Search Results

Search found 14874 results on 595 pages for 'mysql connector'.

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 172/595 | < Previous Page | 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179  | Next Page >

  • Single Large v/s Multiple Small MySQL tables for storing Options

    - by Prasad
    Hi there, I'm aware of several question on this forum relating to this. But I'm not talking about splitting tables for the same entity (like user for example) Suppose I have a huge options table that stores list options like Gender, Marital Status, and many more domain specific groups with same structure. I plan to capture in a OPTIONS table. Another simple option is to have the field set as ENUM, but there are disadvantages of that as well. http://www.brandonsavage.net/why-you-should-replace-enum-with-something-else/ OPTIONS Table: option_id <will be referred instead of the name> name value group Query: select .. from options where group = '15' - Since this table is expected to be multi-tenant, the no of rows could grow drastically. - I believe splitting the tables instead of finding by the group would be easier to write & faster to execute. - or perhaps partitioning by the group or tenant? Pl suggest. Thanks

    Read the article

  • mysql data type confusion

    - by zen
    So this is more of a generalized question about MySQLs data types. I'd like to store a 5-digit US zip code (zip_code) properly in this example. A county has 10 different cities and 5 different zip codes. city | zip code -------+---------- city 0 | 33333 city 1 | 11111 city 2 | 22222 city 3 | 33333 city 4 | 44444 city 5 | 55555 city 6 | 33333 city 7 | 33333 city 8 | 44444 city 9 | 22222 I would typically structure a table like this as varchar(50), int(5) and not think twice about it. (1) If we wanted to ensure that this table had only one of 5 different zip codes we should use the enum data type, right? Now think of a similar scenario on a much larger scale. In a state, there are five-hundred cities with 418 different zip codes. (2) Should I store 418 zip codes as an enum data type OR as an int and create another table to reference?

    Read the article

  • mysql select from multiple table

    - by Loon Yew
    I have 3 tables with values like below tbl_product recID pID price colour 1 BDPLA-0001 1.23 White 2 BDPLA-0002 2.23 Black 3 BDPLA-0003 2.28 Blue tbl_product_size recID pID size stock 1 1 2.0cm 10 2 1 3.0cm 20 3 2 2.5cm 30 4 3 3.6cm 40 5 3 3.8cm 50 tbl_order_details recID pID quantity size 201 BDPLA-0001 5 2.0cm 202 BDPLA-0002 10 2.5cm tbl_product.recID = tbl_product_size.pID tbl_product.pID = tbl_order_details.pID how can i combine the tables and produce result like this pID size stock quantity price BDPLA-0001 2.0cm 10 5 1.23 BDPLA-0001 3.0cm 20 null 1.23 BDPLA-0002 2.5cm 30 10 2.23 BDPLA-0003 3.6cm 40 null 2.28 BDPLA-0003 3.8cm 50 null 2.28

    Read the article

  • Mysql Select 1:n

    - by clinisbut
    Hello, I have two tables that relates 1:n content --------- - id - title - text content_meta ------------- - id - content_id - meta_key - meta_value A content can have multiple content_meta registers associated to it. Typically content_meta will contain the category, tags, descriptions and all that stuff, so I really don't know the number of registers a content will have. What I want to accomplish is to take the content register and also all the related registers in content_meta in a single query. I've tried the subselect approachment but seems that I can only get one register/column (¿?) SELECT content.*, ( SELECT * FROM content_meta WHERE content_id = content.id ) FROM content This query complains that "Operand should contain 1 column(s)", so changing the '*' by for example meta_key clears the error, but returns a NULL for this subselect... SELECT content.*, ( SELECT meta_key FROM content_meta WHERE content_id = content.id ) FROM content Can anybody show me where to go from here please?

