Search Results

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

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 676/1344 | < Previous Page | 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683  | Next Page >

  • Query to find duplicate item in 2 table

    - by Rico
    I have this table Antecedent Consequent I1 I2 I1 I1,I2,I3 I1 I4,I1,I3,I4 I1,I2 I1 I1,I2 I1,I4 I1,I2 I1,I3 I1,I4 I3,I2 I1,I2,I3 I1,I4 I1,I3,I4 I4 AS you can see it's pretty messed up. is there anyway i can remove rows if item in consequent exist in antecedent (in 1 row) for example: INPUT: Antecedent Consequent I1 I2 I1 I1,I2,I3 <---- DELETE since I1 exist in antecedent I1 I4,I1,I3,I4 <---- DELETE since I1 exist in antecedent I1,I2 I1 <---- DELETE since I1 exist in antecedent I1,I2 I1,I4 <---- DELETE since I1 exist in antecedent I1,I2 I1,I3 <---- DELETE since I1 exist in antecedent I1,I4 I3,I2 I1,I2,I3 I1,I4 <---- DELETE since I1 exist in antecedent I1,I3,I4 I4 <---- DELETE since I4 exist in antecedent OUTPUT: Antecedent Consequent I1 I2 I1,I4 I3,I2 is there anyway i can do that by query?

    Read the article

  • Copy new records from datatable and identify changes in old records

    - by Betite
    Assume there are two tables: Remote_table and My_table. Remote_table has 6 columns: **PROJECT JOB_TYPE MONTH YEAR** HOURS IS_DELETED 134393 70 1 2013 30 0 134393 70 2 2013 50 0 134393 70 3 2013 80 0 134393 70 10 2012 10 0 134393 70 11 2012 0 0 134393 70 12 2012 15 0 My_table is a copy of remote_table. I tried to copy only the new records from the remote_table by this query: SELECT * FROM [remote_DB].[LudanProjectManager].[dbo].Remote_table EXCEPT SELECT * FROM My_table It works OK but I get a duplicate primary key exception when changes have been made on the remote_table on the hours column. Can anyone think of a way to copy only the new records from remote_table and if changes has been made on old records, to identify them and update the my_table to correspond?

    Read the article

  • SELECT set of most recent id, amount FROM table, where id occurs many times

    - by Jon Cram
    I have a table recording the amount of data transferred by a given service on a given date. One record is entered daily for a given service. I'd like to be able to retrieve the most recent amount for a set of services. Example data set: serviceId | amount | date ------------------------------- 1 | 8 | 2010-04-12 2 | 11 | 2010-04-12 2 | 14 | 2010-04-11 3 | 9 | 2010-04-11 1 | 6 | 2010-04-10 2 | 5 | 2010-04-10 3 | 22 | 2010-04-10 4 | 17 | 2010-04-19 Desired response (service ids 1,2,3): serviceId | amount | date ------------------------------- 1 | 8 | 2010-04-12 2 | 11 | 2010-04-12 3 | 9 | 2010-04-11 Desired response (service ids 2, 4): serviceId | amount | date ------------------------------- 2 | 11 | 2010-04-12 4 | 17 | 2010-04-19 This retrieves the equivalent as running the following once per serviceId: SELECT serviceId, amount, date FROM table WHERE serviceId = <given serviceId> ORDER BY date DESC LIMIT 0,1 I understand how I can retrieve the data I want in X queries. I'm interested to see how I can retrieve the same data using either a single query or at the very least less than X queries. I'm very interested to see what might be the most efficient approach. The table currently contains 28809 records. I appreciate that there are other questions that cover selecting the most recent set of records. I have examined three such questions but have been unable to apply the solutions to my problem.

