Search Results

Search found 7706 results on 309 pages for 'inner join'.

Page 6/309 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • MySQL LEFT OUTER JOIN virtual table

    - by user1707323
    I am working on a pretty complicated query let me try to explain it to you. Here is the tables that I have in my MySQL database: students Table --- `students` --- student_id first_name last_name current_status status_change_date ------------ ------------ ----------- ---------------- -------------------- 1 John Doe Active NULL 2 Jane Doe Retread 2012-02-01 students_have_courses Table --- `students_have_courses` --- students_student_id courses_course_id s_date e_date int_date --------------------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------- 1 1 2012-01-01 2012-01-04 2012-01-05 1 2 2012-01-05 NULL NULL 2 1 2012-01-10 2012-01-11 NULL students_have_optional_courses Table --- `students_have_optional_courses` --- students_student_id optional_courses_opcourse_id s_date e_date --------------------- ------------------------------ ---------- ---------- 1 1 2012-01-02 2012-01-03 1 1 2012-01-06 NULL 1 5 2012-01-07 NULL Here is my query so far SELECT `students_and_courses`.student_id, `students_and_courses`.first_name, `students_and_courses`.last_name, `students_and_courses`.courses_course_id, `students_and_courses`.s_date, `students_and_courses`.e_date, `students_and_courses`.int_date, `students_have_optional_courses`.optional_courses_opcourse_id, `students_have_optional_courses`.s_date, `students_have_optional_courses`.e_date FROM ( SELECT `c_s_a_s`.student_id, `c_s_a_s`.first_name, `c_s_a_s`.last_name, `c_s_a_s`.courses_course_id, `c_s_a_s`.s_date, `c_s_a_s`.e_date, `c_s_a_s`.int_date FROM ( SELECT `students`.student_id, `students`.first_name, `students`.last_name, `students_have_courses`.courses_course_id, `students_have_courses`.s_date, `students_have_courses`.e_date, `students_have_courses`.int_date FROM `students` LEFT OUTER JOIN `students_have_courses` ON ( `students_have_courses`.`students_student_id` = `students`.`student_id` AND (( `students_have_courses`.`s_date` >= `students`.`status_change_date` AND `students`.current_status = 'Retread' ) OR `students`.current_status = 'Active') ) WHERE `students`.current_status = 'Active' OR `students`.current_status = 'Retread' ) `c_s_a_s` ORDER BY `c_s_a_s`.`courses_course_id` DESC ) `students_and_courses` LEFT OUTER JOIN `students_have_optional_courses` ON ( `students_have_optional_courses`.students_student_id = `students_and_courses`.student_id AND `students_have_optional_courses`.s_date >= `students_and_courses`.s_date AND `students_have_optional_courses`.e_date IS NULL ) GROUP BY `students_and_courses`.student_id; What I want to be returned is the student_id, first_name, and last_name for all Active or Retread students and then LEFT JOIN the highest course_id, s_date, e_date, and int_date for the those students where the s_date is since the status_change_date if status is 'Retread'. Then LEFT JOIN the highest optional_courses_opcourse_id, s_date, and e_date from the students_have_optional_courses TABLE where the students_have_optional_courses.s_date is greater or equal to the students_have_courses.s_date and the students_have_optional_courses.e_date IS NULL Here is what is being returned: student_id first_name last_name courses_course_id s_date e_date int_date optional_courses_opcourse_id s_date_1 e_date_1 ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- ------------ ------------------------------ ---------- ---------- 1 John Doe 2 2012-01-05 NULL NULL 1 2012-01-06 NULL 2 Jane Doe NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL Here is what I want being returned: student_id first_name last_name courses_course_id s_date e_date int_date optional_courses_opcourse_id s_date_1 e_date_1 ------------ ------------ ----------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- ------------ ------------------------------ ---------- ---------- 1 John Doe 2 2012-01-05 NULL NULL 5 2012-01-07 NULL 2 Jane Doe NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL Everything is working except one thing, I cannot seem to get the highest students_have_optional_courses.optional_courses_opcourse_id no matter how I form the query Sorry, I just solved this myself after writing this all out I think it helped me think of the solution. Here is the solution query: SELECT `students_and_courses`.student_id, `students_and_courses`.first_name, `students_and_courses`.last_name, `students_and_courses`.courses_course_id, `students_and_courses`.s_date, `students_and_courses`.e_date, `students_and_courses`.int_date, `students_optional_courses`.optional_courses_opcourse_id, `students_optional_courses`.s_date, `students_optional_courses`.e_date FROM ( SELECT `c_s_a_s`.student_id, `c_s_a_s`.first_name, `c_s_a_s`.last_name, `c_s_a_s`.courses_course_id, `c_s_a_s`.s_date, `c_s_a_s`.e_date, `c_s_a_s`.int_date FROM ( SELECT `students`.student_id, `students`.first_name, `students`.last_name, `students_have_courses`.courses_course_id, `students_have_courses`.s_date, `students_have_courses`.e_date, `students_have_courses`.int_date FROM `students` LEFT OUTER JOIN `students_have_courses` ON ( `students_have_courses`.`students_student_id` = `students`.`student_id` AND (( `students_have_courses`.`s_date` >= `students`.`status_change_date` AND `students`.current_status = 'Retread' ) OR `students`.current_status = 'Active') ) WHERE `students`.current_status = 'Active' OR `students`.current_status = 'Retread' ) `c_s_a_s` ORDER BY `c_s_a_s`.`courses_course_id` DESC ) `students_and_courses` LEFT OUTER JOIN ( SELECT * FROM `students_have_optional_courses` ORDER BY `students_have_optional_courses`.optional_courses_opcourse_id DESC ) `students_optional_courses` ON ( `students_optional_courses`.students_student_id = `students_and_courses`.student_id AND `students_optional_courses`.s_date >= `students_and_courses`.s_date AND `students_optional_courses`.e_date IS NULL ) GROUP BY `students_and_courses`.student_id;

