Search Results

Search found 1575 results on 63 pages for 'bob webster'.

Page 50/63 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

  • Which MySQL Frontend shows foreign rows?

    - by Jeremy Rudd
    I once came across a MySQL Frontend app that displayed foreign linked rows within the parent row, if for instance the Events table has a foreign key to the Students table: Student ID Name DOB -- ---- --------- [+] 22 Bob 25-1-1984 [-] 21 Jane 25-1-1982 Event ID Student-ID Name Time -- ---------- ---- --------- 1 21 Event A 05:50 1 21 Event B 17:20 [+] 20 Jack 25-1-1980

    Read the article

  • Simple JQuery Validator addMethod not working

    - by tehaaron
    Updated question on the bottom I am trying to validate a super simple form. Eventually the username will be compared to a RegExp statement and the same will go for the password. However right now I am just trying to learn the Validator addMethod format. I currently have this script: JQuery.validator.addMethod( "legalName", function(value, element) { if (element.value == "bob") { return false; } else return true; }, "Use a valid username." ); $(document).ready(function() { $("#form1").validate({ rules: { username: { legalName: true } }, }); }); Which if I am not mistaken should return false and respond with "Use a valid username." if I were to put "bob" into the form. However, it is simply submitting it. I am linking to JQuery BEFORE Validator in the header like instructed. My uber simple form looks like this: <form id="form1" method="post" action=""> <div class="form-row"><span class="label">Username *</span><input type="text" name="username" /></div> <div class="form-row"><input class="submit" type="submit" value="Submit"></div> </form> Finally how would I go about restructing the addMethod function to return true if and false at the else stage while keeping the message alert for a false return? (ignore this last part if you don't understand what I was trying to say :) ) Thanks in advance. Thank to everyone who pointed out my JQuery - jQuery typo. New Ideally, I am trying to turn this into a simple login form (username/password). It is for demonstration only so it wont have a database attached or anything, just some simple js validations. I am looking to make the username validate for <48 characters, only english letters and numbers, no special characters. I thought a whitelist would be easiest so I had something like this: ^[a-zA-Z0-9]*${1,48} but I am not sure if that is proper JS RegExp (it varies from Ruby RegExp if I am not mistaken?...Usually I use rubular.com). Password will be similar but require some upper/lowercase and numbers. I believe I need to make another $.validator.addMethod for legalPassword that will look very similar.

    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

  • LINQ/C#: Where & Foreach using index in a list/array

    - by Andrew White
    Hi, I have a list/array and need to process certain elements, but also need the index of the element in the processing. Example: List Names = john, mary, john, bob, simon Names.Where(s = s != "mary").Foreach(MyObject.setInfo(s.index, "blah") But cannot use the "index" property with lists, inversely if the names were in an Array I cannot use Foreach... Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • INSERT OR IGNORE in a trigger

    - by dan04
    I have a database (for tracking email statistics) that has grown to hundreds of megabytes, and I've been looking for ways to reduce it. It seems that the main reason for the large file size is that the same strings tend to be repeated in thousands of rows. To avoid this problem, I plan to create another table for a string pool, like so: CREATE TABLE AddressLookup ( ID INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT, Address TEXT UNIQUE ); CREATE TABLE EmailInfo ( MessageID INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT, ToAddrRef INTEGER REFERENCES AddressLookup(ID), FromAddrRef INTEGER REFERENCES AddressLookup(ID) /* Additional columns omitted for brevity. */ ); And for convenience, a view to join these tables: CREATE VIEW EmailView AS SELECT MessageID, A1.Address AS ToAddr, A2.Address AS FromAddr FROM EmailInfo LEFT JOIN AddressLookup A1 ON (ToAddrRef = A1.ID) LEFT JOIN AddressLookup A2 ON (FromAddrRef = A2.ID); In order to be able to use this view as if it were a regular table, I've made some triggers: CREATE TRIGGER trg_id_EmailView INSTEAD OF DELETE ON EmailView BEGIN DELETE FROM EmailInfo WHERE MessageID = OLD.MessageID; END; CREATE TRIGGER trg_ii_EmailView INSTEAD OF INSERT ON EmailView BEGIN INSERT OR IGNORE INTO AddressLookup(Address) VALUES (NEW.ToAddr); INSERT OR IGNORE INTO AddressLookup(Address) VALUES (NEW.FromAddr); INSERT INTO EmailInfo SELECT NEW.MessageID, A1.ID, A2.ID FROM AddressLookup A1, AddressLookup A2 WHERE A1.Address = NEW.ToAddr AND A2.Address = NEW.FromAddr; END; CREATE TRIGGER trg_iu_EmailView INSTEAD OF UPDATE ON EmailView BEGIN UPDATE EmailInfo SET MessageID = NEW.MessageID WHERE MessageID = OLD.MessageID; REPLACE INTO EmailView SELECT NEW.MessageID, NEW.ToAddr, NEW.FromAddr; END; The problem After: INSERT OR REPLACE INTO EmailView VALUES (1, '[email protected]', '[email protected]'); INSERT OR REPLACE INTO EmailView VALUES (2, '[email protected]', '[email protected]'); The updated rows contain: MessageID ToAddr FromAddr --------- ------ -------- 1 NULL [email protected] 2 [email protected] [email protected] There's a NULL that shouldn't be there. The corresponding cell in the EmailInfo table contains an orphaned ToAddrRef value. If you do the INSERTs one at a time, you'll see that Alice's ID in the AddressLookup table changes! It appears that this behavior is documented: An ON CONFLICT clause may be specified as part of an UPDATE or INSERT action within the body of the trigger. However if an ON CONFLICT clause is specified as part of the statement causing the trigger to fire, then conflict handling policy of the outer statement is used instead. So the "REPLACE" in the top-level "INSERT OR REPLACE" statement is overriding the critical "INSERT OR IGNORE" in the trigger program. Is there a way I can make it work the way that I wanted?

