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 693/1158 | < Previous Page | 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700  | Next Page >

  • Which is faster join

    - by Costa
    Hi Which is faster SELECT * FROM X INNER JOIN Y ON x.Record_ID = y.ForignKey_NotIndexed_NotUnique or SELECT * FROM X INNER JOIN Y ON y.ForignKey_NotIndexed_NotUnique = x.Record_ID

    Read the article

  • Why isn't INT more efficient than UNIQUEIDENTIFIER (according to the execution plan)?

    - by ck
    I have a parent table and child table where the columns that join them together are the UNIQUEIDENTIFIER type. The child table has a clustered index on the column that joins it to the parent table (its PK, which is also clustered). I have created a copy of both of these tables but changed the relationship columns to be INTs instead, have rebuilt the indexes so that they are essentially the same structure and can be queried in the same way. When I query for a known 20 records from the parent table, pulling in all the related records from the child tables, I get identical query costs across both, i.e. 50/50 cost for the batches. If this is true, then my giant project to change all of the tables like this appears to be pointless, other than speeding up inserts. Can anyone provide any light on the situation? EDIT: The question is not about which is more efficient, but why is the query execution plan showing both queries as having the same cost?

    Read the article

  • treating paramater as literal

    - by I__
    DoCmd.TransferText acImportDelim, Import-Accounts, "tableImport", _ "C:\Documents and Settings\accounts.txt", True The second parameter: Import-Accounts is the actual name of the saved import specifications. supposedly it does NOT need to be in quotes; however in this case since there is a - there it is treating it as if i were doing an operation. is there a way i can force it to treat it literally instead of as an operation?

    Read the article

  • how to join on varchar(32) and binary(16) columns in sybase?

    - by Paul Sanwald
    I want to join two tables on a UUID. table A's UUID is represented as varchar(32). table B's UUID is represented as binary(16). what's the best way to join a varchar to a binary column? I've tried using some sybase functions for this, but I'm getting different results and unsure of why: select hextobigint('0x000036ca4c4c11d88b8dcd1344cdb512') 3948051912944290701 select convert(bigint,0x000036ca4c4c11d88b8dcd1344cdb512) -2877434794219274240 what am I missing about convert and hextobigint? I must be misundstanding at least one of these functions. thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • PHP Try and Catch for SQL Insert

    - by meme
    I have a page on my website (high traffic) that does an insert on every page load. I am curious of the fastest and safest way to (catch an error) and continue if the system is not able to do the insert into MySQL. Should I use try/catch or die or something else. I want to make sure the insert happens but if for some reason it can't I want the page to continue to load anyway. ... $db = mysql_select_db('mobile', $conn); mysql_query("INSERT INTO redirects SET ua_string = '$ua_string'") or die('Error #10'); mysql_close($conn); ...

    Read the article

  • Why am I getting a MySQL error?

    - by John Hoffman
    Here is my query. Its intention is allow access to properties of the animals that constitute a match of two animals. The match table contains columns for animal1ID and animal2ID to store which animals constitute the match. SELECT id, (SELECT * FROM animals WHERE animals.id=matches.animal1ID) AS animal1, (SELECT * FROM users WHERE animals.id=matches.animalID) AS animal2 FROM matches WHERE id=5 However, MySQl returns this error: Operand should contain 1 column(s). Why? Is there an alternative way to do this, perhaps with a JOIN statement?

    Read the article

  • stuck with creating rent table

    - by From.ME.to.YOU
    i want to create a php with mysql to do the following: lets say that i have a shop i want to rent, rent will be weekly or monthly. I'm searching for the best way to create this table, so i can do easy queries to calculate free weeks or months. EDIT let say i have ID, START_DATE,RENING_TYPE,CLIENT_ID where Start_date is the start date for renting, and RENTING_TYPE is weekly or monthly how should i run a query to know all the empty weeks or month so new clients may reserve that week/month for example a client reserve July month another client reserve the first week in June, if a new client logged in to my system and want to check all the available weeks/months, how can i achieve that ?

    Read the article

  • How to deal with 2 almost identical tables

    - by jgritty
    I have a table of baseball stats, something like this: CREATE TABLE batting_stats( ab INTEGER, pa INTEGER, r INTEGER, h INTEGER, hr INTEGER, rbi INTEGER, playerID INTEGER, FOREIGN KEY(playerID) REFERENCES player(playerID) ); But then I have a table of stats that are basically exactly the same, but for a team: CREATE TABLE team_batting_stats( ab INTEGER, pa INTEGER, r INTEGER, h INTEGER, hr INTEGER, rbi INTEGER, teamID INTEGER, FOREIGN KEY(teamID) REFERENCES team(teamID) ); My first instinct is to scrap the Foreign key and generalize the ID, but I still have a problem, I have these 2 tables, and they can't have overlapping IDs: CREATE TABLE player( playerID INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, firstname TEXT, lastname TEXT, number INTEGER, teamID INTEGER, FOREIGN KEY(teamID) REFERENCES team(teamID) ); CREATE TABLE team( teamID INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, name TEXT, city TEXT, ); I feel like I'm overlooking something obvious that could solve this problem and reduce stats to a single table.

    Read the article

  • CONCAT_WS rows in JOIN

    - by Alex Kiselev
    i have tables profiles (id, name, deleted) categories (id, name, deleted) profiles_categories (id, profile_id, category_id, , deleted) I have wrong query SELECT p.id, p.name CONCAT_WS(', ', c.name) AS keywords_categories FROM profiles p LEFT JOIN profiles_categories pc ON p.id = pc.profile_id LEFT JOIN categories c ON pc.id = c.id WHERE p.deleted = FALSE So, i want have result with all profiles with concan categories.name. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Please help translate this in linq to ef

    - by user3487644
    StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); sb.AppendLine("SELECT"); sb.AppendLine(String.Format(" (SELECT TOP 1 CAST(ProspectID AS VARCHAR(5)) FROM Lead_Import_Fail Where ProspectID < {0} AND ProspectFullName = '{1}')", Convert.ToInt64(lead.LeadID), lead.Name)); sb.AppendLine(String.Format(", (SELECT TOP 1 CAST(ProspectID AS VARCHAR(5)) FROM Lead_Import_Fail Where ProspectID < {0} AND ProspectNRICPassport = '{1}')", Convert.ToInt64(lead.LeadID), lead.NRIC)); Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Query to select from two different tables

    - by ryan
    I would like to select from two tables and display my result using this query: CREATE TABLE Buy_Table ( buy_id int identity primary key, user_id int, amount decimal (18,2) ); go INSERT INTO Buy_Table (user_id, amount) VALUES ('1', 10), ('1', 8), ('1', 20), ('3', 1), ('2', 2); go CREATE TABLE Sell_Table ( sell_id int identity primary key, user_id int, amount decimal (18,2) ); go INSERT INTO Sell_Table (user_id, amount) VALUES ('1', 10), ('1', 8), ('1', 20), ('3', 3), ('2', 3); go select [user_id], 'Buy' as [Type], buy_id as [ID], amount from Buy_Table union all select [user_id], 'Sell', sell_id, amount from Sell_Table order by [user_id], [ID], [Type] However the above query will return each row of the user_id like this I want to display my result to something like this in a grid: Can this be done in query itself rather manipulating the grid? Thx

    Read the article

  • MySQL: Select remaining rows

    - by Bjork24
    I've searched everywhere for this, but I can't seem to find a solution. Perhaps I'm using the wrong terms. Either way, I'm turning to good ol' trusty S.O. to help my find the answer. I have two tables, we'll call them 'tools' and 'installs' tools = id, name, version installs = id, tool_id, user_id The 'tools' table records available tools, which are then installed by a user and recorded in the 'installs' table. Selecting the installed tools are simple enough: SELECT tools.name FROM tools LEFT JOIN installs ON tools.id = installs.tool_id WHERE user_id = 99 ; How do I select the remaining tools -- the ones that have yet to be installed by user #99? I'm sorry if this is painfully obvious, but I just can't seem to figure it out! Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • Caluculating sum of activity

    - by Maddy
    I have a table which is with following kind of information activity cost order date other information 10 1 100 -- 20 2 100 10 1 100 30 4 100 40 4 100 20 2 100 40 4 100 20 2 100 10 1 101 10 1 101 20 1 101 My requirement is to get sum of all activities over a work order ex: for order 100 1+2+4+4=11 1(for activity 10) 2(for activity 20) 4 (for activity 30) etc. i tried with group by, its taking lot time for calculation. There are 1lakh plus records in warehouse. is there any possibility in efficient way. SELECT SUM(MIN(cost)) FROM COST_WAREHOUSE a WHERE order = 100 GROUP BY (order, ACTIVITY)

    Read the article

  • Should user preferences be included in the users table?

    - by Patrick
    I'm creating a members site, and I'm currently working on the user Preference settings. Should I create a table with all the preference fields (about 17 fields) or should I include them in the main member table along with the account settings? Is there a limit as to how many fields I should have in a table? currently the member table has about 21 fields... not sure if its okay to add another 17 more fields when I can easily just put them in another table. It'll take more coding to pull up the data though... any sugguestions?

    Read the article

  • SQL query for selecting most recent entries

    - by Mr_Skid_Marks
    A table in my database has a column, DATE_ADDED (stored in seconds). I want to extract all rows with the most recent date (aka largest value for DATE_ADDED). The only solution I have come up with is to SELECT all the rows in ASC (ascending) order, grab the last entry from the table, check the date on this, and perform another SELECT on the table but this time only for the discovered DATE_ADDED. Is it possibly to simplify this series of queries into a single one? My thought is I should be able to do a SELECT on all of the largest values in the table, but I am struggling to come up with a proper query.

    Read the article

  • MySQL: averaging with nulls...

    - by Zombies
    Is there a simple way I can exclude nulls from affecting the avg? They appear to count as 0, which is not what I want. I simply don't want to take their average into account, yet here is the catch, I can't drop them from the result set, as that record has data on it that I do need.

    Read the article

  • insert into select from other table

    - by user3815079
    I need to add multiple records based on data from another table where the event is the same. I've found on this forum insert into table2(id,name) select "001",first_name from table1 where table1.id="001" as possible solution for my question. So I thought this should be the following syntax: insert into reservations(event,seat) select "99",id from seats where seats.id>0 to add all seats to event 99. However when I run this query mysql gives the message 'MySQL returned an empty resultset (0 rows). (query 0.0028 sec)' and no records were added. I translated the message so could be sligthly different. When I only use the "select "99",id from seats where seats.id0" query, it returns me 1080 rows.

    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 | 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700  | Next Page >