Search Results

Search found 27530 results on 1102 pages for 'sql truncate'.

Page 617/1102 | < Previous Page | 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624  | Next Page >

  • How can I update a record using a correlated subquery?

    - by froadie
    I have a function that accepts one parameter and returns a table/resultset. I want to set a field in a table to the first result of that recordset, passing in one of the table's other fields as the parameter. If that's too complicated in words, the query looks something like this: UPDATE myTable SET myField = (SELECT TOP 1 myFunctionField FROM fn_doSomething(myOtherField) WHERE someCondition = 'something') WHERE someOtherCondition = 'somethingElse' In this example, myField and myOtherField are fields in myTable, and myFunctionField is a field return by fn_doSomething. This seems logical to me, but I'm getting the following strange error: 'myOtherField' is not a recognized OPTIMIZER LOCK HINTS option. Any idea what I'm doing wrong, and how I can accomplish this? *UPDATE: * Based on Anil Soman's answer, I realized that the function is expecting a string parameter and the field being passed is an integer. I'm not sure if this should be a problem as an explicit call to the function using an integer value works - e.g. fn_doSomething(12345) seems to automatically cast the number to an string. However, I tried to do an explicit cast: UPDATE myTable SET myField = (SELECT TOP 1 myFunctionField FROM fn_doSomething(CAST(myOtherField AS varchar(1000))) WHERE someCondition = 'something') WHERE someOtherCondition = 'somethingElse' Now I'm getting the following error: Line 5: Incorrect syntax near '('.

    Read the article

  • Oracle SQL CMD Line!!!

    - by DAVID
    Hi when ever perform select statements in the command line tool it doesnt use all of the space.. ive modified buffer size and window size and it just doesnt work. here is the Screenshot http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/8954/cmdoracle.jpg

    Read the article

  • Why does this MySQL function return null?

    - by Shore
    Description: the query actually run have 4 results returned,as can be see from below, what I did is just concate the items then return, but unexpectedly,it's null. I think the code is self-explanatory: DELIMITER | DROP FUNCTION IF EXISTS get_idiscussion_ask| CREATE FUNCTION get_idiscussion_ask(iask_id INT UNSIGNED) RETURNS TEXT DETERMINISTIC BEGIN DECLARE done INT DEFAULT 0; DECLARE body varchar(600); DECLARE created DATETIME; DECLARE anonymous TINYINT(1); DECLARE screen_name varchar(64); DECLARE result TEXT; DECLARE cur1 CURSOR FOR SELECT body,created,anonymous,screen_name from idiscussion left join users on idiscussion.uid=users.id where idiscussion.iask_id=iask_id; DECLARE CONTINUE HANDLER FOR SQLSTATE '02000' SET done = 1; SET result = ''; OPEN cur1; REPEAT FETCH cur1 INTO body, created, anonymous, screen_name; SET result = CONCAT(result,'<comment><body><![CDATA[',body,']]></body>','<replier>',if(screen_name is not null and !anonymous,screen_name,''),'</replier>','<created>',created,'</created></comment>'); UNTIL done END REPEAT; CLOSE cur1; RETURN result; END | DELIMITER ; mysql> DELIMITER ; mysql> select get_idiscussion_ask(1); +------------------------+ | get_idiscussion_ask(1) | +------------------------+ | NULL | +------------------------+ 1 row in set (0.01 sec) mysql> SELECT body,created,anonymous,screen_name from idiscussion left join users on idiscussion.uid=users.id where idiscussion.iask_id=1; +------+---------------------+-----------+-------------+ | body | created | anonymous | screen_name | +------+---------------------+-----------+-------------+ | haha | 2009-05-27 04:57:51 | 0 | NULL | | haha | 2009-05-27 04:57:52 | 0 | NULL | | haha | 2009-05-27 04:57:52 | 0 | NULL | | haha | 2009-05-27 04:57:53 | 0 | NULL | +------+---------------------+-----------+-------------+ 4 rows in set (0.00 sec) For those who don't think the code is self-explanatory: Why the function returns NULL?

    Read the article

  • MYSQL DELETE from a table [closed]

    - by Hossein
    Possible Duplicate: MySQL DELETE in a single table Hi, I have this table: userurltag(id,user,Url,tag) I want to remove rows that contain urls that are used by only one user, can someone help me? It seems that DELETE...(SELECT...) is not supported in Mysql.

