which appears in TableA, not just the ID. Is it possible to write a query to do this in one statement, or would I first need to execute the second query I listed, get the list of id's, then query each record in TableA for the name column... seems to me I'm missing something obvious here, but I'm (quite obviously) not an sql guru...

    Read the article

  • ruby on rails group by with null values problem

    - by winter sun
    I have an hour table in witch I store user time tracking information, the table consists from the following cells project_id task_id (optional can be null) worker_id reported_date working_hours each worker enters sevral records per day so generally the table is looking like this id project_id worker_id task_id reported_date working hours; == =========== ========= ========= ============= ============== 1 1 1 1 10/10/2011 4 2 1 1 1 10/10/2011 14 3 1 1 10/10/2011 4 4 1 1 10/10/2011 14 the task_id is not a must field so there can be times when the user is not selecting it and ther task_id cell is empty now i need to display the data by using group by clouse so the resualt will be somthing like this project_id worker_id task_id working hours ========== ========= ========= ============== 1 1 1 18 1 1 18 I did the folowing group by condition @group_hours=Hour.group('project_id,worker_id,task_id)').select('project_id, task_id ,worker_id,sum(working_hours)as working_hours_sum') My view looks like this <% @group_hours.each do |b| % <%= b.project.name if b.project % <%= b.worker.First_name if b.worker % <%= b.task.name if b.task % <%= b.working_hours_sum % <%end% This it is working but only if the task_id is not null when task id is null it present all the records without grouping them like this project_id worker_id task_id working hours =========== ========= ========= ============== 1 1 1 18 1 1 4 1 1 14 I will appreciate any kind of solution to this problem

    Read the article

  • Dynamically add a new row as Add in UITableView in edit mode?

    - by David.Chu.ca
    I have a table view with 0 or n rows of data from datastore. I added a customized Edit button on the right of the view's navigation bar. By default, when the edit button is clicked, in the action event, I set the view as edit mode: [self.tableView setEditing:YES animated:YES]; I would like to add a row at the end of the table view with Add button as an accessory on the left when the table view is in edit mode. And the "Add" row will not be displayed when the view is not in edit mode. This is very similar to the case of iPhon'e Contacts application when a contact is in edit mode. I am not sure if I need to add a row dynamically, and how if so? An alternative way I guess is to add more row when tableView:numberOfRowsInSection: is called? If later is the case, I have to make it hidden when the view is not in edit mode and visible when the view is in edit.

    Read the article

  • UITableViewCell is transparent when not supposed to be

    - by David Liu
    My UITableViewCell is being transparent when it's not supposed to be. My table view has a background color and it shows through the table cell, even though they're supposed to be opaque. I'm not sure why this is. Relevant code: UITableViewCell *cell = [table dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier:emptyIdentifier]; if (cell == nil) { cell = [[[UITableViewCell alloc] initWithFrame:CGRectZero reuseIdentifier:emptyIdentifier] autorelease]; } cell.textLabel.text = @"Empty"; cell.textLabel.textAlignment = UITextAlignmentCenter; cell.textLabel.backgroundColor = [UIColor whiteColor]; return cell;

    Read the article

  • C#: access a class property when the property identifier is known as a string

    - by Hans
    Hi, I'm using LINQ to Entities on a database which structure is not known in advance. I use reflection to retrieve the information, and now have a list of strings with all the table names. Because I use LINQ, I also have the datasource encapsulated in a C# class (linqContext), with each table being a property of that class. What I want to achieve is this: Assume one of the strings in the table names list is "Employees". This is known in code, I want to do the following: linqContext.Employees.DoSomethingHere(); Is this possible? I know that if all the propertie were just items in a list, I could use the string as indexer, linqContext["Employees"]. However, this is not the case :(

    Read the article

  • Retrieving XML node from a path specified in an attribute value of another node