    Read the article

  • LINQ-to-SQL - Join, Count

    - by ile
    I have following query: var result = ( from role in db.Roles join user in db.Users on role.RoleID equals user.RoleID where user.CreatedByUserID == userID orderby user.FirstName ascending select new UserViewModel { UserID = user.UserID, PhotoID = user.PhotoID.ToString(), FirstName = user.FirstName, LastName = user.LastName, FullName = user.FirstName + " " + user.LastName, Email = user.Email, PhoneNumber = user.Phone, AccessLevel = role.Name }); Now, I need to modify this query... Other table I have is table Deals. I would like to count how many deals user created last month and last year. I tried something like this: var result = ( from role in db.Roles join user in db.Users on role.RoleID equals user.RoleID //join dealsYear in db.Deals on date.Year equals dealsYear.DateCreated.Year join dealsYear in ( from deal in db.Deals group deal by deal.DateCreated into d select new { DateCreated = d.Key, dealsCount = d.Count() } ) on date.Year equals dealsYear.DateCreated.Year into dYear join dealsMonth in ( from deal in db.Deals group deal by deal.DateCreated into d select new { DateCreated = d.Key, dealsCount = d.Count() } ) on date.Month equals dealsMonth.DateCreated.Month into dMonth where user.CreatedByUserID == userID orderby user.FirstName ascending select new UserViewModel { UserID = user.UserID, PhotoID = user.PhotoID.ToString(), FirstName = user.FirstName, LastName = user.LastName, FullName = user.FirstName + " " + user.LastName, Email = user.Email, PhoneNumber = user.Phone, AccessLevel = role.Name, DealsThisYear = dYear, DealsThisMonth = dMonth }); but here is even syntax not correct. Any idea? Btw, is there any good book of LINQ to SQL with examples?

    Read the article

  • error with linq join

    - by Luca Romagnoli
    I have this linq query: var segreterie = from s in db.USR_Utenti join h in db.USR_Accounts on new {s.ID, settings.GruppoSegreteria} equals new {h.USR_UtentiReference,h.ID_Gruppo} select s; that has this problem: The type of one of the expressions in the join clause is incorrect. Type inference failed in the call to 'Join'. how can i do to solve it?

    Read the article

  • Why is my left join not returning nulls?

    - by Griz
    In sql server 2008, I have the following query: select c.title as categorytitle, s.title as subcategorytitle, i.title as itemtitle from categories c join subcategories s on c.categoryid = s.categoryid left join itemcategories ic on s.subcategoryid = ic.subcategoryid left join items i on ic.itemid = i.itemid where (ic.isactive = 1 or ic.isactive is null) and i.siteid = 132 order by c.title, s.title I am trying to get items in their subcategories, but I still want to return a record if there are no items in the category or subcategory. Subcategories that have no items are never returned. What am I doing wrong? Thank you EDIT Modified query with a second left join and where clause, but it's still not returning nulls. :/

    Read the article

  • join query with lowstock products with another table in magento

    - by muralikalpana
    I want to display some attributes in reports/products/lowstock grid. here how can i join another table with lowstock product id? here is the query /** @var $collection Mage_Reports_Model_Resource_Product_Lowstock_Collection */ $collection = Mage::getResourceModel('reports/product_lowstock_collection') ->addAttributeToSelect('*') ->setStoreId($storeId) ->filterByIsQtyProductTypes() ->joinInventoryItem('qty') ->joinInventoryItem('low_stock_date') ->useManageStockFilter($storeId) ->useNotifyStockQtyFilter($storeId) ->setOrder('qty', Varien_Data_Collection::SORT_ORDER_ASC); here i have to join with this productid with another table. i am not getting results if i use this query. $collection->getSelect()->join(array('t2' => 'lowstockorders'),'lowstock_inventory_item.product_id = t2.product_id','t2.product_id'); please anybody tell me how to join these tables thanks, murali

