Search Results

Search found 27905 results on 1117 pages for 'sql authority'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 652/1117 | < Previous Page | 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659  | Next Page >

  • best database design for city zip & state tables

    - by ryan a
    My application will need to reference addresses. Street info will be stored with my main objects but the rest needs to be stored seperately to reduce redundancy. How should I store/retrieve ZIPs, cities and states? Here are some of my ideas. single table solution (cant do relationships) [locations] locationID locationParent (FK for locationID - 0 for state entries) locationName (city, state) locationZIP two tables (with relationships, FK constraints, ref integrity) [state] stateID stateName [city] cityID stateID (FK for state.stateID) cityName zipCode three tables [state] stateID stateName [city] cityID stateID (FK for state.stateID) cityName [zip] zipID cityID (FK for city.cityID) zipName Then I read into ZIP codes amd how they are assigned. They aren't specifically related to cities. Some cities have more than one ZIP (ok will still work) but some ZIPs are in more than one city (oh snap) and some other ZIPs (very few) are in more than one state! Also some ZIPs are not even in the same state as the address they belong to at all. Seems ZIPs are made for carrier route identification and some remote places are best served by post offices in neighboring cities or states. Does anybody know of a good (not perfect) solution that takes this into consideration to minimize discrepencies as the database grows?

    Read the article

  • Which would be better? Storing/access data in a local text file, or in a database?

    - by TerranRich
    Basically, I'm still working on a puzzle-related website (micro-site really), and I'm making a tool that lets you input a word pattern (e.g. "r??n") and get all the matching words (in this case: rain, rein, ruin, etc.). Should I store the words in local text files (such as words5.txt, which would have a return-delimited list of 5-letter words), or in a database (such as the table Words5, which would again store 5-letter words)? I'm looking at the problem in terms of data retrieval speeds and CPU server load. I could definitely try it both ways and record the times taken for several runs with both methods, but I'd rather hear it from people who might have had experience with this. Which method is generally better overall?

    Read the article

  • How to check if an entityset is populated

    - by TheQ
    How can i check if an entityset of a linq-object is populated or not? Example code below. My model have two methods, one joins data, and the other does not: public static Member GetMemberWithSettings(Guid memberId) { using (DataContext db = new DataContext()) { DataLoadOptions dataLoadOptions = new DataLoadOptions(); dataLoadOptions.LoadWith<Member>(x => x.Settings); db.LoadOptions = dataLoadOptions; var query = from x in db.Members where x.MemberId == memberId select x; return query.FirstOrDefault(); } } public static Member GetMember(Guid memberId) { using (DataContext db = new DataContext()) { var query = from x in db.Members where x.MemberId == memberId select x; return query.FirstOrDefault(); } } Then my control have the following code: Member member1 = Member.GetMemberWithSettings(memberId); Member member2 = Member.GetMember(memberId); Debug.WriteLine(member1.Settings.Count); Debug.WriteLine(member2.Settings.Count); The last line will generate a "Cannot access a disposed object" exception. I know that i can get rid of that exception just by not disposing the datacontext, but then the last line will generate a new query to the database, and i don't want that. What i would like is something like: Debug.WriteLine((member1.Settings.IsPopulated()) ? member1.Settings.Count : -1); Debug.WriteLine((member2.Settings.IsPopulated()) ? member2.Settings.Count : -1); Is it possible?

    Read the article

  • LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO IN Oracle SQL

    - by Jasim
    updated_date = 08-Jun-2010; I have a query like this select * from asd whre updated_date <= todate('08-Jun-2010', 'dd-MM-yy'); but i am not getting any result. it is wotking only if todate is 09-Jun-2010... ie my equalto operator is not working properly. y is it like that ny help?

    Read the article

  • customizing rowsource query in combobox ACCESS

    - by every_answer_gets_a_point
    i have 4 comboboxes and each of them need to have the same query in the rowsource, except there is a slight variation on each query if rowsource = somequery i need it to be select * from somequery where something like 'something1'; the next one needs to be select * from somequery where something like 'something2'; is there a way to customize the rowsource property in this way?

