Search Results

Search found 7127 results on 286 pages for 'calculated columns'.

Page 61/286 | < Previous Page | 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  | Next Page >

  • How do I allow edit only a particular column in datagridview in windows application using C#

    - by cmrhema
    Hi, I want to enable only two columns in the DataGridview to be able to edit. The others should not be allowed to edit. Further I am not directly linking to datasource; I will be doing some thing like this way DataTable dt = new DataTable(); dt.Columns.Add("Email"); dt.Columns.Add("email1"); for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) { DataRow dr = dt.NewRow(); dr["Email"] = i.ToString(); dr["email1"] = i.ToString() + "sdf"; dt.Rows.Add(dr); } BindingSource bs = new BindingSource(); bs.DataSource = dt; dataGridView1.DataSource = bs; So which property should I set, that will enable only one column say Email(in the above eg) to be editable. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Partition of tables in MySQL

    - by Joel
    Hello, I have read that in a case where a table has many columns, but most of the time only one of them is used (say a title column in a forum post), a way to increase performance would be a partition to two tables, where one will contain only the title and the other one will contain the other columns (such as the forum post body). However, in case I use select ForumTitle from Forum; won't that be good enough to prevent the load of all columns (such as the forum post's body) to the memory, and eliminate the need of partition? Thanks, Joel

    Read the article

  • How to allow multiple inputs from user using R?

    - by Juan
    For example, if I need that the user specifies the number of rows and columns of a matrix: PROMPT: Number of rows?: USER INPUT: [a number] I need that R 'waits' for the input. Then save [a number] into a variable v1. Next, PROMPT: Number of columns?: USER INPUT: [another number] Also save [another number] into a variable v2. At the end, I will have two variables (v1, v2) that will be used in the rest of the code. "readline" only works for one input at a time. I can't run the two lines together v1 <- readline("Number of rows?: ") v2 <- readline("Number of columns?: ") Any ideas or suggestions? Thank you in advance

    Read the article

  • In symfony/doctrine's schema.yml, where should I put onDelete: CASCADE for a many-to-many relationsh

    - by nselikoff
    I have a many-to-many relationship defined in my Symfony (using doctrine) project between Orders and Upgrades (an Order can be associated with zero or more Upgrades, and an Upgrade can apply to zero or more Orders). # schema.yml Order: columns: order_id: {...} relations: Upgrades: class: Upgrade local: order_id foreign: upgrade_id refClass: OrderUpgrade Upgrade: columns: upgrade_id: {...} relations: Orders: class: Order local: upgrade_id foreign: order_id refClass: OrderUpgrade OrderUpgrade: columns: order_id: {...} upgrade_id: {...} I want to set up delete cascade behavior so that if I delete an Order or an Upgrade, all of the related OrderUpgrades are deleted. Where do I put onDelete: CASCADE? Usually I would put it at the end of the relations section, but that would seem to imply in this case that deleting Orders would cascade to delete Upgrades. Is Symfony + Doctrine smart enough to know what I'm wanting if I put onDelete: CASCADE in the above relations sections of schema.yml?

    Read the article

  • SSRS 2008 Interactive Sorting in Sub-Report not working as expected

    - by Ray J
    I have a (parent) report that has a list. The details group of this list contains one sub-report. So basically if the list has 10 records (rows) the sub-report is executed 10 times. The problem seems to be with interactive sorting in the Sub-Report. It has 4 columns with interactive sorting enabled. When I run the parent report and try to sort columns SSRS "remembers" the previous sort column and sorts by multiple columns at the same time. For example if I sort by Col A then click to sort by Col B, SSRS will preserve the sorting of Col A (and the direction) and then apply the sorting to Col B. However I simply want to sort by Col B and do not want to Col A to be part of the sort. When I try this directly with the sub-report everything works as expected. Any ideas why this is happening?