    Read the article

  • multiple join query in entity framework

    - by gvLearner
    I have following tables tasks id | name | proj_id 1 | task1 | 1 2 | task2 | 1 3 | task3 | 1 projects id | name 1 | sample proj1 2 | demo project budget_versions id | version_name| proj_id 1 | 50 | 1 budgets id | cost | budget_version_id | task_id 1 | 3000 | 1 | 2 2 | 5000 | 1 | 1 I need to join these tables to get a result as below task_id | task_name | project_id | budget_version | budget_id | cost 1 | task1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |5000 2 | task2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |3000 3 | task3 | 1 | NULL | NULL |NULL select tsk.id,tsk.name, tsk.project_id, bgtver.id, bgt.id, bgt.cost from TASK tsk left outer join BUDGET_VERSIONS bgtver on tsk.project_id= bgtver.project_id left outer join BUDGETS bgt on bgtver.id = bgt.budget_version_id and tsk.id = bgt.task_id where bgtver.id = 1

    Read the article

  • Linq join with an inner collection

    - by bronze
    Hi, I am trying a LINQ to Object query on 2 collections Customer.Orders Branches.Pending.Orders (Collection within a collection) I want to output each branch which is yet to deliver any order of the customer. var match = from order in customer.Orders join branch in Branches on order equals branch.Pending.Orders select branch; This does not work, I get : The type of one of the expressions in the join clause is incorrect. Type inference failed in the call to 'GroupJoin'. From my search, I think this is because Order or collection of Orders does not implement equals. If this query worked, it will still be wrong, as it will return a branch if the customer's and pending orders match exactly. I want a result if any of the order matches. I am learning Linq, and looking for a approach to address such issues, rather than the solution itself. I would have done this in SQL like this; SELECT b.branch_name from Customers c, Branches b, Orders o WHERE c.customer_id = o.customer_id AND o.branch_id = b.branch_id AND c.customer_id = 'my customer' AND o.order_status = 'pending'

    Read the article

  • Linq To Sql Left outer join - filtering null results

    - by Harry
    I'd like to reproduce the following SQL into C# LinqToSql SELECT TOP(10) Keywords.* FROM Keywords LEFT OUTER JOIN IgnoreWords ON Keywords.WordID = IgnoreWords.ID WHERE (DomainID = 16673) AND (IgnoreWords.Name IS NULL) ORDER BY [Score] DESC The following C# Linq gives the right answer. But I can't help think I'm missing something (a better way of doing it?) var query = (from keyword in context.Keywords join ignore in context.IgnoreWords on keyword.WordID equals ignore.ID into ignored from i in ignored.DefaultIfEmpty() where i == null where keyword.DomainID == ID orderby keyword.Score descending select keyword).Take(10); the SQL produced looks something like this: SELECT TOP (10) [t0].[DomainID], [t0].[WordID], [t0].[Score], [t0].[Count] FROM [dbo].[Keywords] AS [t0] LEFT OUTER JOIN (SELECT 1 AS [test], [t1].[ID] FROM [dbo].[IgnoreWords] AS [t1]) AS [t2] ON [t0].[WordID] = [t2].[ID] WHERE ([t0].[DomainID] = 16673) AND ([t2].[test] IS NULL) ORDER BY [t0].[Score] DESC How can I get rid of this redundant inner selection? It's only slightly more expensive but every bit helps!

    Read the article

  • Join mp4 files in linux

    - by Jose Armando
    I want to join two mp4 files to create a single one. The video streams are encoded in h264 and the audio in aac. I can not re-encode the videos to another format due to computational reasons. Also, I cannot use any gui programs, all processing must be performed with linux command line utilities. FFmpeg cannot do this for mpeg4 files so instead I used MP4Box e.g. MP4Box -add video1.mp4 -cat video2.mp4 newvideo.mp4 unfortunately the audio gets all mixed up. I thought that the problem was that the audio was in aac so I transcoded it in mp3 and used again MP4Box. In this case the audio is fine for the first half of newvideo.mp4 (corresponding to video1.mp4) but then their is no audio and I cannot navigate in the video also. My next thought was that the audio and video streams had some small discrepancies in their lengths that I should fix. So for each input video I splitted the video and audio streams and then joined them with the -shortest option in ffmpeg. thus for the first video I ran avconv -y -i video1.mp4 -c copy -map 0:0 videostream1.mp4 avconv -y -i video1.mp4 -c copy -map 0:1 audiostream1.m4a avconv -y -i videostream1.mp4 -i audiostream1.m4a -c copy -shortest video1_aligned.mp4 similarly for the second video and then used MP4Box as previously. Unfortunately this didn't work either. The only success I had was when I joined the video streams separetely (i.e. videostream1.mp4 and videostream2.mp4) and the audio streams (i.e. audiostream1.m4a and audiostream2.m4a) and then joined the video and audio in a final file. However, the synchronization is lost for the second half of the video. Concretelly, there is a 1 sec delay of audio and video. Any suggestions are really welcome.