    Read the article

  • insert data to table based on another table C#

    - by user1017315
    I wrote a code which takes some values from one table and inserts the other table in these values.(not just these values, but also these values(this values=values from the based on table)) and I get this error: System.Data.OleDb.OleDbException (0x80040E10): value wan't given for one or more of the required parameters.` here's the code. I don't know what i've missed. string selectedItem = comboBox1.SelectedItem.ToString(); Codons cdn = new Codons(selectedItem); string codon1; int index; if (this.i != this.counter) { //take from the DataBase the matching codonsCodon1 to codonsFullName codon1 = cdn.GetCodon1(); //take the serialnumber of the last protein string connectionString = "Provider=Microsoft.ACE.OLEDB.12.0;" + "Data Source=C:\\Projects_2012\\Project_Noam\\Access\\myProject.accdb"; OleDbConnection conn = new OleDbConnection(connectionString); conn.Open(); string last= "SELECT proInfoSerialNum FROM tblProInfo WHERE proInfoScienceName = "+this.name ; OleDbCommand getSerial = new OleDbCommand(last, conn); OleDbDataReader dr = getSerial.ExecuteReader(); dr.Read(); index = dr.GetInt32(0); //add the amino acid to tblOrderAA using (OleDbConnection connection = new OleDbConnection(connectionString)) { string insertCommand = "INSERT INTO tblOrderAA(orderAASerialPro, orderAACodon1) " + " values (?, ?)"; using (OleDbCommand command = new OleDbCommand(insertCommand, connection)) { connection.Open(); command.Parameters.AddWithValue("orderAASerialPro", index); command.Parameters.AddWithValue("orderAACodon1", codon1); command.ExecuteNonQuery(); } } } EDIT:I put a messagebox after that line: index = dr.GetInt32(0); to see where is the problem, and i get the error before that.i don't see the messagebox

    Read the article

  • Adding values from different tables

    - by damdeok
    Friends, I have these tables: Contestant Table: Winner Peter Group Table: Id Name Score Union 1 Bryan 3 77 2 Mary 1 20 3 Peter 5 77 4 Joseph 2 25 5 John 6 77 I want to give additional score of 5 to Peter on Group Table. So, I came up with this query. UPDATE Group SET Score = Score+5 FROM Contestant, Group WHERE Contestant.Winner = Group.Name Now, I want also to give additional score of 5 to the same Union as Peter which is 77. How can I integrate it as one query to my existing query?

    Read the article

  • Need help with a conditional SELECT statement

    - by Ethan
    I've got a stored procedure with a select statement, like this: `SELECT author_ID, author_name, author_bio FROM Authors WHERE author_ID in (SELECT author_ID from Books) ` This limits results to authors who have book records. This is the Books table: Books book_ID INT author_ID INT book_title NVARCHAR featured_book BIT What I want to do is conditionally select the ID of the featured book by each author as part of the select statement above, and if none of the books for a given author are featured, select the ID of the first (top 1) book by the author from the books table. How do I approach this?

    Read the article

  • IDENTITY_INSERT is set to off error

    - by kingrichard2005
    I have a MVC web application with a table in the model that I would like to add to. I have the primary key set along with the other data fields, but every time I try to add to the table, I get the following error: "Cannot insert explicit value for identity column in table 'TABLE_NAME' when IDENTITY_INSERT is set to OFF." I'm not sure why this problem is coming up, I have the primary key set as the identity and it is also set to auto increment in the Visual Studio table designer. Is there any way I can adjust the IDENTITY_INSERT parameter in the table designer in Visual Studio?? Or is there some other issue that might be causing this.

    Read the article

  • Varchar columns: Nullable or not.

    - by NYSystemsAnalyst
    The database development standards in our organization state the varchar fields should not allow null values. They should have a default value of an empty string (""). I know this makes querying and concatenation easier, but today, one of my coworkers questioned me about why that standard only existed for varchar types an not other datatypes (int, datetime, etc). I would like to know if others consider this to be a valid, defensible standard, or if varchar should be treated the same as fields of other data types? I believe this standard is valid for the following reason: I believe that an empty string and null values, though technically different, are conceptually the same. An empty, zero length string is a string that does not exist. It has no value. However, a numeric value of 0 is not the same as NULL. For example, if a field called OutstandingBalance has a value of 0, it means there are $0.00 remaining. However, if the same field is NULL, that means the value is unknown. On the other hand, a field called CustomerName with a value of "" is basically the same as a value of NULL because both represent the non-existence of the name. I read somewhere that an analogy for an empty string vs. NULL is that of a blank CD vs. no CD. However, I believe this to be a false analogy because a blank CD still phyically exists and still has physical data space that does not have any meaningful data written to it. Basically, I believe a blank CD is the equivalent of a string of blank spaces (" "), not an empty string. Therefore, I believe a string of blank spaces to be an actual value separate from NULL, but an empty string to be the absense of value conceptually equivalent to NULL. Please let me know if my beliefs regarding variable length strings are valid, or please enlighten me if they are not. I have read several blogs / arguments regarding this subject, but still do not see a true conceptual difference between NULLs and empty strings.

    Read the article

  • Weird MySQL behavior, seems like a SQL bug

    - by Daniel Magliola
    I'm getting a very strange behavior in MySQL, which looks like some kind of weird bug. I know it's common to blame the tried and tested tool for one's mistakes, but I've been going around this for a while. I have 2 tables, I, with 2797 records, and C, with 1429. C references I. I want to delete all records in I that are not used by C, so i'm doing: select * from i where id not in (select id_i from c); That returns 0 records, which, given the record counts in each table, is physically impossible. I'm also pretty sure that the query is right, since it's the same type of query i've been using for the last 2 hours to clean up other tables with orphaned records. To make things even weirder... select * from i where id in (select id_i from c); DOES work, and brings me the 1297 records that I do NOT want to delete. So, IN works, but NOT IN doesn't. Even worse: select * from i where id not in ( select i.id from i inner join c ON i.id = c.id_i ); That DOES work, although it should be equivalent to the first query (i'm just trying mad stuff at this point). Alas, I can't use this query to delete, because I'm using the same table i'm deleting from in the subquery. I'm assuming something in my database is corrupt at this point. In case it matters, these are all MyISAM tables without any foreign keys, whatsoever, and I've run the same queries in my dev machine and in the production server with the same result, so whatever corruption there might be survived a mysqldump / source cycle, which sounds awfully strange. Any ideas on what could be going wrong, or, even more importantly, how I can fix/work around this? Thanks! Daniel

    Read the article

  • How can I get the rank of rows relative to total number of rows based on a field?

    - by Arms
    I have a scores table that has two fields: user_id score I'm fetching specific rows that match a list of user_id's. How can I determine a rank for each row relative to the total number of rows, based on score? The rows in the result set are not necessarily sequential (the scores will vary widely from one row to the next). I'm not sure if this matters, but user_id is a unique field. Edit @Greelmo I'm already ordering the rows. If I fetch 15 rows, I don't want the rank to be 1-15. I need it to be the position of that row compared against the entire table by the score property. So if I have 200 rows, one row's rank may be 3 and another may be 179 (these are arbitrary #'s for example only). Edit 2 I'm having some luck with this query, but I actually want to avoid ties SELECT s.score , s.created_at , u.name , u.location , u.icon_id , u.photo , (SELECT COUNT(*) + 1 FROM scores WHERE score > s.score) AS rank FROM scores s LEFT JOIN users u ON u.uID = s.user_id ORDER BY s.score DESC , s.created_at DESC LIMIT 15 If two or more rows have the same score, I want the latest one (or earliest - I don't care) to be ranked higher. I tried modifying the subquery with AND id > s.id but that ended up giving me an unexpected result set and different ties.

    Read the article

  • The Next-gen Databases

    - by Randin
    I'm learning traditional Relational Databases (with PostgreSQL) and doing some research I've come across some new types of databases. CouchDB, Drizzle, and Scalaris to name a few, what is going to be the next database technologies to deal with?

    Read the article

  • Are GUID primary keys bad in theory, or just practice?

    - by Yarin
    Whenever I design a database I automatically start with an auto-generating GUID primary key for each of my tables (excepting look-up tables) I know I'll never lose sleep over duplicate keys, merging tables, etc. To me it just makes sense philosophically that any given record should be unique across all domains, and that that uniqueness should be represented in a consistent way from table to table. I realize it will never be the most performant option, but putting performance aside, I'd like to know if there are philosophical arguments against this practice?

    Read the article

  • When using Query Syntax in C# "Enumeration yielded no results". How to retrieve output

    - by Shantanu Gupta
    I have created this query to fetch some result from database. Here is my table structure. What exaclty is happening. DtMapGuestDepartment as Table 1 DtDepartment as Table 2 Are being used var dept_list= from map in DtMapGuestDepartment.AsEnumerable() where map.Field<Nullable<long>>("GUEST_ID") == DRowGuestPI.Field<Nullable<long>>("PK_GUEST_ID") join dept in DtDepartment.AsEnumerable() on map.Field<Nullable<long>>("DEPARTMENT_ID") equals dept.Field<Nullable<long>>("DEPARTMENT_ID") select dept.Field<string>("DEPARTMENT_ID"); I am performing this query on DataTables and expect it to return me a datatable. Here I want to select distinct department from Table 1 as well which will be my next quest. Please answer to that also if possible.

    Read the article

  • Insert query results into table in ms access 2010

    - by CodeMed
    I need to transform data from one schema into another in an MS Access database. This involves writing queries to select data from the old schema and then inserting the results of the queries into tables in the new schema. The below is an example of what I am trying to do. The SELECT component of the below works fine, but the INSERT component does not work. Can someone show me how to fix the below so that it effectively inserts the results of the SELECT statement into the destination table? INSERT INTO CompaniesTable (CompanyName) VALUES ( SELECT DISTINCT IIF(a.FIRM_NAME IS NULL, b.SUBACCOUNT_COMPANY_NAME, a.FIRM_NAME) AS CompanyName FROM (SELECT ContactID, FIRM_NAME, SUBACCOUNT_COMPANY_NAME FROM qrySummaryData) AS a LEFT JOIN (SELECT ContactID, FIRM_NAME, SUBACCOUNT_COMPANY_NAME FROM qrySummaryData) AS b ON a.ContactID = b.ContactID ); The definition of the target table (CompaniesTable) is: CompanyID Autonumber CompanyName Text Description Text WebSite Text Email Text TypeNumber Number

    Read the article

  • Database design - alternatives for Entity Attribute Value (AEV)

    - by Bob
    Hi, see http://stackoverflow.com/questions/695752/product-table-many-kinds-of-product-each-product-has-many-parameters for similar topic. My question: i want to design a database, that will be used for a production facility of different types of products where each product has its own (number of) parameters. because i want the serial numbers to be in one tabel for overview purposes i have a problem with these different paraeters . One solution could be AEV, but it has its downsides, certainly because we have +- 5 products with every product +- 20.000 serial numbers (records). it looks a bit overkill to me... I just don't know how one could design a database so that you have an attribute in a mastertable that says: 'hey, you could find details of this record in THAT detail-table". 'in a way that you qould easely query the results) currenty i am using Visual Basic & Acces 2007. but i'm going to Visual Basic & MySQL. thanks for your help. Bob

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to return result from business layer to presentation layer when using linq - I

    - by samsur
    I have a business layer that has DTOs that are used in the presentation layer. This application uses entity framework. Here is an example of a class called RoleDTO public class RoleDTO { public Guid RoleId { get; set; } public string RoleName { get; set; } public string RoleDescription { get; set; } public int? OrganizationId { get; set; } } In the BLL I want to have a method that returns a list of DTO.. I would like to know which is the better approach: returning IQueryable or list of DTOs. Although i feel that returning Iqueryable is not a good idea because the connection needs to be open. Here are the 2 different methods using the different approaches public class RoleBLL { private servicedeskEntities sde; public RoleBLL() { sde = new servicedeskEntities(); } public IQueryable<RoleDTO> GetAllRoles() { IQueryable<RoleDTO> role = from r in sde.Roles select new RoleDTO() { RoleId = r.RoleID, RoleName = r.RoleName, RoleDescription = r.RoleDescription, OrganizationId = r.OrganizationId }; return role; } Note: in the above method the datacontext is a private attribute and set in the constructor, so that the connection stays opened. Second approach public static List GetAllRoles() { List roleDTO = new List(); using (servicedeskEntities sde = new servicedeskEntities()) { var roles = from pri in sde.Roles select new { pri.RoleID, pri.RoleName, pri.RoleDescription }; //Add the role entites to the DTO list and return. This is necessary as anonymous types can be returned acrosss methods foreach (var item in roles) { RoleDTO roleItem = new RoleDTO(); roleItem.RoleId = item.RoleID; roleItem.RoleDescription = item.RoleDescription; roleItem.RoleName = item.RoleName; roleDTO.Add(roleItem); } return roleDTO; } Please let me know, if there is a better approach - Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Can I join two tables whereby the joined table is sorted by a certain column?

    - by Ferdy
    I'm not much of a database guru so I need some help on a query I'm working on. In my photo community project I want to richly visualize tags by not only showing the tag name and counter (# of images inside them), I also want to show a thumb of the most popular image inside the tag (most karma). The table setup is as follow: Image table holds basic image metadata, important is the karma field Imagefile table holds multiple entries per image, one for each format Tag table holds tag definitions Tag_map table maps tags to images In my usual trial and error query authoring I have come this far: SELECT * FROM (SELECT tag.name, tag.id, COUNT(tag_map.tag_id) as cnt FROM tag INNER JOIN tag_map ON (tag.id = tag_map.tag_id) INNER JOIN image ON tag_map.image_id = image.id INNER JOIN imagefile on image.id = imagefile.image_id WHERE imagefile.type = 'smallthumb' GROUP BY tag.name ORDER BY cnt DESC) as T1 WHERE cnt > 0 ORDER BY cnt DESC [column clause of inner query snipped for the sake of simplicity] This query gives me somewhat what I need. The outer query makes sure that only tags are returned for which there is at least 1 image. The inner query returns the tag details, such as its name, count (# of images) and the thumb. In addition, I can sort the inner query as I want (by most images, alphabetically, most recent, etc) So far so good. The problem however is that this query does not match the most popular image (most karma) of the tag, it seems to always take the most recent one in the tag. How can I make sure that the most popular image is matched with the tag?

    Read the article

  • SqlServer2008 + expensive union all

    - by Tim Mahy
    Hi al, we have 5 tables over which we should query with user search input throughout a stored procedure. We do a union all of the similar data inside a view. Because of this the view can not be materialized. We are not able to change these 5 tables drastically (like creating a 6th table that contains the similar data of the 5 tables and reference that new one from the 5 tables). The query is rather expensive / slow what are our other options? It's allowed to think outside the box. Unfortunately I cannot give more information like the table/view/SP definition because of customer confidentiality... greetings, Tim

    Read the article

  • How to get an id from the results in two tables

    - by Chris Lively
    Consider an order. An order will have one or more line items. Each line item is for a particular product. Given a filter table with a couple of products, how would I get the order id's that had at least all of the products listed in the second table? table Orders( OrderId int ) table LineItems ( OrderId int, LineItemId int, ProductId int ) table Filter ( ProductId int ) data Orders OrderId -------- 1 2 3 LineItems OrderId LineItemId ProductId ------- ---------- --------- 1 1 401 1 2 502 2 3 401 3 4 401 3 5 603 3 6 714 Filter ProductId --------- 401 603 Desired result of the query: OrderId: 3

    Read the article

  • Put logic behind generated LinqToSql fields

    - by boris callens
    In a database I use throughout several projects, there is a field that should actually be a boolean but is for reasons nobody can explain to me a field duplicated over two tables where one time it is a char ('Y'/'N') and one time an int (1/0). When I generate a datacontext with LinqToSql the fields off course gets these datatypes. It would be nice if I don't have to drag this stupid choice of datatype throughout the rest of my application. Is there a way to give the generated classes a little bit of logic that just return me return this.equals('Y'); and return this==1; Preferably without having to make an EXTRA field in my partial class. It would be a solution to give the generated field a totally different name that can only be accessed through the partial class and then generate the extra field with the original name with my custom logic in the partial class. I don't know how to alter the accesibility level in my generated class though.. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Linq for two tables

    - by Diana
    I need to do something like this, My two tables have the same signature, but different class so It suppose to work but it is not working. var myTable; if (booleanVariable == true) { myTable = table1; } else { myTable = table2; } var myLinq1 = from p in myTable join r in myOtherTable select p; In this case, I have to initialize myTable I have tried also, var myTablev= table2; if (booleanVariable == true) { myTable = table1; } var myLinq1 = from p in myTable join r in myOtherTable select p; then var is type table2, then it can't be changed to table1 type. I need help, I don't want to make a copy paste of all the code. the linq query is huge, and it s nested with 5 or 6 queries. also I have to do this on 12 different methods. Thanks a lot for your help.

    Read the article

  • DB2: Won't allow parameterize fetch first X rows only

    - by Guy Roth
    Although in Oracle DB its is allowed to parametrize the number of rows that the query can fetch by adding to the query: select ... from ... where ... and rownum <= @MaximumRecords I can't add similar condition to acuivalent query running in DB2: It is allowed to add: select ... from ... where ... fetch first 500 rows only (where there is fixed number of rows) but not: select ... from ... where ... fetch first :1 rows only (:1 == @MaximumRecords) Is someone aware of a solution/work-around to this problem?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624  | Next Page >