    - by Olivier PAYEN
    From this XML source : <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> <ROOT> <STRUCT> <COL order="1" nodeName="FOO/BAR" colName="Foo Bar" /> <COL order="2" nodeName="FIZZ" colName="Fizz" /> </STRUCT> <DATASET> <DATA> <FIZZ>testFizz</FIZZ> <FOO> <BAR>testBar</BAR> <LIB>testLib</LIB> </FOO> </DATA> <DATA> <FIZZ>testFizz2</FIZZ> <FOO> <BAR>testBar2</BAR> <LIB>testLib2</LIB> </FOO> </DATA> </DATASET> </ROOT> I want to generate this HTML : <html> <head> <title>Test</title> </head> <body> <table border="1"> <tr> <td>Foo Bar</td> <td>Fizz</td> </tr> <tr> <td>testBar</td> <td>testFizz</td> </tr> <tr> <td>testBar2</td> <td>testFizz2</td> </tr> </table> </body> </html> Here is the XSLT I currently have : <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" xmlns:msxsl="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:xslt" exclude-result-prefixes="msxsl"> <xsl:output method="html" indent="yes"/> <xsl:template match="/ROOT"> <html> <head> <title>Test</title> </head> <body> <table border="1"> <tr> <!--Generate the table header--> <xsl:apply-templates select="STRUCT/COL"> <xsl:sort data-type="number" select="@order"/> </xsl:apply-templates> </tr> <xsl:apply-templates select="DATASET/DATA" /> </table> </body> </html> </xsl:template> <xsl:template match="COL"> <!--Template for generating the table header--> <td> <xsl:value-of select="@colName"/> </td> </xsl:template> <xsl:template match="DATA"> <xsl:variable name="pos" select="position()" /> <tr> <xsl:for-each select="/ROOT/STRUCT/COL"> <xsl:sort data-type="number" select="@order"/> <xsl:variable name="elementName" select="@nodeName" /> <td> <xsl:value-of select="/ROOT/DATASET/DATA[$pos]/*[name() = $elementName]" /> </td> </xsl:for-each> </tr> </xsl:template> </xsl:stylesheet> It almost works, the problem I have is to retrieve the correct DATA node from the path specified in the "nodeName" attribute value of the STRUCT block.

    Read the article

  • Using property file in hibernate mapping

    - by Zoltan Hamori
    Hi, I have a two nodes environment using the same database. In the database there is a resource table like RESOURCE_ID, CODE, NODE The content of the NODE column can be 1 or 2 depending on which node can use it. As I need to deploy the same ear to the two nodes, I would like to map this table like this: <hibernate-mapping> <class name="ResourceVO" table="RESOURCE" dynamic-update="true" optimistic-lock="dirty" where="NODE=${node.value}" > I would like to store the node.value property on the file system, so the instances could identify which resource to use. Is it possible in hibernate?

    Read the article

  • In Django, how to create tables from an SQL file when syncdb is run

    - by Sidney
    Hi, How do I make syncdb execute SQL queries (for table creation) defined by me, rather then generating tables automatically. I'm looking for this solution as some particular models in my app represent SQL-table-views for a legacy-database table. So, I've created their SQL-views in my django-DB like this: CREATE VIEW legacy_series AS SELECT * FROM legacy.series; I have a reverse engineered model that represents the above view/legacytable. But whenever I run syncdb, I have to create all the views first by running sql scripts, otherwise syncdb simply creates tables for them (if a view is not found). How do I make syncdb run the above mentioned SQL?

    Read the article

  • Creating a proper CMS thoughts

    - by dallasclark
    I'm just about to expand the functionality of our own CMS but was thinking of restructuring the database to make it simpler to add/edit data types and values. Currently, the CMS is quite flat - the CMS requires a field in the database for every type of stored value. The first option that comes to mind is simply a table which keeps the data types (ie: Address 1, Suburb, Email Address etc) and another table which holds values for each of these data types. Just like how Wordpress keeps values in the 'options' table, serialize would be used to store an array of values. The second option is how Drupal works, the CMS creates tables for every data type. Unlike Wordpress, this can be a bit of an overkill but really useful for SQL queries when ordering and grouping by a particular value. What's everyone's thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Get all related products based on their full-text search relationship

    - by MikeJ
    I have a Product table with the fields Id, Title, Description, Keywords (just comma separated list of keywords). Table is full-text indexed. When I view one product, I do a query and search the full-text catalog for any related products based on the Keywords field. select * from Products where Contains(Products.*, @keywordsFromOneProduct) Works like a charm. Now I would like to list all products and all their related products in a big list and I want to avoid calling this method for each item. Any ideas how could I do it? I was thinking about a job that would go through products one by one and build a one-many mapping table (fields ProductId, RelatedProductId), but I wonder is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Persist collection of interface using Hibernate

    - by Olvagor
    I want to persist my litte zoo with Hibernate: @Entity @Table(name = "zoo") public class Zoo { @OneToMany private Set<Animal> animals = new HashSet<Animal>(); } // Just a marker interface public interface Animal { } @Entity @Table(name = "dog") public class Dog implements Animal { // ID and other properties } @Entity @Table(name = "cat") public class Cat implements Animal { // ID and other properties } When I try to persist the zoo, Hibernate complains: Use of @OneToMany or @ManyToMany targeting an unmapped class: blubb.Zoo.animals[blubb.Animal] I know about the targetEntity-property of @OneToMany but that would mean, only Dogs OR Cats can live in my zoo. Is there any way to persist a collection of an interface, which has several implementations, with Hibernate?