    Read the article

  • SQL: Speed Improvement - Cluttered union query

    - by vol7ron
    SELECT * FROM ( SELECT a.user_id, a.f_name, a.l_name, b.user_id, b.f_name, b.l_name FROM current_tbl a INNER JOIN import_tbl b ON ( a.user_id = b.user_id ) UNION SELECT a.user_id, a.f_name, a.l_name, b.user_id, b.f_name, b.l_name FROM current_tbl a INNER JOIN import_tbl b ON ( lower(a.f_name)=lower(b.f_name) AND lower(a.l_name)=lower(b.l_name) ) ) foo -- UNION -- SELECT a.user_id , a.f_name , a.l_name , '' , '' , '' FROM current_tbl a WHERE a.user_id NOT IN ( select user_id from( SELECT a.user_id, a.f_name, a.l_name, b.user_id, b.f_name, b.l_name FROM current_tbl a INNER JOIN import_tbl b ON ( a.user_id = b.user_id ) UNION SELECT a.user_id, a.f_name, a.l_name, b.user_id, b.f_name, b.l_name FROM current_tbl a INNER JOIN import_tbl b ON ( lower(a.f_name)=lower(b.f_name) AND lower(a.l_name)=lower(b.l_name) ) ) bar ) ORDER BY user_id Example of table population: current_tbl: ------------------------------- user_id | f_name | l_name ---------+----------+---------- A1 | Adam | Acorn A2 | Beth | Berry A3 | Calv | Chard | | import_tbl: ------------------------------- user_id | f_name | l_name ---------+----------+---------- A1 | Adam | Acorn A2 | Beth | Butcher <- last_name different | | Expected Output: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- user_id1 | f_name1 | l_name1 | user_id2 | f_name2 | l_name2 ----------+-----------+-----------+------------+-----------+----------- A1 | Adam | Acorn | A1 | Adam | Acorn A2 | Beth | Berry | A2 | Beth | Butcher A3 | Calv | Chard | | | Doing this method gets rid of conditions where the row would be: A2 | Beth | Berry | A2 | Beth | Butcher But it keeps the A3 row I hope this makes sense and I haven't overly simplified it. This is a continuation question from my other question. The succession of these improvements has dropped the query down from ~32000ms to where it's at now ~1200ms - quite an improvement. I supect I can optimize by using UNION ALL in the subquery and of course the usual index optimizations, but I'm looking for the best SQL optimization. FYI this particular case is for PostgreSQL.

    Read the article

  • Adding one subquery makes query a little slower, adding another makes it way slower

    - by Jason Swett
    This is fast: select ba.name, penamt.value penamt, #address_line4.value address_line4 from account a join customer c on a.customer_id = c.id join branch br on a.branch_id = br.id join bank ba on br.bank_id = ba.id join account_address aa on aa.account_id = a.id join address ad on aa.address_id = ad.id join state s on ad.state_id = s.id join import i on a.import_id = i.id join import_bundle ib on i.import_bundle_id = ib.id join (select * from unused where heading_label = 'PENAMT') penamt ON penamt.account_id = a.id #join (select * from unused where heading_label = 'Address Line 4') address_line4 ON address_line4.account_id = a.id where i.active=1 And this is fast: select ba.name, #penamt.value penamt, address_line4.value address_line4 from account a join customer c on a.customer_id = c.id join branch br on a.branch_id = br.id join bank ba on br.bank_id = ba.id join account_address aa on aa.account_id = a.id join address ad on aa.address_id = ad.id join state s on ad.state_id = s.id join import i on a.import_id = i.id join import_bundle ib on i.import_bundle_id = ib.id #join (select * from unused where heading_label = 'PENAMT') penamt ON penamt.account_id = a.id join (select * from unused where heading_label = 'Address Line 4') address_line4 ON address_line4.account_id = a.id where i.active=1 But this is slow: select ba.name, penamt.value penamt, address_line4.value address_line4 from account a join customer c on a.customer_id = c.id join branch br on a.branch_id = br.id join bank ba on br.bank_id = ba.id join account_address aa on aa.account_id = a.id join address ad on aa.address_id = ad.id join state s on ad.state_id = s.id join import i on a.import_id = i.id join import_bundle ib on i.import_bundle_id = ib.id join (select * from unused where heading_label = 'PENAMT') penamt ON penamt.account_id = a.id join (select * from unused where heading_label = 'Address Line 4') address_line4 ON address_line4.account_id = a.id where i.active=1 Why is it fast when I include just one of the two subqueries but slow when I include both? I would think it should be twice as slow when I include both, but it takes a really long time. On on MySQL.