    Read the article

  • Generating a set of files containing dumps of individual tables in a way that guarantees database co

    - by intuited
    I'd like to dump a MySQL database in such a way that a file is created for the definition of each table, and another file is created for the data in each table. I'd like this to be done in a way that guarantees database integrity by locking the entire database for the duration of the dump. What is the best way to do this? Similarly, what's the best way to lock the database while restoring a set of these dump files? edit I can't assume that mysql will have permission to write to files.

    Read the article

  • Can't delete record via the datacontext it was retrieved from

    - by Antilogic
    I just upgraded one of my application's methods to use compiled queries (not sure if this is relevant). Now I'm getting contradicting error messages when I run the code. This is my method: MyClass existing = Queries.MyStaticCompiledQuery(MyRequestScopedDataContext, param1, param2).SingleOrDefault(); if (existing != null) { MyRequestScopedDataContext.MyClasses.DeleteOnSubmit(existing); } When I run it I get this message: Cannot remove an entity that has not been attached. Note that the compiled query and the DeleteOnSubmit reference the same DataContext. Still I figured I'd humor the application and add an attach command before the DeleteOnSubmit, like so: MyClass existing = Queries.MyStaticCompiledQuery(MyRequestScopedDataContext, param1, param2).SingleOrDefault(); if (existing != null) { MyRequestScopedDataContext.MyClasses.Attach(existing); MyRequestScopedDataContext.MyClasses.DeleteOnSubmit(existing); } BUT... When I run this code, I get a completely different contradictory error message: An attempt has been made to Attach or Add an entity that is not new, perhaps having been loaded from another DataContext. This is not supported. I'm at a complete loss... Does anyone else have some insight as to why I can't delete a record via the same DataContext I retrieved it from?

    Read the article

  • postgres subquery w/ derived column

    - by Wells
    The following query won't work, but it should be clear what I'm trying to do: split the value of 't' on space and use the last element in that array in the subquery (as it will match tl). Any ideas how to do this? Thanks! SELECT t, y, "type", regexp_split_to_array(t, ' ') as t_array, sum(dr), ( select uz from f.tfa where tl = t_array[-1] ) as uz, sc FROM padres.yd_fld WHERE y = 2010 AND pos <> 0 GROUP BY t, y, "type", sc;

    Read the article

  • How to SUM columns on multiple conditions in a GROUP BY

    - by David Liddle
    I am trying to return a list of Accounts with their Balances, Outcome and Income Account Transaction ------- ----------- AccountID TransactionID BankName AccountID Locale Amount Status Here is what I currently have. Could someone explain where I am going wrong? select a.ACCOUNT_ID, a.BANK_NAME, a.LOCALE, a.STATUS, sum(t1.AMOUNT) as BALANCE, sum(t2.AMOUNT) as OUTCOME, sum(t3.AMOUNT) as INCOME from ACCOUNT a left join TRANSACTION t1 on t1.ACCOUNT_ID = a.ACCOUNT_ID left join TRANSACTION t2 on t1.ACCOUNT_ID = a.ACCOUNT_ID and t2.AMOUNT < 0 left join TRANSACTION t3 on t3.ACCOUNT_ID = a.ACCOUNT_ID and t3.AMOUNT > 0 group by a.ACCOUNT_ID, a.BANK_NAME, a.LOCALE, a.[STATUS]

    Read the article

  • I insert new parent row and child rowstate changes from Added to unchanged

    - by Joel
    rowsUpdated is an int32 to count how many rows are updated rowsToUpdate = dataset.ParentTable.Select("", "", dataviewRowState.Added) if rowsToUpdate isNot Nothing then for each row as datarow in RowsToUpdate changes the rowstate: rowsUpdated = rowsUpdated + ParentTableAdapter.update(row) Next row End if I'm sure it's something I'm over looking but I just can't see it. Thanks in advance, Joel

    Read the article

  • count(*) vs count(row-name) - which is more correct?

    - by bread
    Does it make a difference if you do count(*) vs count(row-name) as in these two examples? I have a tendency to always write count(*) because it seems to fit better in my mind with the notion of it being an aggregate function, if that makes sense. But I'm not sure if it's technically best as I tend to see example code written without the * more often than not. count(*): select customerid, count(*), sum(price) from items_ordered group by customerid having count(*) > 1; vs. count(row-name): SELECT customerid, count(customerid), sum(price) FROM items_ordered GROUP BY customerid HAVING count(customerid) > 1;

    Read the article

  • 100+ tables to joined

    - by deian
    Hi guys, I was wondering if anyone ever had a change to measure how a would 100 joined tables perform? Each table would have an ID column with primary index and all table are 1:1 related. It is a common problem within many data entry applications where we need to collect 1000+ data points. One solution would be to have one big table with 1000+ columns and the alternative would be to split them into multiple tables and join them when it is necessary. So perhaps more real question would be how 30 tables (30 columns each) would behave with multitable join. 500K-1M rows should be the expected size of the tables. Cheers

    Read the article

  • CLR: Multi Param Aggregate, Argument not in Final Output?

    - by OMG Ponies
    Why is my delimiter not appearing in the final output? It's initialized to be a comma, but I only get ~5 white spaces between each attribute using: SELECT [article_id] , dbo.GROUP_CONCAT(0, t.tag_name, ',') AS col FROM [AdventureWorks].[dbo].[ARTICLE_TAG_XREF] atx JOIN [AdventureWorks].[dbo].[TAGS] t ON t.tag_id = atx.tag_id GROUP BY article_id The bit for DISTINCT works fine, but it operates within the Accumulate scope... Output: article_id | col ------------------------------------------------- 1 | a a b c I only have rudimentary C# API knowledge... C# Code: using System; using System.Data; using System.Data.SqlClient; using System.Data.SqlTypes; using Microsoft.SqlServer.Server; using System.Xml.Serialization; using System.Xml; using System.IO; using System.Collections; using System.Text; [Serializable] [SqlUserDefinedAggregate(Format.UserDefined, MaxByteSize = 8000)] public struct GROUP_CONCAT : IBinarySerialize { ArrayList list; string delimiter; public void Init() { list = new ArrayList(); delimiter = ","; } public void Accumulate(SqlBoolean isDistinct, SqlString Value, SqlString separator) { delimiter = (separator.IsNull) ? "," : separator.Value ; if (!Value.IsNull) { if (isDistinct) { if (!list.Contains(Value.Value)) { list.Add(Value.Value); } } else { list.Add(Value.Value); } } } public void Merge(GROUP_CONCAT Group) { list.AddRange(Group.list); } public SqlString Terminate() { string[] strings = new string[list.Count]; for (int i = 0; i < list.Count; i++) { strings[i] = list[i].ToString(); } return new SqlString(string.Join(delimiter, strings)); } #region IBinarySerialize Members public void Read(BinaryReader r) { int itemCount = r.ReadInt32(); list = new ArrayList(itemCount); for (int i = 0; i < itemCount; i++) { this.list.Add(r.ReadString()); } } public void Write(BinaryWriter w) { w.Write(list.Count); foreach (string s in list) { w.Write(s); } } #endregion }

    Read the article

  • How can I "merge" or "flatten" results from a query which returns multiple rows into a single result

    - by dsm
    I have a simple query over a table, which returns results like the following: id id_type id_ref 2702 5 31 2702 16 14 2702 17 3 2702 40 1 2702 26 4 And I would like to merge the results into a single row, for instance: id concatenation 2702 5,16,17,40,26:31,14,3,1,4 Is there any way to do this within a trigger? NB: I know I can use a cursor, but I would really prefer not to unless there is no better way.

    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

  • Maintaining stored procedures in source control

    - by dub
    How do you guys maintain your stored procedures? I'd like to keep versions of them for a few different reasons. I also will be setting up cruisecontrol.net and nant this weekend to automate builds. I was thinking about coding something that would generate the create scripts for all tables/sprocs/udf/xml schemas in my development database. Then it would take those scripts and update them in source control every couple hours.... Ideally, I'd like to make this some sort of plugin/module for cruisecontrol.net. Any other ideas?

    Read the article

  • Bulk Compare, Report, Update

    - by Tim Donaldon
    I need to import either csv or excel file into a dbase. The column headers will match but I will want to compare the file against the dbase using an ItemID field, list the rows to be affected and the differences, then allow an update to all the rows with the matching ID.

    Read the article

  • How can I count existing and non-existing values with MySQL?

    - by jaya malladi
    I am new to MySQL. I have a table with answer ids. Answers can look like this:a1, a2, a3 ..., but due to some problems some are NULL, some are blank, and some are others like 1 a etc. Now I want to calculate the count of ids with a1 a2 a3 distinctly. But how is it possible to do this leaving others like NULL, blanks and garbage. The output should look like this atype count a1 45 a2 0 a3 56 If there is no row entry for a particular answer, the count should be 0.

    Read the article

  • Index for wildcard match of end of string

    - by Anders Abel
    I have a table of phone numbers, storing the phone number as varchar(20). I have a requirement to implement searching of both entire numbers, but also on only the last part of the number, so a typical query will be: SELECT * FROM PhoneNumbers WHERE Number LIKE '%1234' How can I put an index on the Number column to make those searchs efficient? Is there a way to create an index that sorts the records on the reversed string? Another option might be to reverse the numbers before storing them, which will give queries like: SELECT * FROM PhoneNumbers WHERE ReverseNumber LIKE '4321%' However that will require all users of the database to always reverse the string. It might be solved by storing both the normal and reversed number and having the reversed number being updated by a trigger on insert/update. But that kind of solution is not very elegant. Any other suggestions?

    Read the article

  • asp:QueryStringParameter and empty query string parameter

    - by abatishchev
    I haveasp:GridView displaying client requests using asp:SqlDataSource. I want to limit displayed information by client: View.aspx has to display everything, View.aspx?client=1 has to display only requests from client ID #1. So I'm using <asp:QueryStringParameter Name="client" QueryStringField="client" /> for query "EXEC getRequests @client". Everything works properly when some client is specified. But don't - if not. I tested my SP using SSMS - it works properly in both cases - when parameter is specified and when it isn't (NULL passed explicitly). What have I do?

    Read the article

  • possible way to attach database to exe

    - by ali
    i created a small application using c# winforms that uses mssql as a database. is there a way to attach the database to the exe file so i won't need to install sqlserver on all the machines that i want to run the program on?

    Read the article

  • how to optimize this query?

    - by jest
    hi! the query is: select employee_id, last_name, salary, round((salary+(salary*0.15)), 0) as NewSalary, (round((salary+(salary*0.15)), 0) - salary) as “IncreaseAmount” from employees; can i optimize this round((salary+(salary*0.15)), 0) part in anyway, so that it doesn't appear twice..i tried giving it an alias but didn't work :(

    Read the article

  • How efficient 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

  • MySQL: selecting totals as three fields from same table as one query?

    - by coderama
    I have a table with various orders in it: ID | Date | etc... 1 | 2013-01-01 | etc 2 | 2013-02-01 | etc 3 | 2013-03-01 | etc 4 | 2013-04-01 | etc 5 | 2013-05-01 | etc 6 | 2013-06-01 | etc 7 | 2013-06-01 | etc 8 | 2013-03-01 | etc 9 | 2013-04-01 | etc 10 | 2013-05-01 | etc I want a query that ends wit the result: overallTotal | totalThisMonth | totalLastMonth 10 | 2 | 1 But I want to do this in one query! I am trying to find a way to use subqueries to do this. SO far I have: SELECT * from ( SELECT count(*) as overallTotal from ORDERS ) How can I combine this with other subqueries so I can get the totals in one query?

    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 | 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683  | Next Page >