    Read the article

  • Collection was modified; enumeration operation may not execute

    - by Rita
    I have the below code. I am trying to remove the record and it is throwing Exception when it is removing the Record. "Collection was modified; enumeration operation may not execute." Any ideas on how to get rid of the message. Appreciate your time. //validClaimControlNo has valid ClaimControl Numbers. List<string> validClaimControlNo = new List<string>(); int count = 0; foreach (List<Field> f in records) { foreach (Field fe in f) { if (i == 0) if (!(validClaimControlNo.Contains(fe.Value))) { //if this claim is not in the Valid list, Remove that Record records.RemoveAt(count); } i++; } i = 0; count++; }

    Read the article

  • SQL Join query, getting ManagerName

    - by user279521
    I have an tblEmployeeProfile & a tblPersonnel. tblPersonnel is an HR table, that consists of all employees in the company; tblEmployeeProfile contains details about an employee's position. tblPersonnel.PersonnelID tblPersonnel.FirstName tblPersonnel.MiddleName tblPersonnel.LastName tblPersonnel.PhoneNumber tblPersonnel.Email tblEmployeeProfile.EmployeeID tblEmployeeProfile.ManagerID tblEmployeeProfile.DepartmentID tblEmployeeProfile.JobCategoryID tblEmployeeProfile.SalaryID I want to return a record with the following fields: EmployeeID, FirstName, MiddleName, LastName, Email, ManagerFullName where EmployeeID = @EmployeeID *tblEmployeeProfile.ManagerID = tblPersonnel.PersonnelID* I can't seem to get the query correct for getting the ManagerFullName

    Read the article

  • How do I use on delete cascade in mysql?

    - by Marius
    I have a database of components. Each component is of a specific type. That means there is a many-to-one relationship between a component and a type. When I delete a type, I would like to delete all the components which has a foreign key of that type. But if I'm not mistaken, cascade delete will delete the type when the component is deleted. Is there any way to do what I described?

    Read the article

  • SQL time issue - need it 6 hours forward!

    - by Luke
    My server is currently based on us eastern time, and as I am in the UK, i need to move this forward 6 hours. When using now() in mysql, i am getting the wrong time, is there anything i can add to now() to bring it forward 6 hours? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Inexplicably slow query in MySQL

    - by Brandon M.
    Given this result-set: mysql> EXPLAIN SELECT c.cust_name, SUM(l.line_subtotal) FROM customer c -> JOIN slip s ON s.cust_id = c.cust_id -> JOIN line l ON l.slip_id = s.slip_id -> JOIN vendor v ON v.vend_id = l.vend_id WHERE v.vend_name = 'blahblah' -> GROUP BY c.cust_name -> HAVING SUM(l.line_subtotal) > 49999 -> ORDER BY c.cust_name; +----+-------------+-------+--------+---------------------------------+---------------+---------+----------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+--------+---------------------------------+---------------+---------+----------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | v | ref | PRIMARY,idx_vend_name | idx_vend_name | 12 | const | 1 | Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | l | ref | idx_vend_id | idx_vend_id | 4 | csv_import.v.vend_id | 446 | | | 1 | SIMPLE | s | eq_ref | PRIMARY,idx_cust_id,idx_slip_id | PRIMARY | 4 | csv_import.l.slip_id | 1 | | | 1 | SIMPLE | c | eq_ref | PRIMARY,cIndex | PRIMARY | 4 | csv_import.s.cust_id | 1 | | +----+-------------+-------+--------+---------------------------------+---------------+---------+----------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+ 4 rows in set (0.04 sec) I'm a bit baffled as to why the query referenced by this EXPLAIN statement is still taking about a minute to execute. Isn't it true that this query only has to search through 449 rows? Anyone have any idea as to what could be slowing it down so much?

    Read the article

  • Mysql query help needed

    - by Me-and-Coding
    Hi, i have two tables category and hotels where category.id should be equal to hotels.catid. Now how do i select 3 rows from each different category from the hotels table. I have this query: select h.* from hotels h inner join category c on h.catid = c.id order by h.catid, h.hid this selects all records, but i want to select three rows per different category so in all it should return 9 rows with 3 rows for each category. If this can not be done in mysql, you could also suggest php code please. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Caching stored procedure results in Linq'u

    - by itdebeloper
    In our web application we have a lots of stored procedures look like this one: getSomeData(/* 7 diffrent params */) This stored procedure don't make any updates. We are using Linq'u. I know that the date are changing no often than once per day so the results for the same sets of parameters values will be the same. Does Linqu have cache simple solution? I know how to 'manually' write cache mechanism in .net, but I supposed that in Linqu this problem was solved. I'm a lazy guy :) so I'm looking for something realy simple like: Linqu_global_store_procedure_configuration.CacheDuration="600" Linqu_global_store_procedure_configuration.CacheVaryByParam="*" I'm using .net 3.5 but its not any problem to move for 4.0.

