Search Results

Search found 33585 results on 1344 pages for 'sql execution plan'.

Page 674/1344 | < Previous Page | 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • Load Empty Database table

    - by john White
    I am using SQLexpress and VS2008. I have a DB with a table named "A", which has an IdentitySpecification column named ID. The ID is auto-incremented. Even if the row is deleted, the ID still increases. After several data manipulation, the current ID has reached 15, for example. When I run the application if there's at least 1 row: if I add a new row, the new ID is 16. Everything is fine. If the table is empty (no row): if I add a new row, the new ID is 0, which is an error (I think). And further data manipulation (eg. delete or update) will result in an unhandled exception. Has anyone encountered this? PS. In my table definition, the ID has been selected as follow: Identity Increment = 1; Identity Seed =1; The DB load code is: dataSet = gcnew DataSet(); dataAdapter->Fill(dataSet,"A"); dataTable=dataSet->Tables["A"]; dbConnection->Open(); The Update button method dataAdapter->Update(dataSet,"tblInFlow"); dataSet->AcceptChanges(); dataTable=dataSet->Tables["tblInFlow"]; dataGrid->DataSource=dataTable; If I press Update: if there's at least a row: the datagrid view updates and shows the table correctly. if there's nothing in the table (no data row), the Add method will add a new row, but from ID 0. If I close the program and restart it again: the ID would be 16, which is correct. This is the add method row=dataTable->NewRow(); row["column1"]="something"; dataTable->Rows->Add(row); dataAdapter->Update(dataSet,"A"); dataSet->AcceptChanges(); dataTable=dataSet->Tables["A"];

    Read the article

  • Multiple conditions with CASE statements

    - by Pavan Reddy
    I need to query some data. here is the query that i have constructed but which isn't workig fine for me. For this example I am using AdventureWorks database. SELECT * FROM [Purchasing].[Vendor] WHERE PurchasingWebServiceURL LIKE case // In this case I need all rows to be returned if @url is '' or 'ALL' or NULL when (@url IS null OR @url = '' OR @url = 'ALL') then ('''%'' AND PurchasingWebServiceURL IS NULL') //I need all records which are blank here including nulls when (@url = 'blank') then (''''' AND PurchasingWebServiceURL IS NULL' ) //n this condition I need all record which are not like a particular value when (@url = 'fail') then ('''%'' AND PurchasingWebServiceURL NOT LIKE ''%treyresearch%''' ) //Else Match the records which are `LIKE` the input value else '%' + @url + '%' end This is not working for me. How can I have multiple where condition clauses in the THEN of the the same CASE? How can I make this work?

    Read the article

  • MySQL whats wrong with my foreign keys?

    - by Skiy
    Hello, what is wrong with the two foreign keys which I have marked with comments? create database db; use db; create table Flug( Flugbez varchar(20), FDatum Date, Ziel varchar(20), Flugzeit int, Entfernung int, Primary Key (Flugbez, FDatum)); create table Flugzeugtyp( Typ varchar(20), Hersteller varchar(20), SitzAnzahl int, Reisegeschw int, primary key (Typ) ); create table flugzeug( Typ varchar(20), SerienNr int, AnschDatum Date, FlugStd int, primary key(Typ,SerienNr), foreign key(Typ) references Flugzeugtyp(Typ)); create table Abflug( Flugbez varchar(20), FDatum Date, Typ varchar(20), Seriennr int, Kaptaen varchar(20), Primary key(Flugbez,FDatum,Typ,SerienNr), Foreign key(Flugbez) references Flug(Flugbez), -- Foreign key(FDatum) references Flug(FDatum), Foreign key(Typ) references Flugzeugtyp(Typ) -- ,Foreign key(SerienNr) references Flugzeug(SerienNr) ); When I uncomment these, I get: ERROR 1005 (HY000): Can't create table 'db.abflug' (errno: 150)

    Read the article

  • Group by query design help

    - by Midhat
    Consider this data PK field1 field2 1 a b 2 a (null) 3 x y 4 x z 5 q w I need to get this data select all columns from all rows where field1 has count 1 i tried and finally settled for select * from mytable where field1 in (select field1 from mytable group by field1 having count(field1)>1 ) order by field1 but there has to be a better way than this

    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 to limit select items with L2E/S?

    - by orlon
    This code is a no-go var errors = (from error in db.ELMAH_Error select new { error.Application, error.Host, error.Type, error.Source, error.Message, error.User, error.StatusCode, error.TimeUtc }).ToList(); return View(errors); as it results in a 'requires a model of type IEnumerable' error. The following code of course works fine, but selects all the columns, some of which I'm simply not interested in: var errors = (from error in db.ELMAH_Error select error).ToList(); return View(errors); I'm brand spanking new to MVC2 + L2E, so maybe I'm just not thinking in the right mindset yet, but this seems counter-intuitive. Is there an easy way to select a limited number of columns, or is this just part of using an ORM?

