Search Results

Search found 28930 results on 1158 pages for 'sql ce'.

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 683/1158 | < Previous Page | 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690  | Next Page >

  • Search by nvarchar

    - by ziks
    Hi all. I have this problem. In table I have column which is nvarcar type. and row in this column is row1= 1;6 row2 = 12 row3 =6;5;67 etc... I try to search this column. for example when i send 1 i try to get only row1. I use LIKE but in result set I get row1 and row2. How can I achieved this, any help is appreciated. Tnx...

    Read the article

  • left join without duplicate values using MIN()

    - by Clipper87
    I have a table_1: id custno 1 1 2 2 3 3 and a table_2: id custno qty descr 1 1 10 a 2 1 7 b 3 2 4 c 4 3 7 d 5 1 5 e 6 1 5 f When I run this query to show the minimum order quantities from every customer: SELECT DISTINCT table_1.custno,table_2.qty,table_2.descr FROM table_1 LEFT OUTER JOIN table_2 ON table_1.custno = table_2.custno AND qty = (SELECT MIN(qty) FROM table_2 WHERE table_2.custno = table_1.custno ) Then I get this result: custno qty descr 1 5 e 1 5 f 2 4 c 3 7 d Customer 1 appears twice each time with the same minimum qty (& a different description) but I only want to see customer 1 appear once. I don't care if that is the record with 'e' as a description or 'f' as a description. How could I do this ? Thx!

    Read the article

  • Multiple/Sub quries with codeigniter

    - by user1011713
    I just started with Codeigniter and this is driving me nuts. I have a query that determines whether a user has bought any programs. I then have to use that program's type category to run and determine how many times he or she has recorded a query in another table. Sorry for the confusion but the code hopefully makes sense. I'm having problem returning the two arrays from my Model to my Controller to onto the view obviously. function specificPrograms() { $specific_sql = $this->db->query("SELECT program,created FROM `assessment` WHERE uid = $this->uid"); if($specific_sql->num_rows() > 0) { foreach ($specific_sql->result() as $specific) { $data[] = $specific; $this->type = $specific->program; } return $data; } $sub_sql = $this->db->query("SELECT id FROM othertable WHERE user_id_fk = $this->uid and type = '$this->type'"); if($sub_sql->num_rows() > 0) { foreach ($sub_sql->result() as $otherp) { $data[] = $otherp; } return $data; } } Then in my Controller I have, $data['specific'] = $this->user_model->specificPrograms(); $data['otherp'] = $this->user_model->specificPrograms(); Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • How to limit results by SUM

    - by superspace
    I have a table of events called event. For the purpose of this question it only has one field called date. The following query returns me a number of events that are happening on each date for the next 14 days: SELECT DATE_FORMAT( ev.date, '%Y-%m-%d' ) as short_date, count(*) as date_count FROM event ev WHERE ev.date >= NOW() GROUP BY short_date ORDER BY ev.start_date ASC LIMIT 14 The result could be as follows: +------------+------------+ | short_date | date_count | +------------+------------+ | 2010-03-14 | 1 | | 2010-03-15 | 2 | | 2010-03-16 | 9 | | 2010-03-17 | 8 | | 2010-03-18 | 11 | | 2010-03-19 | 14 | | 2010-03-20 | 13 | | 2010-03-21 | 7 | | 2010-03-22 | 2 | | 2010-03-23 | 3 | | 2010-03-24 | 3 | | 2010-03-25 | 6 | | 2010-03-26 | 23 | | 2010-03-27 | 14 | +------------+------------+ 14 rows in set (0.06 sec) Let's say I want to dislay these events by date. At the same time I only want to display a maximum of 10 at a time. How would I do this? Somehow I need to limit this result by the SUM of the date_count field but I do not know how. Anybody run into this problem before? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Access database query locks ability to edit table?

    - by Sattvic
    I created a query in Microsoft Access like the one below: SELECT Deliverables.ID, Deliverables.Title, Deliverables.Summary, Deliverables.Header_Code, Deliverables.Header_Code.Value, Deliverables.Sort_order, Deliverables.Pillar, Deliverables.Pillar.Value, Deliverables.Misc_ID FROM Deliverables WHERE (((Deliverables.Pillar.Value)="Link Building")); But my problem is that this query locks my fields and I cannot make changes to the table using the query view. Any suggestions? I am using Microsoft Access 2007

    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

  • Does the order of the columns in a SELECT statement make a difference?

    - by Frank Computer
    This question was inspired by a previous question posted on SO, "Does the order of the WHERE clause make a differnece?". Would it improve a SELECT statement's performance if the the columns used in the WHERE section are placed at the begining of the SELECT statement? example: SELECT customer.id, transaction.id, transaction.efective_date, transaction.a, [...] FROM customer, transaction WHERE customer.id = transaction.id; I do know that limiting the list of columns to only the needed ones in a SELECT statement improves performance as opposed to using SELECT * because the current list is smaller.

    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

  • Select Query Joined on Two Fields?

    - by btollett
    I've got a few tables in an access database: ID | LocationName 1 | Location1 2 | Location2 ID | LocationID | Date | NumProductsDelivered 1 | 1 | 12/10 | 3 2 | 1 | 01/11 | 2 3 | 1 | 02/11 | 2 4 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 5 | 2 | 12/10 | 1 ID | LocationID | Date | NumEmployees | EmployeeType 1 | 1 | 12/10 | 10 | 1 (=Permanent) 2 | 1 | 12/10 | 3 | 2 (=Temporary) 3 | 1 | 12/10 | 1 | 3 (=Support) 4 | 2 | 10/10 | 1 | 1 5 | 2 | 11/10 | 2 | 1 6 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 | 2 7 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 | 3 8 | 2 | 12/10 | 2 | 1 9 | 2 | 12/10 | 1 | 3 What I want to do is pass in the LocationID as a parameter and get back something like the following table. So, if I pass in 2 as my LocationID, I should get: Date | NumProductsDelivered | NumPermanentEmployees | NumSupportEmployees 10/10 | | 1 | 11/10 | 1 | 2 | 1 12/10 | 1 | 2 | 1 It seems like this should be a pretty simple query. I really don't even need the first table except as a way to fill in the combo box on the form from which the user chooses which location they want a report for. Unfortunately, everything I've done has resulted in me getting a lot more data than I should be getting. My confusion is in how to set up the join (presumably that's what I'm looking for here) given that I want both the date and locationID to be the same for each row in the result set. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • simple query Delete records in a table based on count logic

    - by user1905941
    a table with a pk and status column which is having values as 'Y','N','NULL' Query: get the count of records with status column as 'Y', if this count exceeds 1% of total count of records then dont delete , else delete the records in the table. i tried like this Declare v_count Number; v_count1 Number; BEGIN v_count := select count(*) from temp; v_count1 := select count(*) from temp where status = 'Y' ; v_count := v_count + ((0.1) * (v_count)) if (v_count1 > v_count) { insert into temp1 values(pk,status) } else { Delete from temp ; } END;

    Read the article

  • SQL query construction - separate data in a column into two columns

    - by Tommy
    I have a column that contains links. The problem is that the titles of the links are in the same column, so it looks like this: linktitle|-|linkurl I want link title and linkurl in separate columns. I've created a new column for the urls, so I'm looking for a way to extract them and update the linkurl column with them. Is there any clever way to construct a query that does this?

    Read the article

  • MYSQL: COUNT with GROUP BY, LEFT JOIN and WHERE clause doesn't return zero values

    - by Paul Norman
    Hi guys, thanks in advance for any help on this topic! I'm sure this has a very simply answer, but I can't seem to find it (not sure what to search on!). A standard count / group by query may look like this: SELECT COUNT(`t2`.`name`) FROM `table_1` `t1` LEFT JOIN `table_2` `t2` ON `t1`.`key_id` = `t2`.`key_id` GROUP BY `t1`.`any_col` and this works as expected, returning 0 if no rows are found. So does: SELECT COUNT(`t2`.`name`) FROM `table_1` `t1` LEFT JOIN `table_2` `t2` ON `t1`.`key_id` = `t2`.`key_id` WHERE `t1`.`another_column` = 123 However: SELECT COUNT(`t2`.`name`) FROM `table_1` `t1` LEFT JOIN `table_2` `t2` ON `t1`.`key_id` = `t2`.`key_id` WHERE `t1`.`another_column` = 123 GROUP BY `t1`.`any_col` only works if there is at least one row in table_1 and fails miserably returning an empty result set if there are zero rows. I would really like this to return 0! Anyone enlighten me on this? Beer can be provided in exchange if you are in London ;-)

    Read the article

  • how to order string logically

    - by just_name
    Q: I have the following case : set of letters (grades) A,A+,A-,B,B+,B- stored as strings in the database i wanna to order these grades logically from the small one to the big one ,, but this not what happen in real.. because these are strings the order is: A,A+,A- i wanna ASC A-,A,A+ DESC A+,A,A- i bind those grades in drop down list and i wanna these grades with this logical order in it.. is there any idea how to do something like this..

    Read the article

  • Redundancy in doing sum()

    - by Abhi
    table1 - id, time_stamp, value This table consists of 10 id's. Each id would be having a value for each hour in a day. So for 1 day, there would be 240 records in this table. table2 - id Table2 consists of a dynamically changing subset of id's present in table1. At a particular instance, the intention is to get sum(value) from table1, considering id's only in table2, grouping by each hour in that day, giving the summarized values a rank and repeating this each day. the query is at this stage: select time_stamp, sum(value), rank() over (partition by trunc(time_stamp) order by sum(value) desc) rn from table1 where exists (select t2.id from table2 t2 where id=t2.id) and time_stamp >= to_date('05/04/2010 00','dd/mm/yyyy hh24') and time_stamp <= to_date('25/04/2010 23','dd/mm/yyyy hh24') group by time_stamp order by time_stamp asc If the query is correct, can this be made more efficient, considering that, table1 will actually consist of thousand's of id's instead of 10 ? EDIT: I am using sum(value) 2 times in the query, which I am not able to get a workaround such that the sum() is done only once. Pls help on this

    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

  • Transfer Data between databases with postgres

    - by user227932
    I need to transfer some data from another Database. The old database is called paw1.moviesDB and the new database is paw1. The schema of each table are the following Awards (name of the table)(new DB) Id [PK] Serial Award Nominations (name of the table) (old DB) Id [PK] Serial nominations I want to copy the data from old DB to the new DB.

    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 | 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690  | Next Page >