    Read the article

  • Using * in SELECT Query

    - by libregeek
    I am currently porting an application written in MySQL3 and PHP4 to MySQL5 and PHP5. On analysis I found several SQL queries which uses "select * from tablename" even if only one column(field) is processed in PHP. The table has almost 60 columns and it has a primary key. In most cases, the only column used is id which is the primary key. Will there be any performance boost if I use queries in which the column names are explicitly mentioned instead of * ? (In this application there is only one method which we need all the columns and all other methods return only a subset of the columns)

    Read the article

  • Need help with SQL table structure transformation

    - by Arnis L.
    I need to perform update/insert simultaneously changing structure of incoming data. Think about Shops that have defined work time for each day of the week. Hopefully, this might explain better what I'm trying to achieve: worktimeOrigin table: columns: shop_id day val data: 123 | "monday" | "9:00 AM - 18:00" 123 | "tuesday" | "9:00 AM - 18:00" 123 | "wednesday" | "9:00 AM - 18:00" shop table: columns: id worktimeDestination.id worktimeDestination table: columns: id monday tuesday wednesday My aim: I would like to insert data from worktimeOrigin table into worktimeDestination and specify appropriate worktimeDestination for shop. shop table data: 123 1 (updated) worktimeDestination table data: 1 | "9:00 AM - 18:00" | "9:00 AM - 18:00" | "9:00 AM - 18:00" (inserted) Any ideas how to do that?

    Read the article

  • sql query question / count

    - by scheibenkleister
    Hi, I have houses that belongs to streets. A user can buy several houses. How do I find out, if the user owns an entire street? street table with columns (id/name) house table with columns (id/street_id [foreign key] owner table with columns (id/house_id/user_id) [join table with foreign keys] So far, I'm using count which returns the result: select count(*), street_id from owner left join house on owner.house_id = house.id group by street_id where user_id = 1 count(*) | street_id 3 | 1 2 | 2 A more general count: select count(*) from house group by street_id returns: count(*) | street_id 3 | 1 3 | 2 How can I find out, that user 1 owns the entire street 1 but not street 2? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Implementing tagging in JDO

    - by Julie Paltrow
    I am implementing a tagging system for a website that uses JDO . I would like to use this method. However I am new to relationships in JDO. To keep it simple, what I have looks like this: @PersistentCapable class Post { @Persistent String title; @Persistent String body; } @PersistentCapable class Tag { @Persistent String name; } What kind of JDO relationships do I need and how to implement them? I want to be able to list all Tags that belong to a Post, and also be able to list all Posts that have a given Tag. So in the end I would like to have something like this: Table: Post Columns: PostID, Title, Body Table: Tag Columns: TagID, name Table: PostTag Columns: PostID, TagID

    Read the article

  • Latex multicolumn problems

    - by midtiby
    Hi I am trying to build a table in latex where five columns have a common title centered above the columns. But the generated table does not appear as expected. (the common title is left justified instead of centered above the columns) The code looks like \documentclass{article} \begin{document} \begin{table} \centering \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|r|} \multicolumn{5}{c}{Hydrotalcite} \\ \hline kalhsdfsa & 1 asdf asf asfa &7as dfas fasdf as0 & 003 \\ kalhsdfsa & 1 asdf asf asfa &7as dfas fasdf as0 & 003 \\ kalhsdfsa & 1 asdf asf asfa &7as dfas fasdf as0 & 003 \end{tabular} \caption{lala} \label{tabTableRefereaSDasdnce} \end{table} \end{document} And I'm running miktex 2.8 on Windows XP

    Read the article

  • Database Design: A proper table design for large number of column values.

