Search Results

Search found 28760 results on 1151 pages for 'search folder'.

Page 50/1151 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

  • Fix folder scrolling problem in navigation pane of Explorer

    - by Marko Apfel
    Since my first steps with Win7 I hate the behavior of Explorer to scroll down the current expanded folder in the navigation pane. Today I found a solution in this thread: Bug: Windows Explorer expands folders inappropriately, jumping the folder you expand to the bottom of the navigation pane Download and install Classic Shell Activate the classic explorer bar and choose options Verify that “Fix folder scrolling” is checked Verify fixed behavior If necessary deinstall Classic Shell – the fix is persisted

    Read the article

  • Problem in shared folder

    - by alsadi90
    I followed the steps for sharing folders between windows 7 and Ubuntu in virtual box. but the folder appear with X sign and give me the following message when open it "the folder conent could not be displayed" and when choose "shared folder" from "Device" menu the following is written below "on the system page , you have asigned more than 50% of your computer's memory (2.93) to the virtual machine ...

    Read the article

  • Remove nesting "My Music" folder names in Windows 7.

    - by Brentley_11
    I was messing around with the Location tab in "properties" for "My Music" and ended up changing it a few times to directories on another drive. I quickly decided I didn't like the change and reverted it back. The My Music folder in my users directory is working fines but now my iTunes directory is labeled as "My Music" and the music directory within is called "My Music". Describing the issue simply: D:\iTunes\Music is labeled as Computer Local Disk(D:) My Music My Music Any suggestions on how to fix this would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Wordpress Search Results in Order

    - by Brad Houston
    One of my clients websites, www.kevinsplants.co.uk is not showing the search results in alphabetical order, how do I go about ordering the results in alphabetical order? We are using the Shopp plugin and I believe its that plugin that is generating the results! Cheers, Brad case "orderby-list": if (isset($Shopp->Category->controls)) return false; if (isset($Shopp->Category->smart)) return false; $menuoptions = Category::sortoptions(); $title = ""; $string = ""; $default = $Shopp->Settings->get('default_product_order'); if (empty($default)) $default = "title"; if (isset($options['default'])) $default = $options['default']; if (isset($options['title'])) $title = $options['title']; if (value_is_true($options['dropdown'])) { if (isset($Shopp->Cart->data->Category['orderby'])) $default = $Shopp->Cart->data->Category['orderby']; $string .= $title; $string .= '<form action="'.esc_url($_SERVER['REQUEST_URI']).'" method="get" id="shopp-'.$Shopp->Category->slug.'-orderby-menu">'; if (!SHOPP_PERMALINKS) { foreach ($_GET as $key => $value) if ($key != 'shopp_orderby') $string .= '<input type="hidden" name="'.$key.'" value="'.$value.'" />'; } $string .= '<select name="shopp_orderby" class="shopp-orderby-menu">'; $string .= menuoptions($menuoptions,$default,true); $string .= '</select>'; $string .= '</form>'; $string .= '<script type="text/javascript">'; $string .= "jQuery('#shopp-".$Shopp->Category->slug."-orderby-menu select.shopp-orderby-menu').change(function () { this.form.submit(); });"; $string .= '</script>'; } else { if (strpos($_SERVER['REQUEST_URI'],"?") !== false) list($link,$query) = explode("\?",$_SERVER['REQUEST_URI']); $query = $_GET; unset($query['shopp_orderby']); $query = http_build_query($query); if (!empty($query)) $query .= '&'; foreach($menuoptions as $value => $option) { $label = $option; $href = esc_url($link.'?'.$query.'shopp_orderby='.$value); $string .= '<li><a href="'.$href.'">'.$label.'</a></li>'; } } return $string; break;