    Read the article

  • Difference in output from use of synchronized keyword and join()

    - by user2964080
    I have 2 classes, public class Account { private int balance = 50; public int getBalance() { return balance; } public void withdraw(int amt){ this.balance -= amt; } } and public class DangerousAccount implements Runnable{ private Account acct = new Account(); public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException{ DangerousAccount target = new DangerousAccount(); Thread t1 = new Thread(target); Thread t2 = new Thread(target); t1.setName("Ravi"); t2.setName("Prakash"); t1.start(); /* #1 t1.join(); */ t2.start(); } public void run(){ for(int i=0; i<5; i++){ makeWithdrawl(10); if(acct.getBalance() < 0) System.out.println("Account Overdrawn"); } } public void makeWithdrawl(int amt){ if(acct.getBalance() >= amt){ System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " is going to withdraw"); try{ Thread.sleep(500); }catch(InterruptedException e){ e.printStackTrace(); } acct.withdraw(amt); System.out.println(Thread.currentThread().getName() + " has finished the withdrawl"); }else{ System.out.println("Not Enough Money For " + Thread.currentThread().getName() + " to withdraw"); } } } I tried adding synchronized keyword in makeWithdrawl method public synchronized void makeWithdrawl(int amt){ and I keep getting this output as many times I try Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Ravi is going to withdraw Ravi has finished the withdrawl Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw This shows that only Thread t1 is working... If I un-comment the the line saying t1.join(); I get the same output. So how does synchronized differ from join() ? If I don't use synchronize keyword or join() I get various outputs like Ravi is going to withdraw Prakash is going to withdraw Prakash has finished the withdrawl Ravi has finished the withdrawl Prakash is going to withdraw Ravi is going to withdraw Prakash has finished the withdrawl Ravi has finished the withdrawl Prakash is going to withdraw Ravi is going to withdraw Prakash has finished the withdrawl Ravi has finished the withdrawl Account Overdrawn Account Overdrawn Not Enough Money For Ravi to withdraw Account Overdrawn Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Account Overdrawn Not Enough Money For Ravi to withdraw Account Overdrawn Not Enough Money For Prakash to withdraw Account Overdrawn So how does the output from synchronized differ from join() ?

    Read the article

  • Linq, Left Join and Dates...

    - by BitFiddler
    So my situation is that I have a linq-to-sql model that does not allow dates to be null in one of my tables. This is intended, because the database does not allow nulls in that field. My problem, is that when I try to write a Linq query with this model, I cannot do a left join with that table anymore because the date is not a 'nullable' field and so I can't compare it to "Nothing". Example: There is a Movie table, {ID,MovieTitle}, and a Showings table, {ID,MovieID,ShowingTime,Location} Now I am trying to write a statement that will return all those movies that have no showings. In T.SQL this would look like: Select m.* From Movies m Left Join Showings s On m.ID = s.MovieID Where s.ShowingTime is Null Now in this situation I could test for Null on the 'Location' field but this is not what I have in reality (just a simplified example). All I have are non-null dates. I am trying to write in Linq: From m In dbContext.Movies _ Group Join s In Showings on m.ID Equals s.MovieID into MovieShowings = Group _ From ms In MovieShowings.DefaultIfEmpty _ Where ms.ShowingTime is Nothing _ Select ms However I am getting an error saying 'Is' operator does not accept operands of type 'Date'. Operands must be reference or nullable types. Is there any way around this? The model is correct, there should never be a null in the Showings:ShowTime table. But if you do a left join, and there are no show times for a particular movie, then ShowTime SHOULD be Nothing for that movie... Thanks everyone for your help.

