Search Results

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

Page 677/1102 | < Previous Page | 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684  | Next Page >

  • Update table with index is too slow

    - by pauloya
    Hi, I was watching the Profiler on a live system of our application and I saw that there was an update instruction that we run periodically (every second) that was quite slow. It took around 400ms every time. The query includes this update (which is the slow part) UPDATE BufferTable SET LrbCount = LrbCount + 1, LrbUpdated = getdate() WHERE LrbId = @LrbId This is the table CREATE TABLE BufferTable( LrbId [bigint] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, ... LrbInserted [datetime] NOT NULL, LrbProcessed [bit] NOT NULL, LrbUpdated [datetime] NOT NULL, LrbCount [tinyint] NOT NULL, ) The table has 2 indexes (non unique and non clustered) with the fields by this order: * Index1 - (LrbProcessed, LrbCount) * Index2 - (LrbInserted, LrbCount, LrbProcessed) When I looked at this I thought that the problem would come from Index1 since LrbCount is changing a lot and it changes the order of the data in the index. But after desactivating index1 I saw the query was taking the same time as initially. Then I rebuilt index1 and desactivated index2, this time the query was very fast. It seems to me that Index2 should be faster to update, the order of the data shouldn't change since the LrbInserted time is not changed. Can someone explain why index2 is much heavier to update then index1? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • PHP is truncating MSSQL Blob data (4096b), even after setting INI values. Am I missing one?

    - by Dutchie432
    I am writing a PHP script that goes through a table and extracts the varbinary(max) blob data from each record into an external file. The code is working perfectly, except when a file is over 4096b - the data is truncated at exactly 4096. I've modified the values for mssql.textlimit, mssql.textsize, and odbc.defaultlrl without any success. Am I missing something here? <?php ini_set("mssql.textlimit" , "2147483647"); ini_set("mssql.textsize" , "2147483647"); ini_set("odbc.defaultlrl", "0"); include_once('common.php'); $id=$_REQUEST['i']; $q = odbc_exec($connect, "Select id,filename,documentBin from Projectdocuments where id = $id"); if (odbc_fetch_row($q)){ echo "Trying $filename ... "; $fileName="projectPhotos/docs/".odbc_result($q,"filename"); if (file_exists($fileName)){ unlink($fileName); } if($fh = fopen($fileName, "wb")) { $binData=odbc_result($q,"documentBin"); fwrite($fh, $binData) ; fclose($fh); $size = filesize($fileName); echo ("$fileName<br />Done ($size)<br><br>"); }else { echo ("$fileName Failed<br>"); } } ?> OUTPUT Trying ... projectPhotos/docs/file1.pdf Done (4096) Trying ... projectPhotos/docs/file2.zip Done (4096) Trying ... projectPhotos/docsv3.pdf Done (4096) etc..

    Read the article

  • R equivalent of SELECT DISTINCT on two or more fields/variables

    - by wahalulu
    Say I have a dataframe df with two or more columns, is there an easy way to use unique() or other R function to create a subset of unique combinations of two or more columns? I know I can use sqldf() and write an easy "SELECT DISTINCT var1, var2, ... varN" query, but I am looking for an R way of doing this. It occurred to me to try ftable coerced to a dataframe and use the field names, but I also get the cross tabulations of combinations that don't exist in the dataset: uniques <- as.data.frame(ftable(df$var1, df$var2))

    Read the article

  • difference between cn.execute and rs.update?

    - by every_answer_gets_a_point
    i am connecting to mysql from excel using odbc. the following illustrates how i am updating the rs With rs .AddNew ' create a new record ' add values to each field in the record .Fields("datapath") = dpath .Fields("analysistime") = atime .Fields("reporttime") = rtime .Fields("lastcalib") = lcalib .Fields("analystname") = aname .Fields("reportname") = rname .Fields("batchstate") = "bstate" .Fields("instrument") = "NA" .Update ' stores the new record End With the question is why is there a need to run cn.execute after this? havent i already updated the rs with rs.update?

    Read the article

  • "Remember" last three MySql queries; Cookie, passed variable or other method?

    - by Camran
    I have a classified website, with pretty sophisticated searching, and I am about to implement a function where the last three queries is displayed for the user, so that the user can go back easier through the queries. This because for each query the user has to provide a lot of input. I have four questions for you: I wonder, how can I save the actual query (SELECT * FROM etc etc)...? Do I need to add some form of encryption to be on the safe side? How will this affect performance? (I don't like the fact that cookies slow websites down) Anything else to think about? If you need more input, let me know... Btw, the website is PHP based. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How can I use two or more COUNT()s in one SELECT statament?

    - by jjj
    i develop this code: SELECT COUNT(NewEmployee.EmployeeID), NewEmployee.EmployeeId,EmployeeName FROM NewEmployee INNER JOIN NewTimeAttendance ON NewEmployee.EmployeeID = NewTimeAttendance.EmployeeID and NewTimeAttendance.TotalTime is null and (NewTimeAttendance.note = '' or NewTimeAttendance.note is null) and (month = 1 or month = 2 or month = 3) GROUP BY NewEmployee.EmployeeID, EmployeeName order by EmployeeID from my previous two questions selecting null stuff and counting issue...that amazing code is working beautifully fine..but now i need to select more than one count... ...searched (google) .... found alias...tried: SELECT COUNT(NewEmployee.EmployeeID) as attenddays, COUNT(NewEmployee.EmployeeID) as empabsent , NewEmployee.EmployeeId,EmployeeName FROM NewEmployee INNER JOIN NewTimeAttendance ON empabsent =NewEmployee.EmployeeID = NewTimeAttendance.EmployeeID and NewTimeAttendance.TotalTime is null and (NewTimeAttendance.note = '' or NewTimeAttendance.note is null ) and (month=1 or month =2 or month = 3) , attenddays = NewTimeAttendance.EmployeeID and NewTimeAttendance.TotalTime is null and (NewTimeAttendance.note = '' or NewTimeAttendance.note is null ) and (month=1 or month =2 or month = 3) GROUP BY NewEmployee.EmployeeID, EmployeeName order by EmployeeID Incorrect syntax near '='. second try: SELECT COUNT(NewEmployee.EmployeeID) as attenddays, COUNT(NewEmployee.EmployeeID) as absentdays, NewEmployee.EmployeeId,EmployeeName FROM NewEmployee INNER JOIN NewTimeAttendance ON attenddays(NewEmployee.EmployeeID = NewTimeAttendance.EmployeeID and NewTimeAttendance.TotalTime is null and (NewTimeAttendance.note = '' or NewTimeAttendance.note is null ) and (month=1 or month =2 or month = 3)) , absentdays(NewEmployee.EmployeeID = NewTimeAttendance.EmployeeID and NewTimeAttendance.TotalTime is null and (NewTimeAttendance.note = '' or NewTimeAttendance.note is null ) and (month=1 or month =2 or month = 3)) GROUP BY NewEmployee.EmployeeID, EmployeeName order by EmployeeID Incorrect syntax near '='. not very good ideas... so ...help thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • help with sql query - in access 2007

    - by Gold
    hi i have 2 tables table items has 144602 records table A has 27721 records code in items = BAR8 in A i want to show all records that equal i try this: SELECT Items.Code, A.BAR8 FROM Items INNER JOIN A ON Items.Code = A.BAR8; and i get 28048 records !!! i need to get 27721 , how to do it ? thank's in advance

    Read the article

  • select distinct over specific columns

    - by Midhat
    A query in a system I maintain returns QID AID DATA 1 2 x 1 2 y 5 6 t As per a new requirement, I do not want the (QID, AID)=(1,2) pair to be repeated. We also dont care what value is selected from "data" column. either x or y will do. What I have done is to enclose the original query like this SELECT * FROM (<original query text>) Results group by QID,AID Is there a better way to go about this? The original query uses multiple joins and unions and what not, So I would prefer not to touch it unless its absolutely necesary

    Read the article

  • Difference between "and" and "where" in joins

    - by Midhat
    Whats the difference between SELECT DISTINCT field1 FROM table1 cd JOIN table2 ON cd.Company = table2.Name and table2.Id IN (2728) and SELECT DISTINCT field1 FROM table1 cd JOIN table2 ON cd.Company = table2.Name where table2.Id IN (2728) both return the same result and both have the same explain output

    Read the article

  • One on One table relation - is it harmful to keep relation in both tables?

    - by EBAGHAKI
    I have 2 tables that their rows have one on one relation.. For you to understand the situation, suppose there is one table with user informations and there is another table that contains a very specific informations and each user can only link to one these specific kind of informations ( suppose second table as characters ) And that character can only assign to the user who grabs it, Is it against the rules of designing clean databases to hold the relation key in both tables? User Table: user_id, name, age, character_id Character Table: character_id, shape, user_id I have to do it for performance, how do you think about it?

    Read the article

  • how to select the records whose several fields' combination will equal to a specific value

    - by poiu2000
    Hi all, Assume I have the following style table, col1 col2 and col3 have same value scopes, I want to select the records when two of the 3 columns have a value combination such as ('ab' and 'bc'), in the following example, the first 3 records should be selected. Any good way to do this? I am using Sybase. | id | col1 | col2 | col3 | 1 ab bc null 2 null ab bc 3 ab ab bc 4 de ab xy Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Copying Primary key to another field in Access.

    - by BashLover
    Hey, I'm struggling to copy the Primary Key to another field in Access. This is irrelevant , but clarifying on what I'm comparing. ... WHERE Tunniste=" & [Tarkiste] & "" Tunniste = Primary Key , Autonumber , ID (Generated by Access.) Tarkiste = This is the field I want to copy it to compare it. I'm open to suggestions, I've already try'ed with Form_Load, using the following code. Private Sub Form_Load() DoCmd.RunSQL "UPDATE Korut SET [Tarkiste]=('" & Tunniste & "');" End Sub But this copied the same key to all the entries in "Tarkiste" field. In simplicity I want 1:1 copy of field "Tunniste" to "Tarkiste" , whichever method it takes. Started from this question. File Picker Replaces All Rows With The Same Choice.

    Read the article

  • difference between where and nested queries

    - by Chris H
    I'm not able to figure out the difference between these queries. I'm pretty sure that the first one is an equi-join. I'm not sure how the second one ISN'T the same as the first. The sub query in #2 selects all Ids from S, and then it returns all R's that also have those ID's, no? SELECT R.cname FROM R, S, WHERE R.Id = S.Id SELECT R.cname FROM R WHERE R.Id IN (SELECT S.Id FROM S)

    Read the article

  • How can I combine a LINQ query with an IQueryable<Guid>

    - by John
    I have a LINQ query that uses 1 table + a large number of views. I'd like to be able to write something like this: IQueryable<Guid> mostViewedWriters; switch (datePicker) { case DatePicker.Last12Hours: mostViewedWriters = from x in context.tempMostViewed12Hours select x.GuidId; break; case DatePicker.Last24Hours: mostViewedWriters = from x in context.tempMostViewed12Hours select x.GuidId; break; case DatePicker.Last36Hours: mostViewedWriters = from x in context.tempMostViewed12Hours select x.GuidId; break; } var query = from x1 in context.Articles join x2 in context.Authors on x1.AuthorId == x2.AuthorId join x3 in mostViewedWriters on x2.AuthorId == x3.Id select new { x2.AuthorName, x1.ArticleId, x1.ArticleTitle }; The above C# is pseudo-code written to protect the innocent (me). The gist of the question is this: I have a query that is related to the results of a view. That view, however, could be one of many different views. All the views return the same data type. I thought that I might be able to create an IQueryable that would contain the Ids that I need and use that query. Alas, that effort has stalled.

    Read the article

  • copy an identity column into another table

    - by slake
    I have 2 tables that are related,both have identity columns for primary keys and i am using a vb form to insert data into them,My problem is that i cannot get the child table to get the primary key of the parent table and use this as its foreign key in my database. the data is inserted fine though no foreign key constraint is made.I am wondering if a trigger will do it and if so how. All my inserting of data is done in vb. The user wont insert any keys. all these are identity columns that are auto generated. If a trigger is my way out please illustrate with an example. If there is another way i can do this in VB itself then please advise and an example will be greatly appreciated Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • MySQL -- How to do this better?

    - by Andrew
    $activeQuery = mysql_query("SELECT count(`status`) AS `active` FROM `assignments` WHERE `user` = $user_id AND `status` = 0"); $active = mysql_fetch_assoc($activeQuery); $failedQuery = mysql_query("SELECT count(`status`) AS `failed` FROM `assignments` WHERE `user` = $user_id AND `status` = 1"); $failed = mysql_fetch_assoc($failedQuery); $completedQuery = mysql_query("SELECT count(`status`) AS `completed` FROM `assignments` WHERE `user` = $user_id AND `status` = 2"); $completed = mysql_fetch_assoc($completedQuery); There has to be a better way to do that, right? I don't know how much I need to elaborate as you can see what I'm trying to do, but is there any way to do all of that in one query? I need to be able to output the active, failed, and completed assignments, preferably in one query.

    Read the article

  • Is this a bad indexing strategy for a table?

    - by llamaoo7
    The table in question is part of a database that a vendor's software uses on our network. The table contains metadata about files. The schema of the table is as follows Metadata ResultID (PK, int, not null) MappedFieldname (char(50), not null) Fieldname (PK, char(50), not null) Fieldvalue (text, null) There is a clustered index on ResultID and Fieldname. This table typically contains millions of rows (in one case, it contains 500 million). The table is populated by 24 workers running 4 threads each when data is being "processed". This results in many non-sequential inserts. Later after processing, more data is inserted into this table by some of our in-house software. The fragmentation for a given table is at least 50%. In the case of the largest table, it is at 90%. We do not have a DBA. I am aware we desperately need a DB maintenance strategy. As far as my background, I'm a college student working part time at this company. My question is this, is a clustered index the best way to go about this? Should another index be considered? Are there any good references for this type and similar ad-hoc DBA tasks?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684  | Next Page >