    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

  • How to use a varying database?

    - by nimo
    I want to use a database which name is stored in a variable. How do I do this? I first thought this would work but it doesn't: exec('use '+@db) That will not change database context Suggestions anyone?

    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

  • Oracle select query

    - by Jasim
    I have a table like this C1 C2 C3 Code 1 2 3 33 1 2 3 34 2 4 1 14 1 2 3 14 i want to select only those record whose code is appearing only in single row. ie, in this case rows with code 33 and 34.. as they appear only once in this table. How can i write a query for that

    Read the article

  • MySQL SELECT WHERE returning empty with long numbers, although they are there

    - by brybam
    Alright, so basically the most simple query ever... I've done this a million times... SELECT * FROM purchased_items WHERE uid = '$uid' if $uid == 123 It works fine and returns all data in rows where uid is 123 if $uid == 351565051447743 It returns empty... I'm positive 351565051447743 is a possible uid in some rows, i literally copied and pasted it into the table. $uid is a string, and is being passed as a string. This is something i've done a million times, and i've never had this simple query not work. Any ideas why this is not working?

    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

  • Violation of primary key constraint, multiple users

    - by MC.
    Lets say UserA and UserB both have an application open and are working with the same type of data. UserA inserts a record into the table with value 10 (PrimaryKey='A'), UserB does not currently see the value UserA entered and attempts to insert a new value of 20 (PrimaryKey='A'). What I wanted in this situation was a DBConcurrencyException, but instead what I have is a primary key violation. I understand why, but I have no idea how to resolve this. What is a good practice to deal with such a circumstance? I do not want to merge before updating the database because I want an error to inform the user that multiple users updated this data.

    Read the article

  • How to see contents of deployed datasource?

    - by callisto
    I've inherited a project (without a handy handover) that contains reports published to a Reporting Server (2005). MY SSRS knowledge is 4 years stale, so I need your help. I need to edit one of the published reports, is this possible? I also want to peek into the Data Source on the RS, coz that's probably where I can change stuff. I'll add more info as I get a better understanding of what exactly to ask. EDIT: I found a project for some of the reports, opened up in VS2005 BI. Still, how do see where the Data Source gets its data? It brins back 56 fields but I dont know which tables/stored procs/queries are used to get these.

    Read the article

  • Using a trigger to record audit information vs. stored procedure

    - by Germ
    Suppose you have the following... An ASP.NET web application that calls a stored procedure to delete a record. The table has a trigger on it that will insert an audit entry each time a record is deleted. I want to be able to record in the audit entry the username of who deleted the record. What would be the best way to go about achieving this? I know I could remove the trigger and have the delete stored procedure insert the audit entry prior to deleting but are there any other recommeded alternative? If a username was passed as a parameter to the delete stored procedure, is there anyway to get this value in the trigger that's excuted when the record is deleted? I'm just throwing this out there...

    Read the article

  • Does this query fetch unnecessary information? Should I change the query?

    - by Camran
    I have this classifieds website, and I have about 7 tables in MySql where all data is stored. I have one main table, called "classifieds". In the classifieds table, there is a column called classified_id. This is not the PK, or a key whatsoever. It is just a number which is used for me to JOIN table records together. Ex: classifieds table: fordon table: id => 33 id => 12 classified_id => 10 classified_id => 10 ad_id => 'bmw_m3_92923' This above is linked together by the classified_id column. Now to the Q, I use this method to fetch all records WHERE the column ad_id matches any of the values inside an array, called in this case $ad_arr: SELECT mt.*, fordon.*, boende.*, elektronik.*, business.*, hem_inredning.*, hobby.* FROM classified mt LEFT JOIN fordon ON fordon.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN boende ON boende.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN elektronik ON elektronik.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN business ON business.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN hem_inredning ON hem_inredning.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN hobby ON hobby.classified_id = mt.classified_id WHERE mt.ad_id IN ('$ad_arr')"; Is this good or would this actually fetch unnecessary information? Check out this Q I posted couple of days ago. In the comments HLGEM is commenting that it is wrong etc etc. What do you think? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2782275/another-rookie-question-how-to-implement-count-here Thanks

    Read the article

  • Oracle 10g multiple DELETE statements

    - by bmw0128
    I'm building a dml file that first deletes records that may be in the table, then inserts records. Example: DELETE from foo where field1='bar'; DELETE from foo where fields1='bazz'; INSERT ALL INTO foo(field1, field2) values ('bar', 'x') INTO foo(field1, field2) values ('bazz', 'y') SELECT * from DUAL; When I run the insert statement by itself, it runs fine. When I run the deletes, only the last delete runs. Also, it seems to be necessary to end the multiple insert with the select, is that so? If so, why is that necessary? In the past, when using MySQL, I could just list multiple delete and insert statements, all individually ending with a semicolon, and it would run fine.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681  | Next Page >