    Read the article

  • MySQL GROUP_CONCAT + IN() = missing data :-(

    - by Andrew Heath
    Example: Table: box boxID color 01 red 02 blue 03 green Table: boxHas boxID has 01 apple 01 pear 01 grapes 01 banana 02 lime 02 apple 02 pear 03 chihuahua 03 nachos 03 baby crocodile I want to query on the contents of each box, and return a table with each ID, color, and a column that concatenates the contents of each box, so I use: SELECT box.boxID, box.color, GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT boxHas.has SEPARATOR ", ") AS contents FROM box LEFT JOIN boxHas ON box.boxID=boxHas.boxID WHERE boxHas.has IN ('apple','pear') GROUP BY box.boxID ORDER BY box.boxID and I get the following table of results: boxID color contents 01 red apple, pear 02 blue apple, pear My question to you is: why isn't it listing ALL the has values in the contents column? Why is my WHERE statement also cropping my GROUP_CONCAT? The table I thought I was going to get is: boxID color contents 01 red apple, banana, grapes, pear 02 blue apple, lime, pear Although I want to limit my boxID results based upon the WHERE statement, I do not want to limit the contents field for valid boxes. :-/ Help?

    Read the article

  • Displaying data from a linked table and displaying it as a list with HTML/PHP/MySQL

    - by user1672694
    I have three tables. students studentID | FirstName | LastName | Email | Form course CCode | Title courseenrolement courseenrolementid | studentID | ccode | complete | scode With the website, I have a page where I can view all the current enrolements and I wish to be able to view the list displaying the first name, surname and course title. I know I could do it with the following SQL (for the names): SELECT FirstName, LastName FROM student, courseenrolement WHERE courseenrolement.studentID = student.studentID But I am unsure how to get this to work using HTML/PHP. At present I only know how to display the studentID and CCode from the courseenrolement table using the following code: <ul> <?php foreach ($courseenrolements as $ce): ?> <li> <form action="" method="post"> <div> <?php htmlout($ce['studentID']); ?> <?php htmlout($ce['CCode']); ?> <input type="hidden" name="courseenrolementid" value="<?php echo $ce['courseenrolementid']; ?>"> <input type="submit" name="action" value="Edit"> <input type="submit" name="action" value="Delete"> </div> </form> </li> <?php endforeach; ?> </ul> which displays this: But I would like the names and course title. I managed to get it to show the names etc in the dropdown on the 'Add new' form, so I would assume it will be similar, but just unsure on how exactly. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • MySQL Subquery LIMIT

    - by atif089
    As the title says, I wanted a workaround for this... SELECT comments.comment_id, comments.content_id, comments.user_id, comments.`comment`, comments.comment_time, NULL FROM comments WHERE (comments.content_id IN (SELECT content.content_id FROM content WHERE content.user_id = 1 LIMIT 0, 10)) Cheers

    Read the article

  • mysql GROUP_CONCAT

    - by user301766
    I want to list all users with their corropsonding user class. Here are simplified versions of my tables CREATE TABLE users ( user_id INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, user_class VARCHAR(100), PRIMARY KEY (user_id) ); INSERT INTO users VALUES (1, '1'), (2, '2'), (3, '1,2'); CREATE TABLE classes ( class_id INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, class_name VARCHAR(100), PRIMARY KEY (class_id) ); INSERT INTO classes VALUES (1, 'Class 1'), (2, 'Class 2'); And this is the query statement I am trying to use but is only returning the first matching user class and not a concatenated list as hoped. SELECT user_id, GROUP_CONCAT(DISTINCT class_name SEPARATOR ",") AS class_name FROM users, classes WHERE user_class IN (class_id) GROUP BY user_id; Actual Output +---------+------------+ | user_id | class_name | +---------+------------+ | 1 | Class 1 | | 2 | Class 2 | | 3 | Class 1 | +---------+------------+ Wanted Output +---------+---------------------+ | user_id | class_name | +---------+---------------------+ | 1 | Class 1 | | 2 | Class 2 | | 3 | Class 1, Class 2 | +---------+---------------------+ Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • MYSQL Inner Join two table over two keys

    - by bertsisterwanda
    I am doing a query to return all users shopping carts, stored in the sb_carts table. The product information stored in sb_carts is referenced over two keys product_sku and school_id. It needs to reference both to return a unique product with unique stock levels etc. When I execute the following query it returns one row, I am expecting 3 rows. I have tried breaking the inner join into two separate joins but this still returns only 1 result. joining only on one key has the desired result, but may be retuning the wrong product. A left join returns 3 rows but some data is missing product specific Here is a simplified example of what I am doing SELECT sb_carts.product_sku FROM sb_carts INNER JOIN sb_products ON sb_products.sku = sb_carts.product_sku AND sb_products.school_id = sb_carts.school_id WHERE sb_carts.order_id = 0 AND sb_carts.user_id = 2 GROUP BY sb_carts.cart_id

    Read the article

  • MySql Query lag time?

