Search Results

Search found 5233 results on 210 pages for 'records'.

Page 99/210 | < Previous Page | 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106  | Next Page >

  • Any way to speed up this hierarchical query?

    - by RenderIn
    I've got a serious performance problem with a hierarchical query that I can't seem to fix. I am modeling several organization charts in my database, each representing a virtual organization within our company. For example, we have several temporary committees that are created from time to time and there may be a Committee Organizer role at the top of this virtual hierarchy, with several people assigned to the Committee Member role beneath the organizer. Some of our virtual organizations have many levels and several branches at each level. I have a single table in which I represent all the role assignments. i.e. a ROLE_ID column and a PARENT_ROLE_ID column which is a foreign key to the ROLE_ID column. For each assignment we also store as a column the location in the company where this person has the assignment. For example, the Committee Organizer would have a company-level/ CEO assignment, while the committee members would have department-level assignments such as ACCOUNTING, MARKETING, etc. So to model the organizer/member relationship for two individuals we would have: ROLE_ID = 4 PARENT_ROLE_ID = NULL EMPLOYEE_NUMBER = 213423 COMPANY_LOCATION = CEO ROLE_ID = 5 PARENT_ROLE_ID = 4 EMPLOYEE_NUMBER = 838221 COMPANY_LOCATION = ACCOUNTING Here's where things get tricky. I have an application that every person in the organization can log in to. When they log in they should be able to view all the virtual organizations in our company. e.g. the committee members should be able to see the committee organizer and vice-versa. However, only the committee organizer should be able to edit the committee members. The difficulty is in determining whether an individual (who can have multiple role assignments) has edit access for each other assignment. While this seems simple in the example, consider a virtual organization in which we have President at the top, 5 departments directly beneath him, 2 subdepartments below each department. We only want people in the Accounting department to be able to edit individuals in the subdepartments belonging to the Accounting department. They should not have edit access to anybody in the Marketing department or its subdepartments. To determine edit access when a user views a virtual organization in our company I run a query that executes two inline views: A) Hierarchically query for all assignments in this virtual organization and using SYS_CONNECT_BY_PATH to store the entire path to each user/role/company_location and B) Hierarchically retrieve all the assignments the individual logged in has and using the SYS_CONNECT_BY_PATH to store the entire path to each of these assignments. The result of the query is all the records from A) plus a boolean determined by joining with B) which flags whether the logged in user has edit access for each record. Indexes don't seem to be helping... it simply appears that there is too much processing going on to separate all the records and then determine edit access. One issue is that I can't store the SYS_CONNECT_BY_PATH and index it... determining whether an individual record has edit access consists of comparing if: test_record_sys_path LIKE individual_record_sys_path || '%' Is a materialized view the answer?

    Read the article

  • Hibernate-Search: How to search dates?

    - by Aaron
    @Entity @Table(name = "USERS") public class User { @Id @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.AUTO) private long id; @Column(name = "USERNAME", nullable = false, length = 20) private String userName; @Column(name = "PASSWORD", nullable = false, length = 10) private String password; @Column(name = "Date", nullable = false ) private Date date; } How can I select the records which have the date between [now | now-x hours] [now | now-x days] [now | now-x months] [now | now-x years]

    Read the article

  • Frequency Table by user in SQL

    - by Roberto
    Very basic SQL question (DB is MySQL): I want a table of number of transactions by users. User ID Transaction count 1 43 2 213 3 0 4 23 5 0 In a table I have the two relevant records (user_id and buy_count). How could I get the table I want? Thanks, Roberto

    Read the article

  • Mysql order by using two columns

    - by Krishna Priya
    Hi, I am using a table which has Createdon and Lastmodifiedon fields, I have to display first the newly added record based on createdon and then followed by lastmodifiedon records using mysql. I have tried adding "ORDER BY Createdon,Lastmodifiedon desc" at the end of the query;but sorting based on first column only occurs. Anyone please help in this issue Thanks.

    Read the article

  • mysql select update

    - by Tillebeck
    Got this: Table a ID RelatedBs 1 NULL 2 NULL Table b AID ID 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 Need Table a to have a comma separated list as given in table b. And then table b will become obsolete: Table a ID RelatedBs 1 1,2,3 2 4,5,6 This does not rund through all records, but just ad one 'b' to 'table a' UPDATE a, b SET relatedbs = CONCAT(relatedbs,',',b.id) WHERE a.id = b.aid

    Read the article

  • How to solve this issues in URL?

