Search Results

Search found 27368 results on 1095 pages for 'msaccess to sql'.

Page 669/1095 | < Previous Page | 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676  | Next Page >

  • MySQL - accessing a table sum and compare to another table?

    - by assignment_operator
    This is for a homework assignment. I just plain don't understand how to do it. The instructions for this particular question is: List the branch name for all branches that have at least one book that has at least 4 copies on hand. Where the tables in question are: Branch: BranchName | BranchId Henry Downtown | 1 16 Riverview | 2 Henry On The Hill | 3 Inventory: BookId | BranchId | OnHand 1 | 1 | 2 2 | 3 | 4 3 | 1 | 8 4 | 3 | 1 5 | 1 | 2 6 | 2 | 3 From what I understand, I can get the number of OnHand per branch name with: SELECT BranchName, SUM(OnHand) FROM Branch B, Inventory I WHERE B.BranchId = I.BranchId GROUP BY BranchName; but I don't get how I'd do the comparison between the sum of OnHand per branch and 4. Any help would be appreciated, guys!

    Read the article

  • Database table schema design - varchar(n). Suitable choice of N

    - by morpheous
    Coming from a C background, I may be getting too anal about this and worrying unnecessarily about bits and bytes here. Still, I cant help thinking how the data is actually stored and that if I choose an N which is easily factorizable into a power of 2, the database will be more effecient in how it packs data etc. Using this "logic", I have a string field in a table which is a variable length up to 21 chars. I am tempted to use 32 instead of 21, for the reason given above - however now I am thinking that I am wasting disk space because there will be space allocated for 11 extra chars that are guaranteed to be never used. Since I envisage storing several tens of thousands of rows a day, it all adds up. Question: Mindful of all of the above, Should I declare varchar(21) or varchar(32) and why?

    Read the article

  • what is the 'extra' mean in this django code..

    - by zjm1126
    TOPIC_COUNT_SQL = """ SELECT COUNT(*) FROM topics_topic WHERE topics_topic.object_id = maps_map.id AND topics_topic.content_type_id = %s """ MEMBER_COUNT_SQL = """ SELECT COUNT(*) FROM maps_map_members WHERE maps_map_members.map_id = maps_map.id """ maps = maps.extra(select=SortedDict([ ('member_count', MEMBER_COUNT_SQL), ('topic_count', TOPIC_COUNT_SQL), ]), select_params=(content_type.id,)) i don't know this mean, thanks

    Read the article

  • Sorting nested set by name while keep depth integrity

    - by wb
    I'm using the nested set model that'll later be used to build a sitemap for my web site. This is my table structure. create table departments ( id int identity(0, 1) primary key , lft int , rgt int , name nvarchar(60) ); insert into departments (lft, rgt, name) values (1, 10, 'departments'); insert into departments (lft, rgt, name) values (2, 3, 'd'); insert into departments (lft, rgt, name) values (4, 9, 'a'); insert into departments (lft, rgt, name) values (5, 6, 'b'); insert into departments (lft, rgt, name) values (7, 8, 'c'); How can I sort by depth as well as name? I can do select replicate('----', count(parent.name) - 1) + ' ' + node.name , count(parent.name) - 1 as depth , node.lft from departments node , departments parent where node.lft between parent.lft and parent.rgt group by node.name, node.lft order by depth asc, node.name asc; However, that does not match children with their parent for some reason. department lft rgt --------------------------- departments 0 1 ---- a 1 4 ---- d 1 2 -------- b 2 5 -------- c 2 7 As you can see, department 'd' has department 'a's children! Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Database design

    - by Hadad
    Hello, I've a system, that have two types of users (Companies and individuals).all types have a shared set of properties but they differ in another. What is the best design merge all in one table that allows null for unmatched properties, or separate them in two tables related to a basic table with a one to one relationship. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • “Function” calling inside store procedure

    - by idimba
    Hi, I have a big store procedure, that contains a lot of INSERTs. There're many INSERTS that almost identical - they're different by some parameter(s) (all INSERTs to the same table) Is there a way to create a function/method, to which I'll pass the above parameter(s) and the function/method will generate concrete INSERT's? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Merging rows with uniqueness constraints

    - by Flambino
    I've got a little time-tracking web app (implemented in Rails 3.2.8 & MySQL). The app has several users who add their time to specific tasks, on a given date. The system is set up so a user can only have 1 time entry (i.e. row) per task per date. I.e. if you add time twice on the same task and date, it'll add time to the existing row, rather than create a new one. Now I'm looking to merge 2 tasks. In the simplest terms, merging task ID 2 into task ID 1 would take this time | user_id | task_id | date ------+----------+----------+----------- 10 | 1 | 1 | 2012-10-29 15 | 2 | 1 | 2012-10-29 10 | 1 | 2 | 2012-10-29 5 | 3 | 2 | 2012-10-29 and change it into this time | user_id | task_id | date ------+----------+----------+----------- 20 | 1 | 1 | 2012-10-29 <-- time values merged (summed) 15 | 2 | 1 | 2012-10-29 <-- no change 5 | 3 | 1 | 2012-10-29 <-- task_id changed (no merging necessary) I.e. merge by summing the time values, where the given user_id/date/task combo would conflict. I figure I can use a unique constraint to do a ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE ... if I do an insert for every task_id=2 entry. But that seems pretty inelegant. I've also tried to figure a way to first update all the rows in task 1 with the summed-up times, but I can't quite figure that one out. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How to structure data... Sequential or Hierarchical?