    Read the article

  • Multiple user database design

    - by dieguitoweb
    I have to develop a basic social network for an academic purpose; but I need some tips for the users management.. The users are subdivided into 3 groups with different privilege: admins,analysts and standards users. For every user should be stored into the database the following information: name,lastname,e-mail,age,password. I'm not quite sure how I should design the database between theese two solutions: 1)one table called 'users' with the 'role' attribute that explain what a user can do and what can't do, and the permissions are managed via php 2)every application user is a database user created with the query 'CREATE ROLE' (It's a postgres database) and he has permissions on some tables granted with the 'GRANT' statement You should take into account that the project is for a database exam.. thanks

    Read the article

  • Subquery with multiple results combined into a single field?

    - by Todd
    Assume I have these tables, from which i need to display search results in a browser: Table: Containers id | name 1 Big Box 2 Grocery Bag 3 Envelope 4 Zip Lock Table: Sale id | date | containerid 1 20100101 1 2 20100102 2 3 20091201 3 4 20091115 4 Table: Items id | name | saleid 1 Barbie Doll 1 2 Coin 3 3 Pop-Top 4 4 Barbie Doll 2 5 Coin 4 I need output that looks like this: itemid itemname saleids saledates containerids containertypes 1 Barbie Doll 1,2 20100101,20100102 1,2 Big Box, Grocery Bag 2 Coin 3,4 20091201,20091115 3,4 Envelope, Zip Lock 3 Pop-Top 4 20091115 4 Zip Lock The important part is that each item type only gets one record/row in the return on the screen. I accomplished this in the past by returning multiple rows of the same item and using a scripting language to limit the output. However, this makes the ui overly complicated and loopy. So, I'm hoping I can get the database to spit out only as many records as there are rows to display. This example may be a bit extreme because of the 2 joins needed to get to the container from the item (through the sale table). I'd be happy for just an example query that outputs this: itemid itemname saleids saledates 1 Barbie Doll 1,2 20100101,20100102 2 Coin 3,4 20091201,20091115 3 Pop-Top 4 20091115 I can only return a single result in a subquery, so I'm not sure how to do this.

    Read the article

  • Showing multiple models in a single ListView

    - by Veer
    I've three models (Contacts, Notes, Reminders). I want to search all these and produce the filtered result in a single listview and depending upon the selection I've to display the corresponding view(UserControl) to its right. I want the right way of implementing the design or atleast alternatives to this method that I've tried. Now I've tried it using a IntegratedViewModel having all the properties from all the three models. public class IntegratedViewModel { ContactModel _contactModel; NoteModel _noteModel; public IntegratedViewModel(ContactModel contactModel) { _contactModel = contactModel; } // similarly for other models also public string DisplayTitle // For displaying in ListView { get; //same as set set { If(_contactModel != null) return _contactModel.Name; If(_noteModel != null) return _noteModel.Title; } } // All other properties from the three models includin the Name/Title properties for displaying them in the corresponding views(UserControl) } Now I set the itemsSource as the List<IntegratedViewModel>. I've to now bind the visibility of the views to some properties in the MainViewModel. I tried setting bool properties like IsContactViewSelected, IsNoteViewSelected using the setter of SelectedEntity property which is bound to the ListView's SelectedItem. public SelectedEntity { //get set { oldvalue = _selectedEntity; _selectedEntity = value; // now i find the Type of model selected using oldvalue.ModelType // where ModelType is a property in the IntegratedViewModel // according to the type, i set one of the above bool properties to false // and do the same for _selectedEntity but set the property to true // so that the view corresponding to the selectedEntityType is visible // and others are collapsed } } Here is the problem: For eg: let us say, I selected an item of type ContactModel, the old selection being NoteModel. I set the property IsNoteModelSelected to false according to the oldvalue, it sets the property and then Raises the propertychanged event and does not go and check the remaining if condition where i check for _selectedEntity which is used to set the IsContactModelSelected to true.

    Read the article

  • How can I improve the below query?

    - by Newbie
    I have the following input. INPUT: TableA ID Sentences --- ---------- 1 I am a student 2 Have a nice time guys! What I need to do is to extract the words from the sentence(s) and insert each individual word in another table OUTPUT: SentenceID WordOccurance Word ---------- ------------ ----- 1 1 I 1 2 am 1 3 a 1 4 student 2 1 Have 2 2 a 2 3 nice 2 4 time 2 5 guys! I was able to get the answer by using the below query ;With numCTE As ( Select rn = 1 Union all Select rn+1 from numCTE where rn<1000) select SentenceID=id, WordOccurance=row_number()over(partition by TableA.ID order by rn), Word = substring(' '+sentences+' ', rn+1, charindex(' ',' '+sentences+' ', rn+1)-rn-1) from TableA join numCTE on rn <= len(' '+sentences+' ') where substring(' '+sentences+' ', rn,1) = ' ' order by id, rn How can I improve this query of mine.? Basically I am looking for a better solution than the one presented Thanks

    Read the article

  • Best way to update/insert into a table based on a remote table.