    - by Jake
    I wish to perform an experiment many different times. After every trial, I am left with a "large" set of output statistics -- let's say, 1000. I would like to store the outputs of my experiments in a table, but what's the best way...? Option 1 Have a table with 1000 columns. Seems like a bad idea. What if the number of statistics one day exceeds the maximum number of columns? Option 2 Have a table with three columns. Let's say, ID, StatisticType, and StatisticValue. That way, you can have as many statistics as you want. However, reading a single experiments statistics becomes more complicated. Moreover, what if different statistics are different data types?? Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Best approach to show big amount of "grid" data

    - by Jorge Ramírez
    Hello all. I am building an application for Android (1.5) that, after quering a webservice, shows to the user a big amount of data that should be displayed in a "grid" or "table" style. I must show a result of about 7 columns and 50 rows (for example a customer list with names, adresses, telephone number, sales amount last year and so). Obviously, the 7 columns will not fix in the screen and I would like the user would be able to scroll up/down and LEFT/RIGHT (important because of the number of columns) to explore the grid results. cell selection level is NOT necessary, as much I would need row selection level. What is the best approach to get this interface element? Listview / GridView / TableLayout? Thanks

    Read the article

  • 'Out of Memory exception' in sql server 2005 xml column

    - by Raghuraman
    Hi All, I am devloping a windows forms application and am using sql server 2005 database as my backend. I am having an xml column in my database. I am using ultrawingrid control in my application.I obtain the xml of the dataset which is bound to my ultrawingrid control and pass that as a parameter value to the stored procedure where am inserting this value into the xml column which I specified. The columns in my grid are dynamic and hence there can be any no of columns in my grid. I got 'out of memory' exception in the dataset.GetXml() statement since there were more no of columns I believe.So, what I did is that I used dataset.WriteXml() method and stored all the xml contents into an xml file, loaded the xml file into the XmlDocument object and then passed the xmlnodereader as the value to the stored procedure parameter.Now, while executing the stored procedure am getting the same 'out of memory' exception. How could I resolve this issue?

    Read the article

  • Help creating a ColumnName Convention using FluentNHibernate

    - by Rafael E. Belliard
    I've been trying to specify a custom naming convention for my database table columns. So far, I have been able to setup a convention for the table's name, but not the actual columns. I've seen a few guides on the internet, but they're not working using the latest Fluent NHibernate (1.0.0 RTM). public class CamelCaseSplitNamingConvention : IClassConvention, IComponentConvention { public void Apply(IClassInstance instance) { instance.Table(instance.EntityType.Name.ChangeCamelCaseToUnderscore()); } public void Apply(IComponentInstance instance) { // is this the correct call for columns? If not, which one? } } Please help.

    Read the article

  • PHP conditional loop help

    - by sea_1987
    Hi there in my database I have 3 columns, is_contract, is_permenant and is_temporary. Within these columns there is either a Y or N value. I am using these columns to echo onto the page what kind of work someone is looking for, my problem is that the user can be looking for more than one type of work, I am currently running 3 if statements to determine what to echo to the page, however I am struggling to add a comma if more than one of the statemnts returns as true, below is my code so far, <?php if($rslt['is_contract'] == 'Y') { echo "Contract "; } if($rslt['is_permanent'] == 'Y') { echo "Permanent "; } if($rslt['is_temporary'] == 'Y') { echo "Temporary"; } ?>

    Read the article

  • multi column sorting of datagrid view:

    - by Bi
    I have a datagridview in a windows form with 3 columns: Serial number, Name and Date-Time. The Name column will always have either of the two values: "name1" or "name2". I need to sort these columns such that the grid displays all the rows with name values in a specific order (first display all the "name1" rows and then all the "name2" rows). Within the "name1" rows, I want the rows to be sorted by the Date-Time. Please note programmatically, all the 3 columns are strings. For example, if I have the rows: 01 |Name1 | 2010-05-05 10:00 PM 02 |Name2 | 2010-05-02 08:00 AM 03 |Name2 | 2010-05-01 08:00 AM 04 |Name1 | 2010-05-01 11:00 AM 05 |Name1 | 2010-05-04 07:00 AM needs to be sorted as 04 |Name1 | 2010-05-01 11:00 AM 05 |Name1 | 2010-05-04 07:00 AM 01 |Name1 | 2010-05-05 10:00 PM 03 |Name2 | 2010-05-01 08:00 AM 02 |Name2 | 2010-05-02 08:00 AM I am not sure how to go about using the below: myGrid.Sort(.....,ListSortDirection.Ascending)