    Read the article

  • Cross join (pivot) with n-n table containing values

    - by Styx31
    I have 3 tables : TABLE MyColumn ( ColumnId INT NOT NULL, Label VARCHAR(80) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (ColumnId) ) TABLE MyPeriod ( PeriodId CHAR(6) NOT NULL, -- format yyyyMM Label VARCHAR(80) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (PeriodId) ) TABLE MyValue ( ColumnId INT NOT NULL, PeriodId CHAR(6) NOT NULL, Amount DECIMAL(8, 4) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (ColumnId, PeriodId), FOREIGN KEY (ColumnId) REFERENCES MyColumn(ColumnId), FOREIGN KEY (PeriodId) REFERENCES MyPeriod(PeriodId) ) MyValue's rows are only created when a real value is provided. I want my results in a tabular way, as : Column | Month 1 | Month 2 | Month 4 | Month 5 | Potatoes | 25.00 | 5.00 | 1.60 | NULL | Apples | 2.00 | 1.50 | NULL | NULL | I have successfully created a cross-join : SELECT MyColumn.Label AS [Column], MyPeriod.Label AS [Period], ISNULL(MyValue.Amount, 0) AS [Value] FROM MyColumn CROSS JOIN MyPeriod LEFT OUTER JOIN MyValue ON (MyValue.ColumnId = MyColumn.ColumnId AND MyValue.PeriodId = MyPeriod.PeriodId) Or, in linq : from p in MyPeriods from c in MyColumns join v in MyValues on new { c.ColumnId, p.PeriodId } equals new { v.ColumnId, v.PeriodId } into values from nv in values.DefaultIfEmpty() select new { Column = c.Label, Period = p.Label, Value = nv.Amount } And seen how to create a pivot in linq (here or here) : (assuming MyDatas is a view with the result of the previous query) : from c in MyDatas group c by c.Column into line select new { Column = line.Key, Month1 = line.Where(l => l.Period == "Month 1").Sum(l => l.Value), Month2 = line.Where(l => l.Period == "Month 2").Sum(l => l.Value), Month3 = line.Where(l => l.Period == "Month 3").Sum(l => l.Value), Month4 = line.Where(l => l.Period == "Month 4").Sum(l => l.Value) } But I want to find a way to create a resultset with, if possible, Month1, ... properties dynamic. Note : A solution which results in a n+1 query : from c in MyDatas group c by c.Column into line select new { Column = line.Key, Months = from l in line group l by l.Period into period select new { Period = period.Key, Amount = period.Sum(l => l.Value) } }

    Read the article

  • HasMany relation inside a Join Mapping

    - by Sean McMillan
    So, I'm having a problem mapping in fluent nhibernate. I want to use a join mapping to flatten an intermediate table: Here's my structure: [Vehicle] VehicleId ... [DTVehicleValueRange] VehicleId DTVehicleValueRangeId AverageValue ... [DTValueRange] DTVehicleValueRangeId RangeMin RangeMax RangeValue Note that DTValueRange does not have a VehicleID. I want to flatten DTVehicleValueRange into my Vehicle class. Tgis works fine for AverageValue, since it's just a plain value, but I can't seem to get a ValueRange collection to map correctly. public VehicleMap() { Id(x => x.Id, "VehicleId"); Join("DTVehicleValueRange", x => { x.Optional(); x.KeyColumn("VehicleId"); x.Map(y => y.AverageValue).ReadOnly(); x.HasMany(y => y.ValueRanges).KeyColumn("DTVehicleValueRangeId"); // This Guy }); } The HasMany mapping doesn't seem to do anything if it's inside the Join. If it's outside the Join and I specify the table, it maps, but nhibernate tries to use the VehicleID, not the DTVehicleValueRangeId. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Updating join fields in an ORM command

    - by Jono
    I have a question about object relational updates on join fields. I am working on a project using codeigniter with datamapper dmz. But I think my problem is with general understanding of ORMs. So fell free to answer with any ORM you know. I have two tables, Goods and Tags. One good can have many tags. Everything is working, but I am looking for a way to merge tags. Meaning I decide I want to remove tag A and instead have everything that is tagged by it, now be tagged by tag B. I only have models for the goods and the tags. There is no separate model for the join relationship, as I believe these ORMs were designed to work. I know how to delete a tag. But I dont know how to reach into the join table to redirect the references since there is no model for the join table. I would rather use the ORM then issuing a raw SQL command.

    Read the article

  • LEFT OUTER JOIN with a WHERE clause

    - by Wesley
    I have two tables. indRailType contains a list of the names paired with an ID value that I use in other tables to indicate the rail type. WO_BreakerRail contains a date column and a rail code colume that corresponds to the same code in indRailType and some other data. There's a row in WO_BreakerRail for any activity on each rail type, for every date. So I could have 3 rows dated for 3/19/2010, each row indicates a different rail code, and what happened. When I use the following LEFT OUTER JOIN, I get a table with all the types of rail, with nulls in the rows where nothing happened on the 19th. Now, this is only working because I only have one date represented in my WO_BreakerRail table right now, the 19th. When I add more rows with different dates, things will go haywire. This is my SQL statement, which right now gives me exactly the results I want: SELECT WO_BreakerRail.ID, indRailType.RailType, WO_BreakerRail.CreatedPieces, WO_BreakerRail.OutsideSource, WO_BreakerRail.Charged, WO_BreakerRail.Rejected, WO_BreakerRail.RejectedToCrop FROM indRailType LEFT OUTER JOIN WO_BreakerRail ON indRailType.RailCode = WO_BreakerRail.RailCode Now, when I add in a WHERE WO_BreakerRail.Date = @Date clause I lose all the rows in the JOIN which nothing happened. I don't want that. From reading up, it sounds like a FULL OUTER JOIN is what I want, but SQL Server Compact Edition doesn't support FULL OUTER JOINs. Is there a way around this, or am I looking for something else entirely?