    - by Ayyappan.Anbalagan
    I am doing billing project.i am passing invoice number to another .aspx page. /default.aspx?editid=5 its my url. if i changed my editid no=4 then the records also changes.how to solve this issue?? page1: LinkButton InvoiceEdit = sender as LinkButton; string EditId = InvoiceEdit.CommandArgument.ToString(); Response.Redirect("edit invoice.aspx?EditId=" + EditId); page2: String invoiceId = Request.QueryString["InvoiceId"].ToString();

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2005 - query with case statement

    - by user329266
    Trying to put a single query together to be used eventually in a SQL Server 2005 report. I need to: Pull in all distinct records for values in the "eventid" column for a time frame - this seems to work. For each eventid referenced above, I need to search for all instances of the same eventid to see if there is another record with TaskName like 'review1%'. Again, this seems to work. This is where things get complicated: For each record where TaskName is like review1, I need to see if another record exists with the same eventid and where TaskName='End'. Utimately, I need a count of how many records have TaskName like 'review1%', and then how many have TaskName like 'review1%' AND TaskName='End'. I would think this could be accomplished by setting a new value for each record, and for the eventid, if a record exists with TaskName='End', set to 1, and if not, set to 0. The query below seems to accomplish item #1 above: SELECT eventid, TimeStamp, TaskName, filepath FROM (SELECT eventid, TimeStamp, filepath, TaskName, ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY eventid ORDER BY TimeStamp DESC) AS seq FROM eventrecords where ((TimeStamp >= '2010-4-1 00:00:00.000') and (TimeStamp <= '2010-4-21 00:00:00.000'))) AS T WHERE seq = 1 order by eventid And the query below seems to accomplish #2: SELECT eventid, TimeStamp, TaskName, filepath FROM (SELECT eventid, TimeStamp, filepath, TaskName, ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY eventid ORDER BY TimeStamp DESC) AS seq FROM eventrecords where ((TimeStamp >= '2010-4-1 00:00:00.000') and (TimeStamp <= '2010-4-21 00:00:00.000')) and TaskName like 'Review1%') AS T WHERE seq = 1 order by eventid This will bring back the eventid's that also have a TaskName='End': SELECT eventid, TimeStamp, TaskName, filepath FROM (SELECT eventid, TimeStamp, filepath, TaskName, ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY eventid ORDER BY TimeStamp DESC) AS seq FROM eventrecords where ((TimeStamp >= '2010-4-1 00:00:00.000') and (TimeStamp <= '2010-4-21 00:00:00.000')) and TaskName like 'Review1%') AS T WHERE seq = 1 and eventid in (Select eventid from eventrecords where TaskName = 'End') order by eventid So I've tried the following to TRY to accomplish #3: SELECT eventid, TimeStamp, TaskName, filepath FROM (SELECT eventid, TimeStamp, filepath, TaskName, ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY eventid ORDER BY TimeStamp DESC) AS seq FROM eventrecords where ((TimeStamp >= '2010-4-1 00:00:00.000') and (TimeStamp <= '2010-4-21 00:00:00.000')) and TaskName like 'Review1%') AS T WHERE seq = 1 and case when (eventid in (Select eventid from eventrecords where TaskName = 'End') then 1 else 0) as bit end order by eventid When I try to run this, I get: "Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'then'." Not sure what I'm doing wrong. Haven't seen any examples anywhere quite like this. I should mention that eventrecords has a primary key, but it doesn't seem to help anything when I include it, and I am not permitted to change the table. (ugh) I've received one suggestion to use a cursor and temporary table, but am not sure how badley that would bog down performance when the report is running. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Tagging in rails with is_taggable

    - by poseid
    there is an example provided on how to add tags to a model with is_taggable, and it works very nice (working in 5 minutes) Now, I also need the opposite, show all records that are tagged with a certain word. Something like: ModelWithTag.find_by_tags "foo" or find_all_tagged_with "foo" Is this possible with is_taggable ?

    Read the article

  • string categorization strategies

    - by Andrew Heath
    I'm the one-man dev team on a fledgling military history website. One aspect of the site is a catalog of ~1,200 individual battles, including the nations & formations (regiments, divisions, etc) which took part. The formation information (as well as the other battle info) was manually imported from a series of books by a 10-man volunteer team. The formations were listed in groups with varying formatting and abbreviation patterns. At the time I set up the data collection forms I couldn't think of a good way to process that data... and elected to store it all as strings in the MySQL database and sort it out later. Well, "later" - as it tends to happen - has arrived. :-) Each battle has 2+ records in the database - one for each nation that participated. Each record has a formations text string listing the formations present as the volunteer chose to add them. Some real examples: 39th Grenadier Rgmt, 26th Volksgrenadier Division 2nd Luftwaffe Field Division, 246th Infantry Division 247th Rifle Division, 255th Tank Brigade 2nd Luftwaffe Field Division, SS Cavalry Division 28th Tank Brigade, 158th Rifle Division, 135th Rifle Division, 81st Tank Brigade, 242nd Tank Brigade 78th Infantry Division 3rd Kure Special Naval Landing Force, Tulagi Seaplane Base personnel 1st Battalion 505th Infantry Regiment The ultimate goal is for each individual force to have an ID, so that its participation can be traced throughout the battle database. Formation hierarchy, such as the final item above 1st Battalion (of the) 505th Infantry Regiment also needs to be preserved. In that case, 1st Battalion and 505th Infantry Regiment would be split, but 1st Battalion would be flagged as belonging to the 505th. In database terms, I think I want to pull the formation field out of the current battle info table and create three new tables: FORMATION [id] [name] FORMATION_HIERARCHY [id] [parent] [child] FORMATION_BATTLE [f_id] [battle_id] It's simple to explain, but complicated to enact. What I'm looking for from the SO community is just some tips on how best to tackle this problem. Ideally there's some sort of method to solving this that I'm not aware of. However, as a last resort, I could always code a classification framework and call my volunteers back to sort through 2,500+ records...

    Read the article

  • Rails - asynchronous tasks, forked processes, best practices

    - by LisaPatton
    I'm using a Observer on my classes. When one of the records is created/updated I need to notfify another service (via a URL call). What is the best way to do this to avoid slowing down my class? Would using a gem liked delayed_job be overkill? In my Observer's after_update() / after_create() I just want to launch a thread that calls the URL...

    Read the article

  • array size for extendible hashing

    - by Phenom
    If I want to use extendible hashing to store a maximum of 100 records, then what is the minimum array size that I need? I am guessing that an array of 100 would be sufficient, but I could be wrong. I also suspect that I can use a smaller array.

    Read the article

  • union on the same table

    - by StupidDeveloper
    I have a table: ID | Id1 | Id2 1 | 100 | 12 2 | 196 | 140 3 | 196 | 141 4 | 150 | 140 5 | 150 | 199 I want to write a query that will give me a table containing records with the same ID2 and with id1 equal to 196 or 150. I thought about union: select * from table where itemId = 196 union select * from table where itemId = 150 but that doesn't cover the ID2 requirement. How should I do that?

    Read the article

  • set difference in SQL query

    - by TheObserver
    I'm trying to select records with a statement SELECT * FROM A WHERE LEFT(B, 5) IN (SELECT * FROM (SELECT LEFT(A.B,5), COUNT(DISTINCT A.C) c_count FROM A GROUP BY LEFT(B,5) ) p1 WHERE p1.c_count = 1 ) AND C IN (SELECT * FROM (SELECT A.C , COUNT(DISTINCT LEFT(A.B,5)) b_count FROM A GROUP BY C ) p2 WHERE p2.b_count = 1) which takes a long time to run ~15 sec. Is there a better way of writing this SQL?

    Read the article

  • Preference values - static without tables using a model with virtual attributes

    - by Mike
    Im trying to eliminate two tables from my database. The tables are message_sort_options and per_page_options. These tables basically just have 5 records which are options a user can set as their preference in a preferences table. The preferences table has columns like sort_preferences and per_page_preference which both point to a record in the other two tables containing the options. How can i set up the models with virtual attributes and fixed values for the options - eliminating table lookups every time the preferences are looked up?

    Read the article

  • ignoring saturday and sunday

    - by bsandrabr
    I am pulling in all the records from my customer database(mysql) for the last ten days $offset1 =strtotime("-10 day"); $date3=date("Y-m-d",$offset1); SELECT * FROM customers WHERE date between '$date3' and '$date' AND customer.custid = '$custid' ORDER by date DESC I would like to leave out the dates falling on a saturday or sunday and would like to put this in my query rather than the php If you can help thanks

    Read the article

  • How to disable automatic loading in NHibernate?

    - by Drevak
    This question might be a duplicate of this one: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/217761/nhibernate-disable-automatic-lazy-loading-of-child-records-for-one-to-many-rela I'd like to know if there is any way to tell nhibernate to do not load a child collections (best if it's with fluent Nhibernate) unless i do it manually with a query (keeping all the mappings!). The problem is that even turning off lazy loading the collections get eager-loaded automatically. I'd like that no collections are loaded unless I specify a fetchmode in my query.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106  | Next Page >