    Read the article

  • MS SQL Server 2008 Stored Procedure Result as Column Default Value

    - by user337501
    First of all, thank you guys. You always know how to direct me when I cant even find the words to explain what the heck im trying to do. The default values of the columns on a couple of my tables need to equal the result of some complicated calculations on other columns in other tables. My first thought is to simply have the column default value equal the result of a stored procedure. I would also have one or more of the parameters pulled from the columns in the calling table. I don't know the syntax of how to do it though, and any time the word "stored" and "procedure" land next to each other in google I'm flooded with info on Parameter default values and nothing relating to what I actually want. Half of that was more of a vent than a question...any ideas though? And plz plz dont say "Well, you could use an On-Insert Trigger to..."

    Read the article

  • Formatting a query to enumerate through 2 different datatables

    - by boiler1974
    I have 2 datatables sendTable and recvTable They both have identical column names and numbers of columns "NODE" "DSP Name" "BUS" "IDENT" "STATION" "REF1" "REF2" "REF3" "REF4" "REF5" "REF6" "REF7" "REF8" I need to compare these 2 tables and separate out the mismatches I only need to check Columns 3-11 and Ignore col 1 and 2 I tried at first removing the 2 columns and then loop thru row by row and return matches and mismatches but the problem with this approach is that I no longer have the "NODE" and "DSP Name" associated with the row when I finalize my results So I need help with a query Here is my attempt var samerecordQuery = from r1 in sendTable.AsEnumerable() where r1.Field<int>("BUS").Equals(from r2 in recvTable.AsEnumerable() where r2.Field<int>("BUS")) this obviously doesn't work so how do I format the query to say from r1 cols[3-11] equals r2 cols [3-11] and once I have this I can use the except to pull out the mismatches

    Read the article

  • Best Practices for Content Types in SharePoint

    - by Anna Karin
    Hi all, Recently, we came across a severe problem in production farm with the Content Types. I would like to explain the background of this problem first. We have nice working feature for Content Types installation in production and test farms. We developed and deployed (using wsps) this SharePoint feature in Visual studio. We are using the publishing pages using page layouts and Content Types to help content editors to quickly publish the web pages. Unfortunately, some Content Types have been manually updated/added by some people in the production, so whenever I (developer) make some changes to the existing Content Types (using Visual Studio and feature activation/deactivation) , SharePoint removes one or two columns (during feature activation/deactivation) from Content Types; or the columns which have not been added in a best practice way. I think the best practice is to update Content Types using Visual Studio. Now, I wish to ensure that site columns shouldn't get removed from Content Types upon feature activation/deactivation. Note: Our feature for Content Type activation/deactivation doesn't hold any activation dependencies in the feature.xml

    Read the article

  • Sort a GridView Column related to other Table

    - by Tim
    Hello, i have a GridView bound to a DataView. Some columns in the DataView's table are foreignkeys to related tables(f.e. Customer). I want to enable sorting for these columns too, but all i can do is sorting the foreignkey(fiCustomer) and not the CustomerName. I have tried this without success(" Cannot find column ERP_Customer.CustomerName "): <asp:TemplateField HeaderText="Customer" SortExpression="ERP_Customer.CustomerName" > A tried also the DataViewManager, but i've a problem to detect the table to sort: Dim viewManager As New DataViewManager(Me.dsERP) viewManager.DataViewSettings(dsERP.ERP_Charge).RowFilter = filter viewManager.DataViewSettings(dsERP.ERP_Charge).Sort = sort 'sort is the GridView's SortExpression Me.GrdCharge.DataSource = viewManager.CreateDataView(dsERP.ERP_Charge) I have to apply the sort on a distinct table of the DataViewManager, but this table would differ on the related tables. I have bound the TemplateColumns in Codebehind in RowDataBound-Event f.e.: Dim LblCustomer As Label = DirectCast(e.Row.FindControl("LblCustomer"), Label) LblCustomer.Text = drCharge.ERP_CustomerRow.CustomerName 'drCharge inherits DataRow What is the recommended way to sort a GridView on columns related to another table?