    - by martilyo
    I have two very large enterprise tables in an Oracle 10g database. One table keeps the historical information of the other table. The problem is, I'm getting to the point where the records are just too many that my insert update is taking too long and my session is getting killed by the governor. Here's a pseudocode of my update process: sqlsel := 'SELECT col1, col2, col3, sysdate FROM table2@remote_location dpi WHERE (col1, col2, col3) IN ( SELECT col1, col2, col3 FROM table2@remote_location MINUS SELECT DISTINCT col1, col2, col3 FROM table1 mpc WHERE facility = '''||load_facility||''' )'; EXECUTE IMMEDIATE sqlsel BULK COLLECT INTO table1; I've tried the MERGE statement: MERGE INTO table1 t1 USING ( SELECT col1, col2, col3 FROM table2@remote_location ) t2 ON ( t1.col1 = t2.col1 AND t1.col2 = t2.col2 AND t1.col3 = t2.col3 ) WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN INSERT (t1.col1, t1.col2, t1.col3, t1.update_dttm ) VALUES (t2.col1, t2.col2, t2.col3, sysdate ) But there seems to be a confirmed bug on versions prior to Oracle 10.2.0.4 on the merge statement when doing a merge using a remote database. The chance of getting an enterprise upgrade is slim so is there a way to further optimize my first query or write it in another way to have it run best performance wise? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Password security; Is this safe?

    - by Camran
    I asked a question yesterday about password safety... I am new at security... I am using a mysql db, and need to store users passwords there. I have been told in answers that hashing and THEN saving the HASHED value of the password is the correct way of doing this. So basically I want to verify with you guys this is correct now. It is a classifieds website, and for each classified the user puts, he has to enter a password so that he/she can remove the classified using that password later on (when product is sold for example). In a file called "put_ad.php" I use the $_POST method to fetch the pass from a form. Then I hash it and put it into a mysql table. Then whenever the users wants to delete the ad, I check the entered password by hashing it and comparing the hashed value of the entered passw against the hashed value in the mysql db, right? BUT, what if I as an admin want to delete a classified, is there a method to "Unhash" the password easily? sha1 is used currently btw. some code is very much appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Select rows where column LIKE dictionary word

    - by Gerve
    I have 2 tables: Dictionary - Contains roughly 36,000 words CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `dictionary` ( `word` varchar(255) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`word`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1; Datas - Contains roughly 100,000 rows CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `datas` ( `ID` int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `hash` varchar(32) NOT NULL, `data` varchar(255) NOT NULL, `length` int(11) NOT NULL, `time` int(11) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`ID`), UNIQUE KEY `hash` (`hash`), KEY `data` (`data`), KEY `length` (`length`), KEY `time` (`time`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=105316 ; I would like to somehow select all the rows from datas where the column data contains 1 or more words. I understand this is a big ask, it would need to match all of these rows together in every combination possible, so it needs the best optimization. I have tried the below query, but it just hangs for ages: SELECT `datas`.*, `dictionary`.`word` FROM `datas`, `dictionary` WHERE `datas`.`data` LIKE CONCAT('%', `dictionary`.`word`, '%') AND LENGTH(`dictionary`.`word`) > 3 ORDER BY `length` ASC LIMIT 15 I have also tried something similar to the above with a left join, and on clause that specified the like statement.

    Read the article

  • Rails 3 fields_for agressive loading?

    - by Seth
    Hi all, I'm trying to optimize (limit) queries in a view. I am using the fields_for function. I need to reference various properties of the object, such as username for display purposes. However, this is a rel table, so I need to join with my users table. The result is N sub-queries, 1 for each field in fields_for. It's difficult to explain, but I think you'll understand what I'm asking if I paste my code: <%= form_for @election do |f| %> <%= f.fields_for :voters do |voter| %> <%= voter.hidden_field :id %> <%= voter.object.user.preferred_name %> <% end %> <% end %> I have like 10,000 users, and many times each election will include all 10,000 users. That's 10,000 subqueries every time this view is loaded. I want fields_for to JOIN on users. Is this possible? I'd like to do something like: ... <%= f.fields_for :voters, :joins => :users do |voter| %> ... <% end %> ... But that, of course, doesn't work :(

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659  | Next Page >