    Read the article

  • Convert in memory POCO objects to c# code to initialize

    - by sidesinger
    Is there a library or code sample for converting an in memory POCO c# object to a .cs code file that creates that object. An example: object of type car in memory becomes: Car c = new Car { Name = "mazda", Id = 5, Passengers = new List<string> { "Bob", "Sally" } // etc... recursing to the bottom }; I could assume it could only set public properties.

    Read the article

  • Can I filter a django model with a python list?

    - by Rhubarb
    Say I have a model object 'Person' defined, which has a field called 'Name'. And I have a list of people: l = ['Bob','Dave','Jane'] I would like to return a list of all Person records where the first name is not in the list of names defined in l. What is the most pythonic way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • Conditionally display a richfaces modal panel

    - by Mark Lewis
    Hello Quite simple: <a4j:commandButton id="bob" action="#{MyBacking.doAction}" image="/img/btn.png" reRender="stuff" oncomplete="#{not empty MyBacking.myCondition ? #{rich:component('myModelPanel')}.show()" : <do nothing>}" ajaxSingle="true"> </a4j:commandButton> Thats obviously invalid EL. What's the most concise method I conditionally show myModelPanel in this way? Thanks IA

    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

  • What is model driven development good for?

    - by happyappa
    Microsoft, of Cairo fame, is working on Oslo, a new modeling platform. Bob Muglia, Senior Vice President of Microsoft Server & Tools Business, states that the benefits of modeling have always been clear. In simple, practical terms, what are the clear benefits that Oslo bestows upon its users?

    Read the article

  • Java ArrayList initialization

    - by Jonathan
    I am aware that you can initialize an array during instantiation as follows: String[] names = new String[] {"Ryan", "Julie", "Bob"}; Is there a way to do the same thing with an ArrayList? Or must I add the contents individually with array.add()? Thanks, Jonathan

    Read the article

  • `strip`ing the results of a split in python

    - by Igor
    i'm trying to do something pretty simple: line = "name : bob" k, v = line.lower().split(':') k = k.strip() v = v.strip() is there a way to combine this into one line somehow? i found myself writing this over and over again when making parsers, and sometimes this involves way more than just two variables. i know i can use regexp, but this is simple enough to not really have to require it...

    Read the article

  • cant get regex to work as i want

    - by Jorm
    With this function: function bbcode_parse($str) { $str = htmlentities($str); $find = array( '/\\*\*(.[^*]*)\*\*/is', ); $replace = array( '<b>' ); $str = preg_replace($find, $replace, $str); return $str; } And with text "My name is **bob**" I get in source code Hi my name is <b> Been trying to get this to work for a while now. Would appricate some expert help :)

    Read the article

  • Repeating procedure for every item in class

    - by Hendriksen123
    Data.XX.NewValue := Data.XX.SavedValue; Data.XX.OldValue := Data.XX.SavedValue; I need to do the above a large number of times, where XX represents the value in the class. Pretending there were 3 items in the list: Tim, Bob, Steve. Is there any way to do the above for all three people without typing out the above code three times? (Data is a class containing a number of Objects, each type TList, which contain OldValue, NewValue and SavedValue)

    Read the article

  • Is Minus Zero some sort of JavaScript performance trick?

    - by James Wiseman
    Looking in the jQuery core I found the folloiwng code convention: nth: function(elem, i, match){ return match[3] - 0 === i; }, And I was really curious about the snippet match[3] - 0 Hunting around for '-0' on google isn't too productive, and a search for 'minus zero' brings back a reference to a Bob Dylan song. So, can anyone tell me. Is this some sort of performance trick, or is there a reason for doing this rather than a parseInt or parseFloat? Thanks

    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

  • Separate groups of people based on members

    - by tevch
    I have groups of people. I need to move groups with at least one same member as far as possible from each other. Example: GroupA - John, Bob, Nick GroupB - Jack, Nick GroupC - Brian, Alex, Steve As you can see GroupA and GroupB overlap(they both contain Nick) I need an algorithm to set groups as GroupA-GroupC-GroupB Thank you

    Read the article

  • How to find index of an object by key and value in an javascript array

    - by return1.at
    Given: var peoples = [ { "attr1": "bob", "attr2": "pizza" }, { "attr1": "john", "attr2": "sushi" }, { "attr1": "larry", "attr2": "hummus" } ]; Wanted: Index of object where attr === value for example attr1 === "john" or attr2 === "hummus" Update: Please, read my question carefully, i do not want to find the object via $.inArray nor i want to get the value of a specific object attribute. Please consider this for your answers. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • PHP Application check name is unique if not append

    - by user270797
    My application requires the user to enter their business name, which the application will automatically create into a unique identifier to be used in URLs, ie "Bob's Cafe" will become "bobs-cafe" But if there are duplicate names I would like the application to add a number so if there is already a "bobs-cafe" we will use "bobs-cafe-1" and likewise if there is already a "bobs-cafe-1" we will use "bobs-cafe-2" Ive used explode and also looked at a regular expressions but I dont know the best way to approach this. Im stuck in being able to grab the number and incrementing it and returning the string

    Read the article

  • Question about Cost in Oracle Explain Plan

    - by Will
    When Oracle is estimating the 'Cost' for certain queries, does it actually look at the amount of data (rows) in a table? For example: If I'm doing a full table scan of employees for name='Bob', does it estimate the cost by counting the amount of existing rows, or is it always a set cost?

    Read the article

  • Python. How to iterate through a list of lists looking for a partial match

    - by Becca Millard
    I'm completely stuck on this, without even an idea about how to wrap my head around the logic of this. In the first half of the code, I have successfully generation a list of (thousands of) lists of players names and efficiency scores: eg name_order_list = [["Bob", "Farley", 12.345], ["Jack", "Donalds", 14.567], ["Jack", "Donalds", 13.421], ["Jack", "Donalds", 15.232],["Mike", "Patricks", 10.543]] What I'm trying to do, is come up with a way to make a list of lists of the average efficiency of each player. So in that example, Jack Donalds appears multiple times, so I'd want to recognize his name somehow and average out the efficiency scores. Then sort that new list by efficiency, rather than name. So then the outcome would be like: average_eff_list = [[12.345, "Bob", "Farley"], [14.407, "Jack", "Donalds"], [10.543, "Mike", "Patricks"]] Here's what I tried (it's kind of a mess, but should be readable): total_list = [] odd_lines = [name_order_list[i] for i in range(len(name_order_list)) if i % 2 == 0] even_lines = [name_order_list[i] for i in range(len(name_order_list)) if i % 2 == 1] i = 0 j = i-1 while i <= 10650: iteration = 2 total_eff = 0 while odd_lines[i][0:2] == even_lines[i][0:2]: if odd_lines[i][0:2] == even_lines[j][0:2]: if odd_lines[j][0:2] != even_lines[j][0:2]: total_eff = even_lines[j][2]/(iteration-1) iteration -= 1 #account fr the single (rather than dual) additional entry else: total_eff = total_eff if iteration == 2: total_eff = (odd_lines[i][2] + even_lines[i][2]) / iteration else: total_eff = ((total_eff * (iteration - 2)) + (odd_lines[i][2] + even_lines[i][2])) / iteration iteration += 2 i += 1 j += 1 if i > 10650: break else: if odd_lines[i][0:2] == even_lines[j][0:2]: if odd_lines[j][0:2] != even_lines[j][0:2]: total_eff = (odd_lines[i][2] + even_lines[j][2]) / iteration else: total_eff = ((total_eff * (iteration -2)) + odd_lines[i][2]) / (iteration - 1) if total_eff == 0: #there's no match at all total_odd = [odd_lines[i][2], odd_lines[i][0], odd_lines[i][1]] total_list.append(total_odd) if even_lines[i][0:2] != odd_lines[i+1][0:2]: total_even = [even_lines[i][2], even_lines[i][0], even_lines[i][1]] else: total = [total_eff, odd_lines[i][0], odd_lines[i][1]] total_list.append(total) i += 1 if i > 10650: break else: print(total_list) Now, this runs well enough (doesn't get stuck or print someone's name multiple times) but the efficiency values are off by a large amount, so I know that scores are getting missed somewhere. This is a problem with my logic, I think, so any help would be greatly appreciated. As would any advice about how to loop through that massive list in a smarter way, since I'm sure there is one... EIDT: for this exercise, I need to keep it all in a list format. I can make new lists, but no using dictionaries, classes, etc.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >