Search Results

Search found 20031 results on 802 pages for 'full outer join'.

Page 77/802 | < Previous Page | 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  | Next Page >

• How can I make keyword order more relevant in my search?

  - by Atomiton

  In my database, I have a keywords field that stores a comma-delimited list of keywords. For example, a Shrek doll might have the following keywords: ogre, green, plush, hero, boys' toys A "Beanie Baby" doll ( that happens to be an ogre ) might have: beanie baby, kids toys, beanbag toys, soft, infant, ogre (That's a completely contrived example.) What I'd like to do is if the consumer searches for "ogre" I'd like the "Shrek" doll to come up higher in the search results. My content administrator feels that if the keyword is earlier in the list, it should get a higher ranking. ( This makes sense to me and it makes it easy for me to let them control the search result relevance ). Here's a simplified query: SELECT p.ProductID AS ContentID , p.ProductName AS Title , p.ProductCode AS Subtitle , 100 AS Rank , p.ProductKeywords AS Keywords FROM Products AS p WHERE FREETEXT( p.ProductKeywords, @SearchPredicate ) I'm thinking something along the lines of replacing the RANK with: , 200 - INDEXOF(@SearchTerm) AS Rank This "should" rank the keyword results by their relevance I know INDEXOF isn't a SQL command... but it's something LIKE that I would like to accomplish. Am I approaching this the right way? Is it possible to do something like this? Does this make sense?

  Read the article

• SQL query to return data from two separate rows in a table joined to a master table

  - by Ali

  I have a TWO tables of data with following fields table1=(ITTAG,ITCODE,ITDESC,SUPcode) table2=(ACCODE,ACNAME,ROUTE,SALMAN) This is my customer master table that contains my customer data such as customer code, customer name and so on... Every Route has a supervisor (table1=supcode) and I need to know the supervisor name in my table which both supervisor name and code exist in one table. table1 has contain all names separated by ITTAG. For example, supervisor's name has ITTAG='K'; also salesman's name has ITTAG='S'. ITTAG ITCODE ITDESC SUPCODE ------ ------ ------ ------- S JT JOHN TOMAS TF K WK VIKI KOO NULL Now this is the result which I want ACCODE ACNAME ROUTE SALEMANNAME SUPERVISORNAME ------- ------ ------ ------------ --------------- IMC1010 ABC HOTEL 01 JOHN TOMAS VIKI KOO I hope this this information is sufficient to get the query..

  Read the article

• What is the best way to freshen a Nutch index?

  - by Miles

  I haven't looked at Nutch for a year or so and it looks like it has changed significantly. The documentation on re-crawling isn't clear. What is the best way to update an existing Nutch index?

  Read the article

• Python module seeing a full list as empty in another module

  - by Nick

  I'm working on a pygame project and have the main engine layed out. The problem is I hit a bug that I just can not seem to figure out. What happens is one module can't read a variable from another module. It's not that the variable can't be read, it just sees an empty list instead of what it really is. Instead of posting the entire source code I reproduced the bug in two small snippets that hopefully a skillful python-ist can interpret in his\her head. Code: main.py (This is the file that gets run) import screen screens = [] #A stack for all the game screens def current_screen(): #return a reference to the current screen return screens[-1] def play(): print'play called' current_screen().update() if __name__=='__main__': screens.append(screen.Screen()) play() screen.py import main class Screen: def __init__(self): print'screen made' def update(self): print main.screens #Should have a reference to itself in there Thanks!

  Read the article

• How well does Solr scale over large number of facet values?

  - by Continuation

  I'm using Solr and I want to facet over a field "group". Since "group" is created by users, potentially there can be a huge number of values for "group". Would Solr be able to handle a use case like this? Or is Solr not really appropriate for facet fields with a large number of values? I understand that I can set facet.limit to restrict the number of values returned for a facet field. Would this help in my case? Say there are 100,000 matching values for "group" in a search, if I set facet.limit to 50. would that speed up the query, or would the query still be slow because Solr still needs to process and sort through all the facet values and return the top 50 ones? Any tips on how to tune Solr for large number of facet values? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Showing all rows for keys with more than one row

  - by Leif Neland

  Table kal id integer primary key init char 4 indexed job char4 id init job --+----+------ 1 | aa | job1 2 | aa | job2 3 | bb | job1 4 | cc | job3 5 | cc | job5 I want to show all rows where init has more than one row id init job --+----+------ 1 | aa | job1 2 | aa | job2 4 | cc | job3 5 | cc | job5 I tried select * from kal where init in (select init from kal group by init having count(init)2); Actually, the table has 60000 rows, and the query was count(init)<40, but it takes humongus time, phpmyadmin and my patience runs out. Both select init from kal group by init having count(init)2) and select * from kal where init in ('aa','bb','cc') runs in "no time", less than 0.02 seconds. I've tried different subqueries, but all takes "infinite" time, more than a few minutes; I've actually never let them finish. Leif

  Read the article

• MYSQL - SELECT ALL FROM TABLE if...

  - by hornetbzz

  Hello I have a (nice) mysql table built like this : Fields Datas id (pk) 1 2 3 4 5 6 master_id 1000 1000 1000 2000 2000 2000 ... master_name home home home shop shop shop ... type_data value common client value common client ... param_a foo_a 1 0 bar_a 0 1 ... param_b foo_b 1 0 bar_b 1 0 ... param_c foo_c 0 1 bar_c 0 1 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... All these datas are embed in a single table. Each datas are dispatched on 3 "columns" set (1 for the values, 1 for identifying if these are common values and one for identifying client values). It's not the best I got but many other scripts depends on this structure. I'd need sthg like this: SELECT parameters name (eg param_a, param_b..) and their values (eg foo_a, foo_b..) WHEN master_id=? AND type_data=(common or client) (eg for values=1 on the 2nd column) . in order to get the parameters hash like param_a => foo_a param_b => foo_b param_c => foo_c ... I could not succeed in self joining on the same table till now but I guess it should be feasible. (I'd like to avoid to do several queries) Thx in advance

  Read the article

• Recommended way to perform Lucene search without limit

  - by Thomas

  The Lucene documents tell me that "Hits" will be removed from the API in Lucene 3.0. Deprecated. Hits will be removed in Lucene 3.0. Use search(Query, Filter, int) instead. The proposed overload limits the number of documents returned to the value of the int. So my question is: what is the recommended way to perform a search in Lucene with no limit on the number of documents to be returned?

  Read the article

• How can I make MySQL multiple search words and multiple fields to search correctely

  - by newbie

  If user inserts search query "john doe new york", then search should find all those words form searched fields, if not all fields are not found, then that row shouldn't be selected at all, only rows that contain all those words should be included in search. How can I do that in MySQL?

  Read the article

• What is a SQL statement that can tally up the counts even including the Zeros? (all in 1 statement)

  - by Jian Lin

  A SQL statement can give a list of the most popular gifts that are sent in a Social application, all the way to the ones that are sent 1, or 2 times, but it won't include the Zeros. I think the same goes for getting the list of the most popular Classes that students are registering for, when the registration process for all students is 10 days and now it is the 3rd day. Again, we get the count but the Zeros are not there. Is there a simple SQL statement that can show the whole list, including the zeros?

  Read the article

• Mysql advanced SELECT, or multiple SELECTS? Movies keywords

  - by Supyxy

  I have a mysql database with movies as follows: MOVIES(id,title) KEYWORDS_TABLE(id,key_id) [id is referenced to movies.id, key_id is refernced to keywords.id] KEYWORDS(id,keyword) //this doesn't matter on my example.. Basically i have movies with their titles and plot keywords for each one, i want to select all movies that have the same keywords with with a given movie id. I tried something like: SELECT key_id FROM keywords_table WHERE id=9 doing that in php and storing all the IDs in an array $key_id.. then i build another select that looks like: SELECT movies.title FROM movies,keywords_table WHERE keywords_table.key_id=$key_id[1] OR keywords_table.key_id=$key_id[2] OR ......... OR keywords_table.key_id=$key_id[n] This kinda works but it takes too much time as we talk about a database with thousands of thousands of records. So, any suggestions?? thanks!

  Read the article

• Writing a post search algorithm.

  - by MdaG

  I'm trying to write a free text search algorithm for finding specific posts on a wall (similar kind of wall as Facebook uses). A user is suppose to be able to write some words in a search field and get hits on posts that contain the words; with the best match on top and then other posts in decreasing order according to match score. I'm using the edit distance (Levenshtein) "e(x, y) = e" to calculate the score for each post when compared to the query word "x" and post word "y" according to: score(x, y) = 2^(2 - e)(1 - min(e, |x|) / |x|) Each word in a post contributes to the total score for that specific post. This approach seems to work well when the posts are of roughly the same size, but sometime certain large posts manages to rack up score solely on having a lot of words in them while in practice not being relevant to the query. Am I approaching this problem in the wrong way or is there some way to normalize the score that I haven't thought of?

  Read the article

• Two entities with @ManyToOne should join the same table

  - by Ivan Yatskevich

  I have the following entities Student @Entity public class Student implements Serializable { @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) private Long id; //getter and setter for id } Teacher @Entity public class Teacher implements Serializable { @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) private Long id; //getter and setter for id } Task @Entity public class Task implements Serializable { @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) private Long id; @ManyToOne(optional = false) @JoinTable(name = "student_task", inverseJoinColumns = { @JoinColumn(name = "student_id") }) private Student author; @ManyToOne(optional = false) @JoinTable(name = "student_task", inverseJoinColumns = { @JoinColumn(name = "teacher_id") }) private Teacher curator; //getters and setters } Consider that author and curator are already stored in DB and both are in the attached state. I'm trying to persist my Task: Task task = new Task(); task.setAuthor(author); task.setCurator(curator); entityManager.persist(task); Hibernate executes the following SQL: insert into student_task (teacher_id, id) values (?, ?) which, of course, leads to null value in column "student_id" violates not-null constraint Can anyone explain this issue and possible ways to resolve it?

  Read the article

• Rails - Why is HAML showing the full hash?

  - by Mr. Demetrius Michael

  View: !!! %html %head %title= full_title(yield(:title)) =stylesheet_link_tag "application", media: "all" =javascript_include_tag "application" =csrf_meta_tags =render 'layouts/shim' %body =render 'layouts/header' .container =flash.each do |key, value| %div{class: "alert alert-#{key}"} #{value} Controller def create @user = User.new(params[:user]) if @user.save flash[:success] = "This is Correct" redirect_to @user else flash[:wrong] = "no" render 'new' end end Regardless of the flash (:success or :wrong or otherwise) it always compiles the entire hash as html (below) Output: <!DOCTYPE html> .... <div class='container'> <div class='alert alert-wrong'>no</div> {:wrong=&gt;&quot;no&quot;} </div> </body> </html> I have no idea why {:wrong=&gt;&quot;no&quot;} is being displayed. I've been staring at this terminal for hours. What's interesting is that the hash is being outputted with the container id, but not in the alert class. It feels like an indentation problem, but I went through several permutations with no success.

  Read the article

• using STI and ActiveRecordBase<> with full FindAll

  - by oillio

  Is it possible to use generic support with single table inheritance, and still be able to FindAll of the base class? As a bonus question, will I be able to use ActiveRecordLinqBase< as well? I do love those queries. More detail: Say I have the following classes defined: public interface ICompany { int ID { get; set; } string Name { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord("companies", DiscriminatorColumn="type", DiscriminatorType="String", DiscriminatorValue="NA")] public abstract class Company<T> : ActiveRecordBase<T>, ICompany { [PrimaryKey] private int Id { get; set; } [Property] public String Name { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord(DiscriminatorValue="firm")] public class Firm : Company<Firm> { [Property] public string Description { get; set; } } [ActiveRecord(DiscriminatorValue="client")] public class Client : Company<Client> { [Property] public int ChargeRate { get; set; } } This works fine for most cases. I can do things like: var x = Client.FindAll(); But sometimes I want all of the companies. If I was not using generics I could do: var x = (Company[]) FindAll(Company); Client a = (Client)x[0]; Firm b = (Firm)x[1]; Is there a way to write a FindAll that returns an array of ICompany's that can then be typecast into their respective types? Something like: var x = (ICompany[]) FindAll(Company<ICompany>); Client a = (Client)x[0]; Or maybe I am going about implementing the generic support all wrong?

  Read the article

• Vertically Merge Multiple Tables in MySQL by Joint Primary Key

  - by world

  Hello, I'll attempt to make my question as clear as possible. I'm fairly unexperienced with SQL, only know the really basic queries. In order to have a better idea I'd been reading the MySQL manual for the past few days, but I couldn't really find a concrete solution and my needs are quite specific. I've got 3 MySQL MyISAM tables: table1, table2 and table3. Each table has an ID column (ID, ID2, ID3 respectively), and different data columns. For example table1 has [ID, Name, Birthday, Status, ...] columns, table2 has [ID2, Country, Zip, ...], table3 has [ID3, Source, Phone, ...] you get the idea. The ID, ID2, ID3 columns are common to all three tables... if there's an ID value in table1 it will also appear in table2 and table3. The number of rows in these tables is identical, about 10m rows in each table. What I'd like to do is create a new table that contains (most of) the columns of all three tables and merge them into it. The dates, for instance, must be converted because right now they're in VARCHAR YYYYMMDD format. Reading the MySQL manual I figured STR_TO_DATE() would do the job, but I don't know how to write the query itself in the first place so I have no idea how to integrate the date conversion. So basically, after I create the new table (which I do know how to do), how can I merge the three tables into it, integrating into the query the date conversion?

  Read the article

• Rails advanced queries with join and sum calculation

  - by Dustin Brewer

  I have two models: companies and expenses. Companies have many expenses and expenses belong to companies. My expense model has an 'amount' column. I was wondering if there is a way to perform a find based on a date range and the amount column of the expenses. Something like top 3 companies by total expense amounts over a 7 day period. I've tried for the better part of the day to get this to work, I've attempted joins, chaining named scopes, raw sql, etc. and I'm not having any luck. Thanks for the help.

  Read the article

• Table clusters in SQLServer

  - by Bruno Martinez

  In Oracle, a table cluster is a group of tables that share common columns and store related data in the same blocks. When tables are clustered, a single data block can contain rows from multiple tables. For example, a block can store rows from both the employees and departments tables rather than from only a single table: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e10713/tablecls.htm#i25478 Can this be done in SQLServer?

  Read the article

• Populate an unmapped property of domain object from result of join with Nhibernate

  - by Adam Pope

  I have a situation where I have 3 tables: StockItem, Office and StockItemPrice. The price for each StockItem can be different for each Office. StockItem( ID Name ) Office( ID Name ) StockItemPrice( ID StockItemID OfficeID Price ) I've set up a schema with 2 many-to-one relations to link StockItem and Office. So in my StockItem domain object I have a property: IList<StockItemPrice> Prices; which gets loaded with the price of the item for each office. That's working fine. Now I'm trying to get the price of an item for a single office. I have the following Criteria query: NHibernateSession.CreateCriteria(persistentType) .Add(Restrictions.Eq("ID", id)) .CreateAlias("Prices", "StockItemPrice") .Add(Restrictions.Eq("StockItemPrice.Office", office)) .UniqueResult<StockItem>(); This appears to work fine as the SQL it generates is what I qould expect. However, I dont know if it populates StockItem.Prices with a single object correctly as as soon as I reference that property NHibernate performs a lazy load of all the office's prices. Also, even if it does work, it feels really crufty having to access the price by using: mystockitem.Prices[0].Price What I would really like is to have a Price field on the StockItem object and have the price of the item put into that field by NHibernate. I've tried adding .CreateCriteria("Price", "StockItemPrice.Price") and the same with CreateAlias, but I get the error NHibernate.QueryException : could not resolve property: Price of: StockItem which makes sense I guess as Price isn't a mapped property. How would I adjust the query to make this possible?

  Read the article

• rails include with options

  - by holden

  Is it possible to limit an AR :include to say only pull in one record... Item.find(:all, :include => [ :external_ratings, :photos => LIMIT 1 ]) I have a list of items and each item has between 5 and 15 photos. I want to load a photo id into memory, but i don't need all of them, I just want to preview the first one. Is there a way to do this?

  Read the article

• MessageListener didnt receive full message ASMACK Android

  - by Frank Junior

  i got problem when want to receive message, right now i am able to receive message, but some attribut is missing class MyMessageListener implements MessageListener { @Override public void processMessage(Chat chat, Message message) { Util.DebugLog("message->"+message.toXmlns()); } } what i got is <message to="[email protected]" type="chat" from="[email protected]/ff3b2485"><body asdf="asdf">aaa</body></message> talk_id and chat type inside message is missing. This is want i want when receive message <message to="[email protected]" type="chat" talk_id="304" chat_type="0" from="[email protected]/ff3b2485"><body asdf="asdf">aaa</body></message>

  Read the article

• c# linq to sql join problem

  - by b0x0rz

  i am trying to do using (UserManagementDataContext context = new UserManagementDataContext()) { var users = from u in context.Users where u.UserEMailAdresses.EMailAddress == "[email protected]" select u; return users.Count(); } however, when i get to: using (UserManagementDataContext context = new UserManagementDataContext()) { var users = from u in context.Users where u.UserEMailAdresses. i do not get offered the EMailAddress name, but rather some neutral default-looking list of options in intelisense. what am i doing wrong? table Users ID bigint NameTitle nvarchar(64) NameFirst nvarchar(64) NameMiddle nvarchar(64) NameLast nvarchar(64) NameSuffix nvarchar(64) Status bigint IsActive bit table UserEMailAddresses ID bigint UserID bigint EMailAddress nvarchar(256) IsPrimary bit IsActive bit obviously, 1 user can have many addresses and so Users.ID and UserEMailAddresses.UserID have a relationship between them: 1 to MANY.

  Read the article

• awk/sed/bash to merge/concatenate data

  - by Kyle

  Trying to merge some data that I have. The input would look like so: foo bar foo baz boo abc def abc ghi And I would like the output to look like: foo bar baz boo abc def ghi I have some ideas using some arrays in a shell script, but I was looking for a more elegant or quicker solution.

  Read the article

• Why are joins bad when considering scalability?

  - by acidzombie24

  Why are joins bad or 'slow'. I know i heard this more then once. I found this quote The problem is joins are relatively slow, especially over very large data sets, and if they are slow your website is slow. It takes a long time to get all those separate bits of information off disk and put them all together again. source I always thought they were fast especially when looking up a PK. Why are they 'slow'?

  Read the article

• SQL SELECT Join?

  - by SurfingCat

  Hello, i got a MySql DB. There is a table with products and orders. Structure: Products: product_id, name, manufacturers_id Orders: orders_id, product_id, quantitiy Now I want to get all orders (show only products where product id=1). I tried: SELECT orders.orders_id, orders.product_od FROM products, orders WHERE products.manufacturers_id = 1 GROUP BY orders_id ORDER BY orders_id But this doesnt work

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  | Next Page >