    Read the article

  • SQL Inner Join : DB stuck

    - by SurfingCat
    I postet this question a few days ago but I didn't explain exactly what I want. I ask the question better formulated again: To clarify my problem I added some new information: I got an MySQL DB with MyISAM tables. The two relevant tables are: * orders_products: orders_products_id, orders_id, product_id, product_name, product_price, product_name, product_model, final_price, ... * products: products_id, manufacturers_id, ... (for full information about the tables see screenshot products (Screenshot) and screenshot orders_products (Screenshot)) Now what I want is this: - Get all Orders who ordered products with manufacturers_id = 1. And the product name of the product of this order (with manufacturers_id = 1). Grouped by orders. What I did so far is this: SELECT op.orders_id, p.products_id, op.products_name, op.products_price, op.products_quantity FROM orders_products op , products p INNER JOIN products ON op.products_id = p.products_id WHERE p.manufacturers_id = 1 AND p.orders_id > 10000 p.orders_id 10000 for testing to get only a few order_id's. But thies query takes much time to get executed if it even works. Two times the sql server stucked. Where is the mistake?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008 - Keyword search using table Join

    - by Aaron Wagner
    Ok, I created a Stored Procedure that, among other things, is searching 5 columns for a particular keyword. To accomplish this, I have the keywords parameter being split out by a function and returned as a table. Then I do a Left Join on that table, using a LIKE constraint. So, I had this working beautifully, and then all of the sudden it stops working. Now it is returning every row, instead of just the rows it needs. The other caveat, is that if the keyword parameter is empty, it should ignore it. Given what's below, is there A) a glaring mistake, or B) a more efficient way to approach this? Here is what I have currently: ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[usp_getOppsPaged] @startRowIndex int, @maximumRows int, @city varchar(100) = NULL, @state char(2) = NULL, @zip varchar(10) = NULL, @classification varchar(15) = NULL, @startDateMin date = NULL, @startDateMax date = NULL, @endDateMin date = NULL, @endDateMax date = NULL, @keywords varchar(400) = NULL AS BEGIN SET NOCOUNT ON; ;WITH Results_CTE AS ( SELECT opportunities.*, organizations.*, departments.dept_name, departments.dept_address, departments.dept_building_name, departments.dept_suite_num, departments.dept_city, departments.dept_state, departments.dept_zip, departments.dept_international_address, departments.dept_phone, departments.dept_website, departments.dept_gen_list, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY opp_id) AS RowNum FROM opportunities JOIN departments ON opportunities.dept_id = departments.dept_id JOIN organizations ON departments.org_id=organizations.org_id LEFT JOIN Split(',',@keywords) AS kw ON (title LIKE '%'+kw.s+'%' OR [description] LIKE '%'+kw.s+'%' OR tasks LIKE '%'+kw.s+'%' OR requirements LIKE '%'+kw.s+'%' OR comments LIKE '%'+kw.s+'%') WHERE ( (@city IS NOT NULL AND (city LIKE '%'+@city+'%' OR dept_city LIKE '%'+@city+'%' OR org_city LIKE '%'+@city+'%')) OR (@state IS NOT NULL AND ([state] = @state OR dept_state = @state OR org_state = @state)) OR (@zip IS NOT NULL AND (zip = @zip OR dept_zip = @zip OR org_zip = @zip)) OR (@classification IS NOT NULL AND (classification LIKE '%'+@classification+'%')) OR ((@startDateMin IS NOT NULL AND @startDateMax IS NOT NULL) AND ([start_date] BETWEEN @startDateMin AND @startDateMax)) OR ((@endDateMin IS NOT NULL AND @endDateMax IS NOT NULL) AND ([end_date] BETWEEN @endDateMin AND @endDateMax)) OR ( (@city IS NULL AND @state IS NULL AND @zip IS NULL AND @classification IS NULL AND @startDateMin IS NULL AND @startDateMax IS NULL AND @endDateMin IS NULL AND @endDateMin IS NULL) ) ) ) SELECT * FROM Results_CTE WHERE RowNum >= @startRowIndex AND RowNum < @startRowIndex + @maximumRows; END

    Read the article

  • SQL n:m Inheritance join

    - by Nightmares
    I want to join a table which contains n:m relationship between groups. (Groups are defined in a separate table). This table only has entries listing a member_group_id and a parent_group_id. Given this structure: id(int) | member_group_id(int) | parent_group_id(int) The "base" query looks like this: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.member_group_id = p1.member_group_id The "base" query correctly shows all relationships (I checked by doing it manually.) The problem is when I try to apply a where clause to this query to filter for a specific group as "point of origin" (the first group for which I want all parent groups) it returns only the closest parents. For example like this: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.member_group_id = p1.member_group_id where p1.group_id = 1 Can anyone give a clue how I can fix this? Or a different approach to realize this. (I suppose I could always do this in my C++ source code on the server side but I would have to transfer a entire table which has a high growth potential to the application server.) UPDATE: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.group_id = p1.member_group_id Typing mistake confirmed. Now I don't get past first level of inheritance period. Thanks at denied for pointing that out.