    Read the article

  • SQL update fields of one table from fields of another one.

    - by Nir
    I'm having two tables: A [ID, column1, column2, column3] B [ID, column1, column2, column3, column4] A table will always be subset of B table (meaning all columns of A are also in B). I want to update a record with a specific ID in B with their data from A for all columns of A. This ID exists both in A and B. Is there an UPDATE syntax or any other way to do that without specifying the column names, just saying "set all columns of A"? I'm using postgresql, so a specific non-standard command is also accepted (however, not preferred). Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Check value at insert

    - by ThreeFingerMark
    Hello, i have this three tables. Table: Item Columns: ItemID, Title, Content, NoChange (Date) Table: Tag Columns: TagID, Title Table: ItemTag Columns: ItemID, TagID In the Item Table is a Field with NoChange, if this field = true no Tag is allowed to insert a ItemTag value with this ItemID. How can i check this in the insert? For Updates i have this Statement: UPDATE ItemTag SET TagID = ? where ItemID = ? AND TagID = ? AND exists ( select ItemID from Item where ItemID = ? AND NoChange is null)"); Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Adding a new column to Table which contains live data

    - by Ardman
    I have a large table consisting of over 60 millions records and I would like to add 2 new columns for data migration purposes. There are indexes on the table and some of them are large. So, by me adding the 2 new columns to the table, will I run the risk of slowing down the database whilst it attempts to add them and maybe time-out? Or will it just work? I know that if I try and rearrange the columns SQL Server will ask me to drop and re-create the table, so I definately don't want this. Is this something everyone is challenged with?

    Read the article

  • Is it a good idea to use a computed column as part of a primary key ?

    - by Brann
    I've got a table defined as : OrderID bigint NOT NULL, IDA varchar(50) NULL, IDB bigint NULL, [ ... 50 other non relevant columns ...] The natural primary key for this table would be (OrderID,IDA,IDB), but this it not possible because IDA and IDB can be null (they can both be null, but they are never both defined at the same time). Right now I've got a unique constraint on those 3 columns. Now, the thing is I need a primary key to enable transactional replication, and I'm faced with two choices : Create an identity column and use it as a primary key Create a non-null computed column C containing either IDA or IDB or '' if both columns were null, and use (OrderID,C) as my primary key. The second alternative seams cleaner as my PK would be meaningful, and is feasible (see msdn link), but since I've never seen this done anywhere, I was wondering if they were some cons to this approach.

    Read the article

  • How would I design this table in SQL?

    - by RSharma
    I have a parent master table that is generic enough to hold the common information of the children. Since the children were substantially different, we created separate tables for them. So I have something like this: tblMaster -------- MasterID int Name varchar(50) --Common to all children and there are a bunch of fields like this ChildType int -- Type of Child either ChildOne or ChildTwo ChildID int -- need to store ChildOneID or ChildTwoID depending on type of Child, so that i can refer to children tblChild1 -------- ChildOneID int IDENTITY tblChild2 --------- ChildTwoID int IDENTITY Should I have a ChildID in the master that is either ChildOneID or ChildTwoID based on the ChildType column? I have a number of children and I have simplified it for this question. The other way is to add ChildOneID and ChildTwoID as columns in the master, but since i have a number of columns, I will have a lot of null columns EDIT: Any help is appreciated

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68  | Next Page >