    Read the article

  • How do I return JSON data from a partial view FormMethod.Get?

    - by MrM
    I have the following code that posts to my Search Json. The problem is the url redirects to the json search and displays the raw json data. I would like to return to a table in my partialView instead. Any thoughts on how I can achieve this? <div> @using (Html.BeginForm("Search", "Home", Formmethod.Get, new {id="search-form"})){ ... <button id="search-btn">Search</button> } </div> <div> <table id="search-results">...</table> </div> My home controller works fine but to make sure the picture is clear... public JsonResult Search(/*variables*/) { ... return Json(response, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet); } And I get redirected to "Search/(all my variables)

    Read the article

  • Managing Foreign Keys

    - by jwzk
    So I have a database with a few tables. The first table contains the user ID, first name and last name. The second table contains the user ID, interest ID, and interest rating. There is another table that has all of the interest ID's. For every interest ID (even when new ones are added), I need to make sure that each user has an entry for that interest ID (even if its blank, or has defaults). Will foreign keys help with this scenario? or will I need to use PHP to update each and every record when I add a new key?

    Read the article

  • Is using Natural Join or Implicit column names not a good practice when writing SQL in a programming

    - by Jian Lin
    When we use Natural Join, we are joining the tables when both table have the same column names. But what if we write it in PHP and then the DBA add some more fields to both tables, then the Natural Join can break? The same goes for Insert, if we do a insert into gifts values (NULL, "chocolate", "choco.jpg", now()); then it will break the code as well as contaminating the table when the DBA adds some fields to the table (example as column 2 or 3). So it is always best to spell out the column names when the SQL statements are written inside a programming language and stored in a file in a big project.

    Read the article

  • How can I do a right outer join where both tables have a where clause?

    - by cdeszaq
    Here's the scenario: I have 2 tables: CREATE TABLE dbo.API_User ( id int NOT NULL, name nvarchar(255) NOT NULL, authorization_key varchar(255) NOT NULL, is_active bit NOT NULL ) ON [PRIMARY] CREATE TABLE dbo.Single_Sign_On_User ( id int NOT NULL IDENTITY (1, 1), API_User_id int NOT NULL, external_id varchar(255) NOT NULL, user_id int NULL ) ON [PRIMARY] What I am trying to return is the following: is_active for a given authorization_key The Single_Sign_On_User.id that matches the external_id/API_User_id pair if it exists or NULL if there is no such pair When I try this query: SELECT Single_Sign_On_User.id, API_User.is_active FROM API_User LEFT OUTER JOIN Single_Sign_On_User ON Single_Sign_On_User.API_User_id = API_User.id WHERE Single_Sign_On_User.external_id = 'test_ext_id' AND API_User.authorization_key = 'test' where the "test" API_User record exists but the "test_ext_id" record does not, and with no other values in either table, I get no records returned. When I use: SELECT Single_Sign_On_User.id, API_User.is_active FROM API_User LEFT OUTER JOIN Single_Sign_On_User ON Single_Sign_On_User.API_User_id = API_User.id WHERE API_User.authorization_key = 'test' I get the results I expect (NULL, 1), but that query doesn't allow me to find the "test_ext_id" record if it exists but would give me all records associated with the "test" API_User record. How can I get the results I am after?

    Read the article

  • How to reference a specific object in an array of objects using jTemplates

    - by Travis
    I am using the excellent jTemplates plugin to generate content. Given a data object like this... var data = { name: 'datatable', table: [ {id: 1, name: 'Anne'}, {id: 2, name: 'Amelie'}, {id: 3, name: 'Polly'}, {id: 4, name: 'Alice'}, {id: 5, name: 'Martha'} ] }; ..I'm wondering if it is possible to directly specify an object in an array of objects using $T. (I'm hoping there is something like $T.table:3 available) Currently the only way I can think of to access a specific object in an array is to do something like this... {#foreach $T.table as record} {#if $T.record$iteration == 3} This is record 3! Name: {$T.record.name} {#/if} {#/for} However that seems clumsy... Any suggestions? Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481  | Next Page >