    Read the article

  • Mysql slow query: INNER JOIN + ORDER BY causes filesort

    - by Alexander
    Hello! I'm trying to optimize this query: SELECT `posts`.* FROM `posts` INNER JOIN `posts_tags` ON `posts`.id = `posts_tags`.post_id WHERE (((`posts_tags`.tag_id = 1))) ORDER BY posts.created_at DESC; The size of tables is 38k rows, and 31k and mysql uses "filesort" so it gets pretty slow. I tried to use different indexes, no luck. CREATE TABLE `posts` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `created_at` datetime default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`), KEY `index_posts_on_created_at` (`created_at`), KEY `for_tags` (`trashed`,`published`,`clan_private`,`created_at`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=44390 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_unicode_ci CREATE TABLE `posts_tags` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, `post_id` int(11) default NULL, `tag_id` int(11) default NULL, `created_at` datetime default NULL, `updated_at` datetime default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`), KEY `index_posts_tags_on_post_id_and_tag_id` (`post_id`,`tag_id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB AUTO_INCREMENT=63175 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 +----+-------------+------------+--------+--------------------------+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+------------+--------+--------------------------+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | posts_tags | index | index_post_id_and_tag_id | index_post_id_and_tag_id | 10 | NULL | 24159 | Using where; Using index; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | posts | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | .posts_tags.post_id | 1 | | +----+-------------+------------+--------+--------------------------+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+ 2 rows in set (0.00 sec) What kind of index I need to define to avoid mysql using filesort? Is it possible when order field is not in where clause?

    Read the article

  • SQL: many-to-many relationship, IN condition

    - by Maarten
    I have a table called transactions with a many-to-many relationship to items through the items_transactions table. I want to do something like this: SELECT "transactions".* FROM "transactions" INNER JOIN "items_transactions" ON "items_transactions".transaction_id = "transactions".id INNER JOIN "items" ON "items".id = "items_transactions".item_id WHERE (items.id IN (<list of items>)) But this gives me all transactions that have one or more of the items in the list associated with it and I only want it to give me the transactions that are associated with all of those items. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Forward declaration of derived inner class

    - by Loom
    I ran into problem implementing some variations of factory method. // from IFoo.h struct IFoo { struct IBar { virtual ~IBar() = 0; virtual void someMethod() = 0; }; virtual IBar *createBar() = 0; }; // from Foo.h struct Foo : IFoo { // implementation of Foo, Bar in Foo.cpp struct Bar : IBar { virtual ~Bar(); virtual void someMethod(); }; virtual Bar *createBar(); // implemented in Foo.cpp }; I'd like to place declaration of Foo::Bar in Foo.cpp. For now I cannot succeed: struct Foo : IFoo { //struct Bar; //1. error: invalid covariant return type // for ‘virtual Foo::Bar* //struct Bar : IBar; //2. error: expected ‘{’ before ‘;’ token virtual Bar *createBar(); // virtual IBar *createBar(); // Is not acceptable by-design }; Is there a trick to have just forward declaration of Boo in Foo.hpp and to have full declaration in Foo.cpp?

    Read the article

  • MySQL calling in Username to show instead of ID!

    - by Jess
    I have a users table, books table and authors table. An author can have many books, while a user can also have many books. (This is how my DB is currently setup). As I'm pretty new to So far my setup is like bookview.php?book_id=23 from accessing authors page, then seeing all books for the author. The single book's details are all displayed on this new page...I can get the output to display the user ID associated with the book, but not the user name, and this also applies for the author's name, I can the author ID to display, but not the name, so somewhere in the query below I am not calling in the correct values: SELECT users.user_id, authors.author_id, books.book_id, books.bookname, books.bookprice, books.bookplot FROM books INNER JOIN authors on books.book_id = authors.book_id INNER JOIN users ON books.book_id = users.user_id WHERE books.book_id=" . $book_id; Could someone help me correct this so I can display the author name and user name both associated with the book! Thanks for the help :)

    Read the article

  • Will the compiler optimize escaping an inner loop?

    - by BCS
    The code I have looks like this (all uses of done shown): bool done = false; for(int i = 0; i < big; i++) { ... for(int j = 0; j < wow; j++) { ... if(foo(i,j)) { done = true; break; } ... } if(done) break; ... } will any compilers convert it to this: for(int i = 0; i < big; i++) { ... for(int j = 0; j < wow; j++) { ... if(foo(i,j)) goto __done; // same as a labeled break if we had it ... } ... } __done:;

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >