Search Results

Search found 32130 results on 1286 pages for 'local search'.

Page 60/1286 | < Previous Page | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67  | Next Page >

  • Translate along local axis

    - by Aaron
    I have an object with a position matrix and a rotation matrix (derived from a quaternion, but I digress). I'm able to translate this object along world-relative vectors, but I'm trying to figure out how to translate it along local-relative vectors. So if the object is tilted 45 degrees around its Z-axis the vector (1, 0, 0) would make it move to the upper right. For world-space translations I simply turn the movement vector into a matrix and multiply it by the position matrix: position_mat = translation_mat * position_mat. For local-space translations I'd think I'd have to use the rotation matrix into that formula, but I see the object spin around instead when I apply a translation over time no matter where I multiply the rotation matrix.

    Read the article

  • Google Chrome Browser does not display the images from Local network or local host? [migrated]

    - by Arjang
    While developing and testing a site on local network I have noticed that while IE/FireFox would display the images coming from URL's like "http:\mypc" or "http:\localhost" or ip adress on the netwrok , google chrome on Galaxy, Windows Machine, or google Android will not display the images. After having burned too many hours trying various CSS, image src tag, html document description tricks, I have given up. During my search I found (and lost) the link to chrome forums regarding this issue that seemed to say it is just so by users. Anyone has any more information on weather it is possible to view images on local host/computer name on netwrok or ip adress?

    Read the article

  • Samba: map domain group to local one

    - by user285467
    I have a problem with mapping pure domain group to one existing on UNIX system. When I map NT domain account by default samba picks local SID - one that can be acquired via the command; net getlocalsid Instead of SID that comes from domain; net getdomainsid This is the behavior that I do not understand. I can explicitly set the SID to the domain one. E.g.: net groupmap add sid=[DOMAIN SID]-[RID] ntgroup=[DOMAIN group] unixgroup=[UNIX group] type=l However the command getent group | grep 'DOMAIN group indicates this group to be domain one - GID created in accordance to RID backend in use, not the GID of 'UNIX group' as expected. Worth to mention I use the winbind. Strange thing is that I already have such mapping in place for other 'DOMAIN group2' that getent group reports with GID of local UNIX group with all members of the 'DOMAIN group2'. Now the question is how to populate such behavior for other of my groups???

    Read the article

  • Domain resolution - local first then external

    - by stefgosselin
    I would like to know how I can configure my dns settings so that domain is resolved locally first, then if not resolved it goes to external DNS. I had this working before, I am using Ubuntu through a VM and need the local domain to resolve first but since I have upgraded I had to reconfigure network and now it works only external, local host file does not seem to even be used. Is there an easy way to check this out? I did slap it up in google but no specific answer seemed to match my case and I too tight on delivery deadline to test-and-try different approaches. You guys rock, thanks.

    Read the article

  • Launching firefox on remote server causes local firefox to start instead

    - by terdon
    Right, this is strange. I am connecting from my laptop (LMDE) to a remote host (SUSE linux enterprise) using ssh -X. I want to launch a firefox instance running on the remote server so I can have access to webpages on a private network. User@RemoteMachine $ which -a firefox /usr/bin/firefox User@RemoteMachine $ /usr/bin/firefox --version Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.2, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2007 mozilla.org User@LocalMachine $ which -a firefox /usr/bin/firefox User@LocalMachine $ /usr/bin/firefox --version Mozilla Firefox 14.0.1 Now, if firefox is not running on the local machine, everything goes as expected and executing firefox on the remote machine causes a firefox (v 2.0) window running on the remote machine to show up. However, if firefox is running on the local machine a second window of firefox 14.0.1 running on the local machine appears. I have checked top in both machines. In the 2nd case, a firefox process briefely appears on the remote machine and then disappears when the local version of firefox is launched. My questions are the following: What gives? How/why can firefox connect to its existing instance on the local machine? The remote machine appears to have access to the local machine. It, in fact, appears to have the right to execute programs on my local machine. Am I missing something or is this just weird? Is this not a security risk?

    Read the article

  • nameserver spoiling avahi multicast name resolution of .local domain

    - by Doug Coburn
    After trying to ping a machine on my local network, I noticed that I was trying hit address 66.152.109.24. This is an external public address. Resolution should have occurred via avahi mDNS. I ran dig to see how the name resolution worked and my quest/centurylink name server was retuning results for my .local domain queries! I tried a random name and got the same ip address result. $ dig jakdafj.local ; <<>> DiG 9.8.1-P1-RedHat-9.8.1-3.P1.fc15 <<>> jakdafj.local ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 58410 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 2, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;jakdafj.local. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: jakdafj.local. 10 IN A 66.152.109.24 jakdafj.local. 10 IN A 204.232.231.46 ;; Query time: 104 msec ;; SERVER: 205.171.3.25#53(205.171.3.25) ;; WHEN: Sat Mar 24 20:40:17 2012 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 63 Am I missing something or is my DNS name server at 205.171.3.25 corrupted?

    Read the article

  • Edit-text-files-over-SSH using a local text editor

    - by Mikko Ohtamaa
    I am working in various Linux and UNIX environments. I'd like to elegantly solve the problem of editing remote configuration files over SSH. Instead of using terminal editors (nano), I'd like to open the file in a local text editor on my desktop (Sublime Text 2). CyberDuck, WinSCP and various other SFTP apps can do this. Using editors over X11 forwarding has also proven to be problematic. Also using archaic text editors like Vim or Emacs do not serve my needs well. They could do this, but I prefer using other text editing software. Using ssh mounts (FUSE) are also problematic unless they can happen on the demand and triggered by the remote site. So what I hope to achieve Have a somekind of easily deployable shell script etc. which I can copy to remote server (let's call it mooedit) I run mooedit command on the remote server of which I have connected over SSH connection mooedit sends some kind of signal (over SSH( to my local desktop On my local desktop this signal is captured and it determines 'a ha! moo wants to edit a file on server X in folder Y' File is SFTP transfered to the local desktop (/tmp) File is opened in a nice GUI text editor on the local desktop When Save is pressed, the local desktop notices changes in the file and SFTP sends the resulting file back to the server The question is: What signaling mechanisms SSH provides for this? Any other methods to trigger a local text editor for remote SSH file?

    Read the article

  • Does Google sometimes ignore "special" characters, possibly depending on your location or font type settings? [closed]

    - by RLH
    TLDR Google tends to ignore special characters in my search strings. Is there anything that I can do about it and is it, possibly, happening because Google makes certain assumptions based off of my default text-encoding settings and my location? I just posted this question over at StackOverflow. I had found a C preprocessor that I'd never seen before. As I should have done, I Googled it and tried to find out further information. I attempted various search terms which were all variations of "C Operator ##" (some times with and some times without the double-quotes.) Google didn't bring back anything of use so I posted my question on SO. As you can see from the comments, someone mentioned a search string (ironically one which I did try to search) and stated that I could have even hit the "I'm feeling lucky" button and have gotten my answer. The problem is I did search that, and the results that I received were far more basic and even after following the top results and searching the resulting pages, I could find nothing referencing the string "##". I'm not posting this question to complain but it does provide an empirical example of something I've seen before that really bugs me-- Google often ignores special characters in my search strings and the results are often useless. As a developer I often need to search for string values containing non-alphanumeric characters. Some characters (like the underscore or hyphen) can be used without trouble. However, other characters (such as the ampersand, carat, tilde and pound sign) are often ignored in my query strings. Is there a way to prevent this from happening so that I can get meaningful results from Google? NOTE I stay logged into Google and I live in the US. I wonder if Google detects some form of text-encoding setting or derives my results based off of certain, localized text-based assumptions. Regardless, I would like to for Google to search for what I give it. Is there anything that I can do to improve my results?

    Read the article

  • The Sitemap Paradox

    - by Jeff Atwood
    We use a sitemap on Stack Overflow, but I have mixed feelings about it. Web crawlers usually discover pages from links within the site and from other sites. Sitemaps supplement this data to allow crawlers that support Sitemaps to pick up all URLs in the Sitemap and learn about those URLs using the associated metadata. Using the Sitemap protocol does not guarantee that web pages are included in search engines, but provides hints for web crawlers to do a better job of crawling your site. Based on our two years' experience with sitemaps, there's something fundamentally paradoxical about the sitemap: Sitemaps are intended for sites that are hard to crawl properly. If Google can't successfully crawl your site to find a link, but is able to find it in the sitemap it gives the sitemap link no weight and will not index it! That's the sitemap paradox -- if your site isn't being properly crawled (for whatever reason), using a sitemap will not help you! Google goes out of their way to make no sitemap guarantees: "We cannot make any predictions or guarantees about when or if your URLs will be crawled or added to our index" citation "We don't guarantee that we'll crawl or index all of your URLs. For example, we won't crawl or index image URLs contained in your Sitemap." citation "submitting a Sitemap doesn't guarantee that all pages of your site will be crawled or included in our search results" citation Given that links found in sitemaps are merely recommendations, whereas links found on your own website proper are considered canonical ... it seems the only logical thing to do is avoid having a sitemap and make damn sure that Google and any other search engine can properly spider your site using the plain old standard web pages everyone else sees. By the time you have done that, and are getting spidered nice and thoroughly so Google can see that your own site links to these pages, and would be willing to crawl the links -- uh, why do we need a sitemap, again? The sitemap can be actively harmful, because it distracts you from ensuring that search engine spiders are able to successfully crawl your whole site. "Oh, it doesn't matter if the crawler can see it, we'll just slap those links in the sitemap!" Reality is quite the opposite in our experience. That seems more than a little ironic considering sitemaps were intended for sites that have a very deep collection of links or complex UI that may be hard to spider. In our experience, the sitemap does not help, because if Google can't find the link on your site proper, it won't index it from the sitemap anyway. We've seen this proven time and time again with Stack Overflow questions. Am I wrong? Do sitemaps make sense, and we're somehow just using them incorrectly?

    Read the article

  • Incorrect Meta information in Google

    - by Ashfame
    Google shows up incorrect meta info (title & description) in search engine results for an add domain and the information is of the domain which is the primary domain of the hosting account. I mentioned this fact because add-on domains are in a sub-directory of the primary domain. Any ideas what could be the reason? Check this Google search which shows the information of http://katherinegaudette.com/

    Read the article

  • No description for any page on the website is available in Google despite robots.txt allowing crawling

    - by Abhijit
    I seem to have the weirdest issue with Search Engine Optimization, and I asked the IT folks at my university, I asked people on Joomla forums and I am trying to sort this issue out using Google Webmaster Tools for more than 2 months to little avail. I want to know if I have some blatantly wrong configuration somewhere that is causing search engines to be unable to index this site. I noticed a similar issue with another website I searched for online (ECEGSA - The University of British Columbia at gsa.ece.ubc.ca), making me believe this might be a concern that people might be looking an answer for. Here are the details: The website in question is: http://gsa.ece.umd.edu/. It runs using Joomla 2.5.x (latest). The site was up since around mid December of 2013, and I noticed right from the get go that the site was not being indexed correctly on Google. Specifically I see the following message when I search for the website on Google: A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt – learn more. The thing is in December till around March I used the default Joomla robots.txt file which is: User-agent: * Disallow: /administrator/ Disallow: /cache/ Disallow: /cli/ Disallow: /components/ Disallow: /images/ Disallow: /includes/ Disallow: /installation/ Disallow: /language/ Disallow: /libraries/ Disallow: /logs/ Disallow: /media/ Disallow: /modules/ Disallow: /plugins/ Disallow: /templates/ Disallow: /tmp/ Nothing there should stop Google from searching my website. And even more confusingly, when I go to Google Webmaster tools, under "Blocked URLs" tab, when I try many of the links on the site, they are all shown up as "Allowed". I then tried adding a sitemap, putting it in the robots.txt file. That did not help. Same exact search result, same behavior in the "Blocked URLs" tab on the webmaster tools. Now additionally, the "sitemaps" tab says for several links an error saying "URL is robotted out". I tried those exact links in the "Blocked URLs" and they are allowed! I then tried deleting the robots.txt file. No use. Same exact problem. Here is an example screenshot from Google's Webmaster Tools: At this point I cannot give a rational explanation to why this is happening and neither can anyone in the IT department here. No one on Joomla forums can seem to understand what is going on. Based on what I explained, does it seem that I have somehow set a setting in the robots.txt or in .htaccess or somewhere else, incorrectly?

    Read the article

  • SQL 2012 - MySemanticSearch Demo with Tag Clouds

    - by sqlartist
    Excellent demonstration of the new SQL Server 2012 Semantic Search feature available at http://mysemanticsearch.codeplex.com Just tried it out on a large Business Intelligence related Microsoft Word collection and also the health related DMOZ collection of html files discussed in my previous posts. I have included some screenshots below of each document collection. I have realised that the Tag Cloud may need to be a bit more configurable based on the results of any search term. Business Intelligence...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Can a website become popular in a "category" (ie, not just a single page)

    - by Earlz
    I have a few keywords where my website is high ranking(2nd and 3rd result). For instance, I have 3 blog posts covering a certain kind of modem. Is it common for search engines to consider a website popular in a "category"? For instance, if I was the first result for "foobar" with one page, and then added another separate page which mentioned "foobar"(and maybe a link from the original page), would a search engine prioritize this separate page when compared to a completely separate website with a page with the same content?

    Read the article

  • Grep, no value return

    - by Daniel S.
    I am searching for a word, in this case "hehe" that is located in the file findTest by using grep, but when i initiate the search: grep -r "hehe" or grep -lr "hehe" it starts but after 5 min waiting nothing happens, even if i am in the same directory as the file. the only way i get a results straight away is being in the same directory and typing: grep "hehe" findTest Are their any other ways to search for a word? even if not in the same directory.

    Read the article

  • Is there a more efficient way to filter large arrays than preg_match()?

    - by hozza
    I have a log that our web application builds. Each month it contains around 16,000 entries of a string with about the average sentence worth of text. To filter/search through these in our admin panel the script uses preg_match() but this seems to be taking ages and timing out on the 30sec limit. I have isolated that it is indeed the preg_match() that causes the time out. Is there a more efficient way to search through values in a large array for a users input?

    Read the article

  • How to hide pages from Google crawler? [closed]

    - by NoobDev4iPhone
    Possible Duplicate: What are the most important things I need to do to encourage Google Sitelinks? I'm currently working on a website and need to keep certain pages hidden from Google crawler. How to make it so that search engines see only what I want them to see in a directory? Also, you know how Google results also give you shortcut links, Like 'Login', 'About' etc... how to put these links to search result?

    Read the article

  • Delphi Unit local variables - how to make each instance unique?

    - by Justin
    Ok, this, I'm sure is something simple that is easy to do. The problem : I've inherited scary spaghetti code and am slowly trying to better it when new features need adding - generally when a refactor makes adding the new feature neater. I've got a bunch of code I'm packing into a single unit which, in different places in the application, controls the same physical thing in the outside world. The control appears in several places in the application and operates slightly differently in each instance. What I've done is to create a unit with all of the features I need which I can simply drop, as a frame, into each form that requires it. Each form then uses the unit's interface methods to customise the behaviour for each instance. The problem within the problem : In the unit in question (the frame) I have a variable declared in the IMPLEMENTATION section - local to the unit. I also have a procedure, declared in the TYPE section which takes an argument and assigns that argument to the local variable in question - each form passes a unique variable to each instance of the frame/unit. What I want it to do is for each instance of the frame to keep its own version of that variable, different from the others, and use that to define how it operates. What seems to be happening, however, is that all instances are using the same value, even if I explicitly pass each instance a different variable. ie: Unit FlexibleUnit; interface uses //the uses stuff type TFlexibleUnit=class(TFrame) //declarations including procedure makeThisInstanceX(passMeTheVar:integer); private // public // end; implementation uses //the uses var myLocalVar; procedure makeThisInstanceX(passMeTheVar:integer); begin myLocalVar:=passMeTheVar; end; //other procedures using myLocalVar //etc to the end; Now somewhere in another Form I've dropped this Frame onto the Design pane, sometimes two of these frames on one Form, and have it declared in the proper places, etc. Each is unique in that : ThisFlexibleUnit : TFlexibleUnit; ThatFlexibleUnit : TFlexibleUnit; and when I do a: ThisFlexibleUnit.makeThisInstanceX(var1); //want to behave in way "var1" ThatFlexibleUnit.makeThisInstanceX(var2); //want to behave in way "var2" it seems that they both share the same variable "myLocalVar". Am I doing this wrong, in principle? If this is the correct method then it's a matter of debugging what I have (which is too huge to post) but if this is not correct in principle then is there a way to do what I am suggesting? Thanks in advance, Stack Overflow - you guys (and gals!) are legendary.

    Read the article

  • Friday Fun: The Search For Wondla

    - by Asian Angel
    The best day of the week is finally here again, so it is time to have some fun while waiting to go home for the weekend. The game we have for you today takes you far into humanity’s future where you journey with Eva Nine in her quest to find other humans. Note: Today’s game comes with a double bonus! First, there is a sequel game that you can move on to once you have completed the first one. Second, there are three wallpapers available in multiple sizes for those who enjoy the characters and artwork presented in the game (see below). The Search For Wondla The object of the game is to find the differences between two similar looking images based on artwork from The Search For Wondla by Tony DiTerlizzi. Are you ready to join Eva Nine in her quest to find other humans in the future? Note: There is a version available for those who would like to play The Search For Wondla on their iPads! The first game has 28 levels of difference finding goodness for you to work through. Each level will list the minimum number of differences that you need to find to progress to the next level. If you need a hint along the way just click on the Shake or Reveal options at the bottom of the game play window. Get a level completed quickly enough and you get bonus points! There will also be differences in the images for individual levels each time you play the game, so have fun! Note: The second game has 12 levels to complete. To give you a good feel for the game we have covered the first six levels here and provided seven clues for each level (you are only required to find a minimum of five). Eva Nine viewing the holographic outdoor projections in the main hub of her living quarters… Eva Nine is in a grumpy mood as Muthr visits her at bedtime… Eva Nine in her secret hideaway visiting old “childhood friends” as she contemplates her recent survival test failure. Eva Nine viewing the entire set of floor plans for the underground sanctuary where she was born and has been growing up. Eva Nine’s escape to the surface as the underground sanctuary is attacked by the bounty hunter creature Besteel. Eva Nine on the surface for the first time in her young life. Will she be successful in her quest? There is only one way to find out! Play The Search For Wondla Part 1 Play The Search For Wondla Part 2 Bonus Content If you have enjoyed this game you can learn more about the book and download the three wallpapers shown here by visiting the link below! Note: The wallpapers come in the following sizes: 1024*768, 1280*800, 1280*1024, 1440*900, iPhone, iPhone4, and iPad (click on the Extras link at the bottom of the page). Visit the Search For Wondla Homepage Do you enjoy playing difference finding games? Then you will definitely want to have a look at another wonderful game that we have covered here: Friday Fun: Isis Latest Features How-To Geek ETC The How-To Geek Guide to Learning Photoshop, Part 8: Filters Get the Complete Android Guide eBook for Only 99 Cents [Update: Expired] Improve Digital Photography by Calibrating Your Monitor The How-To Geek Guide to Learning Photoshop, Part 7: Design and Typography How to Choose What to Back Up on Your Linux Home Server How To Harmonize Your Dual-Boot Setup for Windows and Ubuntu Hang in There Scrat! – Ice Age Wallpaper How Do You Know When You’ve Passed Geek and Headed to Nerd? On The Tip – A Lamborghini Theme for Chrome and Iron What if Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner were Human? [Video] Peaceful Winter Cabin Wallpaper Store Tabs for Later Viewing in Opera with Tab Vault

    Read the article

  • How can I get my dynamic site search results content indexed by Google?

    - by Kris
    I have a site that is simply a search box to search a cloud-hosted database of .tiff images, and then all of my content can only be accessed by entering a search term. So for example, you're on the home page www.example.com and you type in "search" to the box and hit submit. Then it takes you to www.example.com/?q=search, which is a page of all my .tiff images with "search" in the description. How can I get a page like www.example.com/?q=search indexed, WITHOUT making a humungous list of search terms that people might type in?? I know about mod_rewrite, but it seems like for that you need to know ahead of time which URLs you'll need to convert, which I don't. All of these pages will be dynamically user-generated by typing into the search field. Please help!

    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

  • 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

  • search form in html/php via ajax

    - by fusion
    i've a search form wherein the database query has been coded in php and the html file calls this php file via ajax to display the results in the search form. the problem is, i would like the result to be displayed in the same form as search.html; yet while the ajax works, it goes to search.php to display the results. search.html: <!DOCTYPE html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> <script src="scripts/search_ajax.js" type="text/javascript"></script> </head> <body> <form id="submitForm" method="post"> <div class="wrapper"> <div class="field"> <input name="search" id="search" /> </div><br /> <input id="button1" type="submit" value="Submit" class="submit" onclick="run_query();" /><br /> </div> <div id="searchContainer"> </div> </form> </body> </html> if i add action="search.php" to the form tag, it displays the result but on search.php. i'd like it to display on the same form [i.e search.html, and not search.php] if i just add the javascript function [as done above], it displays nothing on search.html

    Read the article

  • MySQL Full-Text Search Across Multiple Tables - Quick/Long Solution?

    - by Kerry
    Hello all, I have been doing a bit of research on full-text searches as we realized a series of LIKE statements are terrible. My first find was MySQL full-text searches. I tried to implement this and it worked on one table, failed when I was trying to join multiple tables, and so I consulted stackoverflow's articles (look at the end for a list of the ones I've been to) I didn't see anything that clearly answered my questions. I'm trying to get this done literally in an hour or two (quick solution) but I also want to do a better long term solution. Here is my query: SELECT a.`product_id`, a.`name`, a.`slug`, a.`description`, b.`list_price`, b.`price`, c.`image`, c.`swatch`, e.`name` AS industry FROM `products` AS a LEFT JOIN `website_products` AS b ON (a.`product_id` = b.`product_id`) LEFT JOIN ( SELECT `product_id`, `image`, `swatch` FROM `product_images` WHERE `sequence` = 0) AS c ON (a.`product_id` = c.`product_id`) LEFT JOIN `brands` AS d ON (a.`brand_id` = d.`brand_id`) INNER JOIN `industries` AS e ON (a.`industry_id` = e.`industry_id`) WHERE b.`website_id` = 96 AND b.`status` = 1 AND b.`active` = 1 AND MATCH( a.`name`, a.`sku`, a.`description`, d.`name` ) AGAINST ( 'ashley sofa' ) GROUP BY a.`product_id` ORDER BY b.`sequence` LIMIT 0, 9 The error I get is: Incorrect arguments to MATCH If I remove d.name from the MATCH statement it works. I have a full-text index on that column. I saw one of the articles say to use an OR MATCH for this table, but won't that lose the effectiveness of being able to rank them together or match them properly? Other places said to use UNIONs but I don't know how to do that properly. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. In the idea of a long term solution it seems that either Sphinx or Lucene is best. Now by no means and I a MySQL guru, and I heard that Lucene is a bit more complicated to setup, any recommendations or directions would be great. Articles: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1117005/mysql-full-text-search-across-multiple-tables http://stackoverflow.com/questions/668371/mysql-fulltext-search-across-1-table http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2378366/mysql-how-to-make-multiple-table-fulltext-search http://stackoverflow.com/questions/737275/pros-cons-of-full-text-search-engine-lucene-sphinx-postgresql-full-text-searc http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1059253/searching-across-multiple-tables-best-practices

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67  | Next Page >