    - by Ryan
    I'm going through the exercise of building a CMS that will organize a lot of the common documents that my employer generates each time we get a new sales order. Each new sales order gets a 5 digit number (12222,12223,122224, etc...) but internally we have applied a hierarchy to these numbers: + 121XX |--01 |--02 + 122XX |--22 |--23 |--24 In my table for sales orders, is it better to use the 5 digital number as an ID and populate up or would it be better to use the hierarchical structure that we use when referring to jobs in regular conversation? The only benefit to not populating sequentially seems to be formatting the data later on in my view, but that doesn't sound like a good enough reason to go through the extra work. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Have 2 separate tables or an additional field in 1 table?

    - by hkansal
    Hello, I am making a small personal application regarding my trade of shares of various companies. The actions can be selling shares of a company or buying. Therefore, the details to be saved in both cases would be: Number of Shares Average Price Would it be better to use a separate tables for "buy" and "sell" or just use one table for "trade" and keep a field that demarcates "buy" from "sell"?

    Read the article

  • Create an index only on certain rows in mysql

    - by dhruvbird
    So, I have this funny requirement of creating an index on a table only on a certain set of rows. This is what my table looks like: USER: userid, friendid, created, blah0, blah1, ..., blahN Now, I'd like to create an index on: (userid, friendid, created) but only on those rows where userid = friendid. The reason being that this index is only going to be used to satisfy queries where the WHERE clause contains "userid = friendid". There will be many rows where this is NOT the case, and I really don't want to waste all that extra space on the index. Another option would be to create a table (query table) which is populated on insert/update of this table and create a trigger to do so, but again I am guessing an index on that table would mean that the data would be stored twice. How does mysql store Primary Keys? I mean is the table ordered on the Primary Key or is it ordered by insert order and the PK is like a normal unique index? I checked up on clustered indexes (http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-index-types.html), but it seems only InnoDB supports them. I am using MyISAM (I mention this because then I could have created a clustered index on these 3 fields in the query table). I am basically looking for something like this: ALTER TABLE USERS ADD INDEX (userid, friendid, created) WHERE userid=friendid

    Read the article

  • How effecient is a details table?

    - by Jeffrey Lott
    At my job, we have pseudo-standard of creating one table to hold the "standard" information for an entity, and a second table, named like 'TableNameDetails', which holds optional data elements. On average, for every row in the main table will have about 8-10 detail rows in it. My question is: What kind of performance impacts does this have over adding these details as additional nullable columns on the main table?

    Read the article

  • Centralizing / Abstracting MSSQL Data from Multiple Tables / Databases

    - by davemackey
    If one has a number of databases (due to separate application front-ends) that provide a complete picture - for example a CRM, accounting, and product database - what methods are available to centralize/abstract this data for easy reporting? Essentially, I'm wondering if there is a way to automatically pull data from multiple databases into a central repository that is continuously updated from the three databases and which can be used for reporting? I'm also open to alternative best practice suggestions?

    Read the article

  • joining two tables and getting aggregate data

    - by alex
    how do i write a query that returns aggregate sales data for California in the past x months. ----------------------- ----------------------- | order | | customer | |-----------------------| |-----------------------| | orderId int | | customerId int | | customerId int | | state varchar | | deposit decimal | ----------------------- | orderDate date | ----------------------- ----------------------- | orderItem | |-----------------------| | orderId int | | itemId int | | qty int | | lineTotal decimal | | itemPrice decimal | -----------------------

    Read the article

  • Improving performance for WRITE operation on Oracle DB in Java

    - by Lucky
    I've a typical scenario & need to understand best possible way to handle this, so here it goes - I'm developing a solution that will retrieve data from a remote SOAP based web service & will then push this data to an Oracle database on network. Also, this will be a scheduled task that will execute every 15 minutes. I've event queues on remote service that contains the INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE operations that have been done since last retrieval, & once I retrieve the events for last 15 minutes, it again add events for next retrieval. Now, its just pushing data to Oracle so all my interactions are INSERT & UPDATE statements. There are around 60 tables on Oracle with some of them having 100+ columns. Moreover, for every 15 minutes cycle there would be around 60-70 Inserts, 100+ Updates & 10-20 Deletes. This will be an executable jar file that will terminate after operation & will again start on next 15 minutes cycle. So, I need to understand how should I handle WRITE operations (best practices) to improve performance for this application as whole ? Current Test Code (on every cycle) - Connects to remote service to get events. Creates a connection with DB (single connection object). Identifies the type of operation (INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE) & table on which it is done. After above, calls the respective method based on type of operation & table. Uses Preparedstatement with positional parameters, & retrieves each column value from remote service & assigns that to statement parameters. Commits the statement & returns to get event class to process next event. Above is repeated till all the retrieved events are processed after which program closes & then starts on next cycle & everything repeats again. Thanks for help !

    Read the article

  • Database design 1 to 1 relationship

    - by Khou
    I design my database incorrectly, should I fix this while its in development? "user" table is suppose to have a 1.1 relationship with "userprofile" table however the actual design the "user" table has a 1.* relationship with "userprofile" table. Everything works! but should it be fixed anyways?

    Read the article

  • MySQL - Limit a left join to the first date-time that occurs?

    - by John M
    Simplified table structure (the tables can't be merged at this time): TableA: dts_received (datetime) dts_completed (datetime) task_a (varchar) TableB: dts_started (datetime) task_b (varchar) What I would like to do is determine how long a task took to complete. The join parameter would be something like ON task_a = task_b AND dts_completed < dts_started The issue is that there may be multiple date-times that occur after the dts_completed. How do I create a join that only returns the first tableB-datetime that occurs after the tableA-datetime?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676  | Next Page >