    Read the article

  • MySQL search for user and their roles

    - by Jenkz
    I am re-writing the SQL which lets a user search for any other user on our site and also shows their roles. An an example, roles can be "Writer", "Editor", "Publisher". Each role links a User to a Publication. Users can take multiple roles within multiple publications. Example table setup: "users" : user_id, firstname, lastname "publications" : publication_id, name "link_writers" : user_id, publication_id "link_editors" : user_id, publication_id Current psuedo SQL: SELECT * FROM ( (SELECT user_id FROM users WHERE firstname LIKE '%Jenkz%') UNION (SELECT user_id FROM users WHERE lastname LIKE '%Jenkz%') ) AS dt JOIN (ROLES STATEMENT) AS roles ON roles.user_id = dt.user_id At the moment my roles statement is: SELECT dt2.user_id, dt2.publication_id, dt.role FROM ( (SELECT 'writer' AS role, link_writers.user_id, link_writers.publication_id FROM link_writers) UNION (SELECT 'editor' AS role, link_editors.user_id, link_editors.publication_id FROM link_editors) ) AS dt2 The reason for wrapping the roles statement in UNION clauses is that some roles are more complex and require a table join to find the publication_id and user_id. As an example "publishers" might be linked accross two tables "link_publishers": user_id, publisher_group_id "link_publisher_groups": publisher_group_id, publication_id So in that instance, the query forming part of my UNION would be: SELECT 'publisher' AS role, link_publishers.user_id, link_publisher_groups.publication_id FROM link_publishers JOIN link_publisher_groups ON lpg.group_id = lp.group_id I'm pretty confident that my table setup is good (I was warned off the one-table-for-all system when researching the layout). My problem is that there are now 100,000 rows in the users table and upto 70,000 rows in each of the link tables. Initial lookup in the users table is fast, but the joining really slows things down. How can I only join on the relevant roles? -------------------------- EDIT ---------------------------------- Explain above (open in a new window to see full resolution). The bottom bit in red, is the "WHERE firstname LIKE '%Jenkz%'" the third row searches WHERE CONCAT(firstname, ' ', lastname) LIKE '%Jenkz%'. Hence the large row count, but I think this is unavoidable, unless there is a way to put an index accross concatenated fields? The green bit at the top just shows the total rows scanned from the ROLES STATEMENT. You can then see each individual UNION clause (#6 - #12) which all show a large number of rows. Some of the indexes are normal, some are unique. It seems that MySQL isn't optimizing to use the dt.user_id as a comparison for the internal of the UNION statements. Is there any way to force this behaviour? Please note that my real setup is not publications and writers but "webmasters", "players", "teams" etc.

    Read the article

  • Finding good heuristic for A* search

    - by Martin
    I'm trying to find the optimal solution for a little puzzle game called Twiddle (an applet with the game can be found here). The game has a 3x3 matrix with the number from 1 to 9. The goal is to bring the numbers in the correct order using the minimum amount of moves. In each move you can rotate a 2x2 square either clockwise or counterclockwise. I.e. if you have this state 6 3 9 8 7 5 1 2 4 and you rotate the upper left 2x2 square clockwise you get 8 6 9 7 3 5 1 2 4 I'm using a A* search to find the optimal solution. My f() is simply the number of rotations need. My heuristic function already leads to the optimal solution but I don't think it's the best one you can find. My current heuristic takes each corner, looks at the number at the corner and calculates the manhatten distance to the position this number will have in the solved state (which gives me the number of rotation needed to bring the number to this postion) and sums all these values. I.e. You take the above example: 6 3 9 8 7 5 1 2 4 and this end state 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 then the heuristic does the following 6 is currently at index 0 and should by at index 5: 3 rotations needed 9 is currently at index 2 and should by at index 8: 2 rotations needed 1 is currently at index 6 and should by at index 0: 2 rotations needed 4 is currently at index 8 and should by at index 3: 3 rotations needed h = 3 + 2 + 2 + 3 = 10 But there is the problem, that you rotate 4 elements at once. So there a rare cases where you can do two (ore more) of theses estimated rotations in one move. This means theses heuristic overestimates the distance to the solution. My current workaround is, to simply excluded one of the corners from the calculation which solves this problem at least for my test-cases. I've done no research if really solves the problem or if this heuristic still overestimates in same edge-cases. So my question is: What is the best heuristic you can come up with? (Disclaimer: This is for a university project, so this is a bit of homework. But I'm free to use any resource if can come up with, so it's okay to ask you guys. Also I will credit Stackoverflow for helping me ;) )

    Read the article

  • New folder doesn't appear in Finder

    - by rxt
    Many times I have the following problem. I create a new folder, but it doesn't appear in the Finder. Right now I have this problem with a folder created in Eclipse. After a while it appears, but I cannot tell when. I can see the folder in the terminal. A similar problem happens when I rename a folder or file. Then I have to move out of the parent folder, open another folder, go back, and most of the time it's there. (Finally the new folder appeared after creating another folder in the finder itself.) I'm using 10.8 Mountain Lion now, but this is not a problem of this release. I have this problem for several years now. Maybe I'm the only one with this problem? Is there a way to get this working normally?

    Read the article

  • How do I use a list of filenames to find a folder on my hard drive, that contains most matches of these filenames?

    - by Web Master
    I need a program that will use a list of file names to find a folder on my hard drive that contains the most of these filenames. Long story short I made a giant map. This map was live and got ruined. New map data files have been generated, and previous map data files have been altered. What does this mean? This means file sizes have been changed, and there will be new files that have never been in the backup folder. Some files map files could also have been generated in other projects. So there could be filenames on my computer not associated with this due to the way the files are named when created. So If I take an indidual file for example "r.-1.-1.mca" This file could show up on my hard drive 10 times. Anyway, the goal is to take 100 map files, turn them into a list, and then search the hard drive and find the folder that has the highest count of matching map file names. Can anyone figure out a way to do this? I am thinking about manually searching for every single file.

    Read the article

  • Partial string search in boost::multi_index_container

    - by user361699
    I have a struct to store info about persons and multi_index_contaider to store such objects struct person { std::string m_first_name; std::string m_last_name; std::string m_third_name; std::string m_address; std::string m_phone; person(); person(std::string f, std::string l, std::string t = "", std::string a = DEFAULT_ADDRESS, std::string p = DEFAULT_PHONE) : m_first_name(f), m_last_name(l), m_third_name(t), m_address(a), m_phone(p) {} }; typedef multi_index_container , ordered_non_unique, member, member persons_set; operator< and operator<< implementation for person bool operator<(const person &lhs, const person &rhs) { if(lhs.m_last_name == rhs.m_last_name) { if(lhs.m_first_name == rhs.m_first_name) return (lhs.m_third_name < rhs.m_third_name); return (lhs.m_first_name < rhs.m_first_name); } return (lhs.m_last_name < rhs.m_last_name); } std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream &s, const person &rhs) { s << "Person's last name: " << rhs.m_last_name << std::endl; s << "Person's name: " << rhs.m_first_name << std::endl; if (!rhs.m_third_name.empty()) s << "Person's third name: " << rhs.m_third_name << std::endl; s << "Phone: " << rhs.m_phone << std::endl; s << "Address: " << rhs.m_address << std::endl; return s; } Add several persons into container: person ("Alex", "Johnson", "Somename"); person ("Alex", "Goodspeed"); person ("Petr", "Parker"); person ("Petr", "Goodspeed"); Now I want to find person by lastname (the first member of the second index in multi_index_container) persons_set::nth_index<1::type &names_index = my_set.get<1(); std::pair::type::const_iterator, persons_set::nth_index<1::type::const_iterator n_it = names_index.equal_range("Goodspeed"); std::copy(n_it.first ,n_it.second, std::ostream_iterator(std::cout)); It works great. Both 'Goodspeed' persons are found. Now lets try to find person by a part of a last name: std::pair::type::const_iterator, persons_set::nth_index<1::type::const_iterator n_it = names_index.equal_range("Good"); std::copy(n_it.first ,n_it.second, std::ostream_iterator(std::cout)); This returns nothing, but partial string search works as a charm in std::set. So I can't realize what's the problem. I only wraped strings by a struct. May be operator< implementation? Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • How to order results based on number of search term matches?

    - by Travis
    I am using the following tables in mysql to describe records that can have multiple searchtags associated with them: TABLE records ID title desc TABLE searchTags ID name TABLE recordSearchTags recordID searchTagID To SELECT records based on arbitrary search input, I have a statement that looks sort of like this: SELECT recordID FROM recordSearchTags LEFT JOIN searchTags ON recordSearchTags.searchTagID = searchTags.ID WHERE searchTags.name LIKE CONCAT('%','$search1','%') OR searchTags.name LIKE CONCAT('%','$search2','%') OR searchTags.name LIKE CONCAT('%','$search3','%') OR searchTags.name LIKE CONCAT('%','$search4','%'); I'd like to ORDER this resultset, so that rows that match with more search terms are displayed in front of rows that match with fewer search terms. For example, if a row matches all 4 search terms, it will be top of the list. A row that matches only 2 search terms will be somewhere in the middle. And a row that matches just one search term will be at the end. Any suggestions on what is the best way to do this? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Search function fails because it refers to the wrong controller action?

    - by Christoffer
    My Sunspot search function (sunspot_rails gem) works just fine in my index view, but when I duplicate it to my show view my search breaks... views/supplierproducts/show.html.erb <%= form_tag supplierproducts_path, :method => :get, :id => "supplierproducts_search" do %> <p> <%= text_field_tag :search, params[:search], placeholder: "Search by SKU, product name & EAN number..." %> </p> <div id="supplierproducts"><%= render 'supplierproducts' %></div> <% end %> assets/javascripts/application.js $(function () { $('#supplierproducts th a').live('click', function () { $.getScript(this.href); return false; } ); $('#supplierproducts_search input').keyup(function () { $.get($("#supplierproducts_search").attr("action"), $("#supplierproducts_search").serialize(), null, 'script'); return false; }); }); views/supplierproducts/show.js.erb $('#supplierproducts').html('<%= escape_javascript(render("supplierproducts")) %>'); views/supplierproducts/_supplierproducts.hmtl.erb <%= hidden_field_tag :direction, params[:direction] %> <%= hidden_field_tag :sort, params[:sort] %> <table class="table table-bordered"> <thead> <tr> <th><%= sortable "sku", "SKU" %></th> <th><%= sortable "name", "Product name" %></th> <th><%= sortable "stock", "Stock" %></th> <th><%= sortable "price", "Price" %></th> <th><%= sortable "ean", "EAN number" %></th> </tr> </thead> <% for supplierproduct in @supplier.supplierproducts %> <tbody> <tr> <td><%= supplierproduct.sku %></td> <td><%= supplierproduct.name %></td> <td><%= supplierproduct.stock %></td> <td><%= supplierproduct.price %></td> <td><%= supplierproduct.ean %></td> </tr> </tbody> <% end %> </table> controllers/supplierproducts_controller.rb class SupplierproductsController < ApplicationController helper_method :sort_column, :sort_direction def show @supplier = Supplier.find(params[:id]) @search = @supplier.supplierproducts.search do fulltext params[:search] end @supplierproducts = @search.results end end private def sort_column Supplierproduct.column_names.include?(params[:sort]) ? params[:sort] : "name" end def sort_direction %w[asc desc].include?(params[:direction]) ? params[:direction] : "asc" end models/supplierproduct.rb class Supplierproduct < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessible :ean, :name, :price, :sku, :stock, :supplier_id belongs_to :supplier validates :supplier_id, presence: true searchable do text :ean, :name, :sku end end Visiting show.html.erb works just fine. Log shows: Started GET "/supplierproducts/2" for 127.0.0.1 at 2012-06-24 13:44:52 +0200 Processing by SupplierproductsController#show as HTML Parameters: {"id"=>"2"} Supplier Load (0.1ms) SELECT "suppliers".* FROM "suppliers" WHERE "suppliers"."id" = ? LIMIT 1 [["id", "2"]] SOLR Request (252.9ms) [ path=#<RSolr::Client:0x007fa5880b8e68> parameters={data: fq=type%3ASupplierproduct&start=0&rows=30&q=%2A%3A%2A, method: post, params: {:wt=>:ruby}, query: wt=ruby, headers: {"Content-Type"=>"application/x-www-form-urlencoded; charset=UTF-8"}, path: select, uri: http://localhost:8982/solr/select?wt=ruby, open_timeout: , read_timeout: } ] Supplierproduct Load (0.2ms) SELECT "supplierproducts".* FROM "supplierproducts" WHERE "supplierproducts"."id" IN (1) Supplierproduct Load (0.1ms) SELECT "supplierproducts".* FROM "supplierproducts" WHERE "supplierproducts"."supplier_id" = 2 Rendered supplierproducts/_supplierproducts.html.erb (2.2ms) Rendered supplierproducts/show.html.erb within layouts/application (3.3ms) Rendered layouts/_shim.html.erb (0.0ms) User Load (0.1ms) SELECT "users".* FROM "users" WHERE "users"."remember_token" = 'zMrtTbDun2MjMHRApSthCQ' LIMIT 1 Rendered layouts/_header.html.erb (2.1ms) Rendered layouts/_footer.html.erb (0.2ms) Completed 200 OK in 278ms (Views: 20.6ms | ActiveRecord: 0.6ms | Solr: 252.9ms) But it breaks when I type in a search. Log shows: Started GET "/supplierproducts?utf8=%E2%9C%93&search=a&direction=&sort=&_=1340538830635" for 127.0.0.1 at 2012-06-24 13:53:50 +0200 Processing by SupplierproductsController#index as JS Parameters: {"utf8"=>"?", "search"=>"a", "direction"=>"", "sort"=>"", "_"=>"1340538830635"} Rendered supplierproducts/_supplierproducts.html.erb (2.4ms) Rendered supplierproducts/index.js.erb (2.9ms) Completed 500 Internal Server Error in 6ms ActionView::Template::Error (undefined method `supplierproducts' for nil:NilClass): 10: <th><%= sortable "ean", "EAN number" %></th> 11: </tr> 12: </thead> 13: <% for supplierproduct in @supplier.supplierproducts %> 14: <tbody> 15: <tr> 16: <td><%= supplierproduct.sku %></td> app/views/supplierproducts/_supplierproducts.html.erb:13:in `_app_views_supplierproducts__supplierproducts_html_erb___2251600857885474606_70174444831200' app/views/supplierproducts/index.js.erb:1:in `_app_views_supplierproducts_index_js_erb___1613906916161905600_70174464073480' Rendered /Users/Computer/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p194@myapp/gems/actionpack-3.2.3/lib/action_dispatch/middleware/templates/rescues/_trace.erb (33.3ms) Rendered /Users/Computer/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p194@myapp/gems/actionpack-3.2.3/lib/action_dispatch/middleware/templates/rescues/_request_and_response.erb (0.9ms) Rendered /Users/Computer/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.3-p194@myapp/gems/actionpack-3.2.3/lib/action_dispatch/middleware/templates/rescues/template_error.erb within rescues/layout (39.7ms)

    Read the article

  • Dominating Search Results With Local SEO

    Local Businesses are turning to local SEO services to obtain high placement with the major search engines. With tens of millions of websites currently online, dominant placement with the search engines is vital for online success. To obtain high placement within search engine results, you will need to deploy proven search engine optimization methods.

    Read the article

  • Beginners Guide To Search Engine Optimisation

    Search Engine Optimisation, (aka ?SEO?, ?organic? or ?natural? search) involves a variety of techniques which are used to improve your natural search engine rankings (i.e. the listings on search engi... [Author: Jim Webster - Web Design and Development - March 29, 2010]

    Read the article

  • Search Engine Optimization (SEO) Tips - Code Optimization

    Code optimization is a very important in making your website Search Engine Friendly. A webpage is called Search Engine Friendly when it is coded in such a way that search engines can read and understand it to the maximum. For making your Webpage Search Engine Friendly you have to keep the following factors in mind and code accordingly.

    Read the article

  • Search Engine Optimization And Other Web Services

    The SEO (Search Engine Optimization) involves an On-Page Optimization through which the different actions being done on the site so as to make the data and content presentable and relevant with a tidy and appealing display for the readers who frequently visit it to gain info on their part of interest and also for the Search Engines wanderers who want to register them. The search engine marketing Company, SEO Services renders a good quality Search Engine Optimization, also Social media optimization and many different types of marketing Solutions for the web business.

    Read the article

  • The Know How Series - Understanding Search Engine Crawlers

    While most internet users use a lot of search engines, hardly a handful really know how a search engine works. If you are an online marketer or your business relies heavily on the internet it becomes a prerogative that you understand search engines and web crawlers. Search engines provide data at the flick of a button or at a single click.

    Read the article

  • Google and Semantic Search Engine Optimization (SEO)

    Semantic Search Engine Optimization is a new frontier for SEO experts who want to stay ahead of the Google curve in securing additional search engine rankings for their target search terms. 'Semantic SEO' is currently quite misunderstood in the SEO community. Once understood, the proper application of a Semantic SEO strategy for your web site (and for your clients) can pay big dividends in improving your on-page copy, page headings, anchor text and internal linking, and deliver increased site traffic for search engine queries containing alternate word meanings.

    Read the article

  • Knowing the Search Engine Process to Improve SEO

    In order to begin your Search Engine Optimization you must first know how search engines work, whether or not you hire an SEO Consultant. It's important to know what you are trying to attract, as well as how search engines find their pages and determine their rating. There are several steps that are part of a search engines process until they get the results pop up on a searchers screen.

    Read the article

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