    - by Click Upvote
    When there are multiple PHP scripts running in parallel, each making an UPDATE query to the same record in the same table repeatedly, is it possible for there to be a 'lag time' before the table is updated with each query? I have basically 5-6 instances of a PHP script running in parallel, having been launched via cron. Each script gets all the records in the items table, and then loops through them and processes them. However, to avoid processing the same item more than once, I store the id of the last item being processed in a seperate table. So this is how my code works: function getCurrentItem() { $sql = "SELECT currentItemId from settings"; $result = $this->db->query($sql); return $result->get('currentItemId'); } function setCurrentItem($id) { $sql = "UPDATE settings SET currentItemId='$id'"; $this->db->query($sql); } $currentItem = $this->getCurrentItem(); $sql = "SELECT * FROM items WHERE status='pending' AND id > $currentItem'"; $result = $this->db->query($sql); $items = $result->getAll(); foreach ($items as $i) { //Check if $i has been processed by a different instance of the script, and if so, //leave it untouched. if ($this->getCurrentItem() > $i->id) continue; $this->setCurrentItem($i->id); // Process the item here } But despite of all the precautions, most items are being processed more than once. Which makes me think that there is some lag time between the update queries being run by the PHP script, and when the database actually updates the record. Is it true? And if so, what other mechanism should I use to ensure that the PHP scripts always get only the latest currentItemId even when there are multiple scripts running in parrallel? Would using a text file instead of the db help?

    Read the article

  • Improve speed of a JOIN in MySQL

    - by ran2
    Dear all, I know there a similar threads around, but this is really the first time I realize that query speed might affect me - so it´s not that easy for me to really make the transfer from other folks problems. That being said I have using the following query successfully with smaller data, but if I use it on what are mildly large tables (about 120,000 records). I am waiting for hours. INSERT INTO anothertable (id,someint1,someint1,somevarchar1,somevarchar1) SELECT DISTINCT md.id,md.someint1,md.someint1,md.somevarchar1,pd.somevarchar1 from table1 AS md JOIN table2 AS pd ON (md.id = pd.id); Tables 1 and 2 contain about 120,000 records. The query has been running for almost 2 hours right now. Is this normal? Do I just have to wait. I really have no idea, but I am pretty sure that one could do it better since it´s my very first try. I read about indexing, but dont know yet what to index in my case? Thanks for any suggestions - feel free to point my to the very beginners guides ! best matt

    Read the article

  • get value from MySQL database with PHP

    - by Hristo
    $from = $_POST['from']; $to = $_POST['to']; $message = $_POST['message']; $query = "SELECT * FROM Users WHERE `user_name` = '$from' LIMIT 1"; $result = mysql_query($query); while($row = mysql_fetch_array($result, MYSQL_ASSOC)) { $fromID = $row['user_id']; } I'm trying to have $formID be the user_id for a user in my database. Each row in the Users table is like: user_id | user_name | user_type 1 | Hristo | Agent So I want $from = 1 but the above code isn't working. Any ideas why?

    Read the article

  • MySQL SELECT Statment issue

    - by mouthpiec
    Hi, I have the following query which returns 2 tuples SELECT bar_id, bar_name, town_name, bar_telephone, subscription_type_id, type FROM towns, subscriptiontype, regions, bar LEFT JOIN barpictures bp ON bar.bar_id = bp.bar_id_fk WHERE town_id = town_id_fk AND bar.test_field = 0 AND subscription_type_id = subscription_type_id_fk AND region_id = region_id_fk AND (type like 'logo%' OR type IS NULL) The main difference between the tuples is that one has 'type' = logo and the other tuple has 'type' = logo_large. I need that instead of having two tuples, I need that I have 2 type attributes, one holding the "logo" and the other the "logo_large" eg bar_id, bar_name, town_name, bar_telephone, subscription_type_id, type1, type2 is this possible

    Read the article

  • MYSQL and the LIMIT clause

    - by Lizard
    I was wondering if adding a LIMIT 1 to a query would speed up the processing? For example... I have a query that will most of the time return 1 result, but will occasionaly return 10's, 100's or even 1000's of records. But I will only ever want the first record. Would the limit 1 speed things up or make no difference? I know I could use GROUP BY to return 1 result but that would just add more computation. Any thoughts gladly accepted! Thanks

    Read the article

  • Retrieve part of a MySQL column with PHP

    - by Gerardo Marset
    For instance, if I have the following table: +----+---+----------+ | id | a | position | +----+---+----------+ | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 1 | 0 | 1 | | 2 | 1 | 4 | | 3 | 1 | 9 | | 4 | 1 | 6 | | 5 | 1 | 1 | +----+---+----------+ and I want to get an array that contains the first 100 values from position where a is 1 in ascending order, what would I do? Im guessing something like this: $col = mysql_fetch_array( mysql_query(' SELECT `position` FROM `table` WHERE `a`="1" ORDER BY `position` ASC LIMIT 100 ')); I'd expect to get the following array: +-------+-------+ | index | value | +-------+-------+ | 0 | 1 | | 1 | 4 | | 2 | 6 | | 3 | 9 | +-------+-------+ but it doesn't work. ¿What should I do to make it work? Thanks

    Read the article

  • rewritten mysql query returning unexpected results, trying to figure out why

    - by dq
    I created a messy query in a hurry a while ago to get a list of product codes. I am now trying to clean up my tables and my code. I recently tried to rewrite the query in order for it to be easier to use and understand. The original query works great, but it requires multiple search strings in order to do one search because it uses UNIONS, and it has a few other issues. My newly modified query is easier to understand, and only requires one search string, but is returning different results. Basically the new query is leaving records out, and I would like to understand why, and how to fix it. Here are the two queries (search strings are all null): Original Query: $query = 'SELECT product_code FROM bus_warehouse_lots WHERE status=\'2\''.$search_string_1 .' UNION SELECT product_code FROM bus_po WHERE status=\'0\''.$search_string_2 .' UNION SELECT bus_warehouse_entries.new_product_code AS product_code FROM (bus_warehouse_entries LEFT JOIN bus_warehouse_transfers ON bus_warehouse_entries.picking_ticket_num=bus_warehouse_transfers.pt_number) LEFT JOIN bus_warehouse_lots ON bus_warehouse_entries.ebooks_lot_id=bus_warehouse_lots.id WHERE bus_warehouse_entries.type=\'6\' AND bus_warehouse_transfers.status=\'0\''.$search_string_3 .' UNION SELECT bus_contracts.main_product AS product_code FROM bus_contracts LEFT JOIN bus_warehouse_lots ON bus_contracts.main_product=bus_warehouse_lots.product_code WHERE bus_contracts.status=\'0\''.$search_string_4 .' UNION SELECT prod_id AS product_code FROM bus_products WHERE last_usage > \''.date('Y-m-d', strtotime('-12 months')).'\''.$search_string_5 .' ORDER BY product_code'; New Query: $query = 'SELECT bus_products.prod_id FROM bus_products' .' LEFT JOIN (bus_warehouse_lots, bus_po, bus_warehouse_entries, bus_contracts) ON (' .'bus_products.prod_id = bus_warehouse_lots.product_code' .' AND bus_products.prod_id = bus_po.product_code' .' AND bus_products.prod_id = bus_warehouse_entries.new_product_code' .' AND bus_products.prod_id = bus_contracts.main_product)' .' LEFT JOIN bus_warehouse_transfers ON' .' bus_warehouse_entries.picking_ticket_num = bus_warehouse_transfers.pt_number' .' WHERE (bus_products.last_usage > \''.date('Y-m-d', strtotime('-12 months')).'\'' .' OR bus_warehouse_lots.status = \'2\'' .' OR bus_po.status = \'0\'' .' OR (bus_warehouse_entries.type = \'6\' AND bus_warehouse_transfers.status = \'0\')' .' OR bus_contracts.status = \'0\')' .$search_string_6 .' GROUP BY bus_products.prod_id' .' ORDER BY bus_products.prod_id';

    Read the article

  • Optimize MySQL query (ngrams, COUNT(), GROUP BY, ORDER BY)

    - by Gerardo
    I have a database with thousands of companies and their locations. I have implemented n-grams to optimize search. I am making one query to retrieve all the companies that match with the search query and another one to get a list with their locations and the number of companies in each location. The query I am trying to optimize is the latter. Maybe the problem is this: Every company ('anunciante') has a field ('estado') to make logical deletes. So, if 'estado' equals 1, the company should be retrieved. When I run the EXPLAIN command, it shows that it goes through almost 40k rows, when the actual result (the reality matching companies) are 80. How can I optimize this? This is my query (XXX represent the n-grams for the search query): SELECT provincias.provincia AS provincia, provincias.id, COUNT(*) AS cantidad FROM anunciantes JOIN anunciante_invertido AS a_i0 ON anunciantes.id = a_i0.id_anunciante JOIN indice_invertido AS indice0 ON a_i0.id_invertido = indice0.id LEFT OUTER JOIN domicilios ON anunciantes.id = domicilios.id_anunciante LEFT OUTER JOIN localidades ON domicilios.id_localidad = localidades.id LEFT OUTER JOIN provincias ON provincias.id = localidades.id_provincia WHERE anunciantes.estado = 1 AND indice0.id IN (SELECT invertido_ngrama.id_palabra FROM invertido_ngrama JOIN ngrama ON ngrama.id = invertido_ngrama.id_ngrama WHERE ngrama.ngrama = 'XXX') AND indice0.id IN (SELECT invertido_ngrama.id_palabra FROM invertido_ngrama JOIN ngrama ON ngrama.id = invertido_ngrama.id_ngrama WHERE ngrama.ngrama = 'XXX') AND indice0.id IN (SELECT invertido_ngrama.id_palabra FROM invertido_ngrama JOIN ngrama ON ngrama.id = invertido_ngrama.id_ngrama WHERE ngrama.ngrama = 'XXX') AND indice0.id IN (SELECT invertido_ngrama.id_palabra FROM invertido_ngrama JOIN ngrama ON ngrama.id = invertido_ngrama.id_ngrama WHERE ngrama.ngrama = 'XXX') AND indice0.id IN (SELECT invertido_ngrama.id_palabra FROM invertido_ngrama JOIN ngrama ON ngrama.id = invertido_ngrama.id_ngrama WHERE ngrama.ngrama = 'XXX') GROUP BY provincias.id ORDER BY cantidad DESC And this is the query explained (hope it can be read in this format): id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 PRIMARY anunciantes ref PRIMARY,estado estado 1 const 36669 Using index; Using temporary; Using filesort 1 PRIMARY domicilios ref id_anunciante id_anunciante 4 db84771_viaempresas.anunciantes.id 1 1 PRIMARY localidades eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 db84771_viaempresas.domicilios.id_localidad 1 1 PRIMARY provincias eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 db84771_viaempresas.localidades.id_provincia 1 1 PRIMARY a_i0 ref PRIMARY,id_anunciante,id_invertido PRIMARY 4 db84771_viaempresas.anunciantes.id 1 Using where; Using index 1 PRIMARY indice0 eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 db84771_viaempresas.a_i0.id_invertido 1 Using index 6 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY ngrama const PRIMARY,ngrama ngrama 5 const 1 Using index 6 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY invertido_ngrama eq_ref PRIMARY,id_palabra,id_ngrama PRIMARY 8 func,const 1 Using index 5 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY ngrama const PRIMARY,ngrama ngrama 5 const 1 Using index 5 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY invertido_ngrama eq_ref PRIMARY,id_palabra,id_ngrama PRIMARY 8 func,const 1 Using index 4 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY ngrama const PRIMARY,ngrama ngrama 5 const 1 Using index 4 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY invertido_ngrama eq_ref PRIMARY,id_palabra,id_ngrama PRIMARY 8 func,const 1 Using index 3 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY ngrama const PRIMARY,ngrama ngrama 5 const 1 Using index 3 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY invertido_ngrama eq_ref PRIMARY,id_palabra,id_ngrama PRIMARY 8 func,const 1 Using index 2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY ngrama const PRIMARY,ngrama ngrama 5 const 1 Using index 2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY invertido_ngrama eq_ref PRIMARY,id_palabra,id_ngrama PRIMARY 8 func,const 1 Using index

    Read the article

  • mysql display each day in a month

    - by Jason
    during a month, display the infor each date, order by date, but this infor is empty in some day. how can i still display each day as a row? Product date ----------------- 20 2008-01-01 10 2008-01-02 20 2008-01-03 10 2008-01-05 09 2008-01-08 30 2008-01-09 result: Product date ----------------- 20 2008-01-01 10 2008-01-02 20 2008-01-03 0 2008-01-04 10 2008-01-05 0 2008-01-06 0 2008-01-07 09 2008-01-08 30 2008-01-09

    Read the article

  • Resuming MySQL indexing

    - by gmemon
    Hello All, I have been building index on a 200 million row table for almost 14 hours. Due to resource over-consumption on the machine (because of a separate incident), the machine cashed. Clearly, I want to avoid another 14 hours to re-construct the index. Is there a way that I can resume the construction of index from the point (or slightly back) where the machine crashed? I can see the temporary files created. Thanks

    Read the article

  • how i group do this mysql query

    - by moustafa
    i want to make charts system and i think it must be like that 1 jan 2009 = 10 post 2 jan 2009 = 2 post 4 jan 2009 = 10 post 6 jan 2009 = 60 post and i have posts table that has id,user_id,date how i can select from posts to show it like that

    Read the article

  • Tree data in MySql database table

    - by Robert Koritnik
    I have a table that uses Adjacency list model for hierarchy storage. My most relevant columns in this table are therefore: ItemId // is auto_increment ParentId Level ParentTrail // in the form of "parentId/../parentId/itemId" then I created a before insert tigger, that populates columns Level and ParentTrail. Since the last column also includes current item's ID I had to use a trick in my trigger because auto_increment columns are not available in the before insert trigger. So I get that value from the information_schema.tables table. All works fine, until I try to write an update trigger, that would update my item and its descendants when the item changes its parent (ParentId has changed). But I can't make an update on my table inside the update trigger. All I can do is to change current record's values but not other's. I could use a separate table for hierarchy data, but that would mean that I would also have to create a view that would combine these two tables (1:1 relation) and I would like to avoid this is at all possible. Is there a way to have all these in the same table so that these fields (Level and ParetTrail) set/update themselves automagically using triggers?

    Read the article

  • Creating a [materialised]view from generic data in Oracle/Mysql

    - by Andrew White
    I have a generic datamodel with 3 tables CREATE TABLE Properties ( propertyId int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, name varchar(80) NOT NULL ) CREATE TABLE Customers ( customerId int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, customerName varchar(80) NOT NULL ) CREATE TABLE PropertyValues ( propertyId int(11) NOT NULL, customerId int(11) NOT NULL, value varchar(80) NOT NULL ) INSERT INTO Properties VALUES (1, 'Age'); INSERT INTO Properties VALUES (2, 'Weight'); INSERT INTO Customers VALUES (1, 'Bob'); INSERT INTO Customers VALUES (2, 'Tom'); INSERT INTO PropertyValues VALUES (1, 1, '34'); INSERT INTO PropertyValues VALUES (2, 1, '80KG'); INSERT INTO PropertyValues VALUES (1, 2, '24'); INSERT INTO PropertyValues VALUES (2, 2, '53KG'); What I would like to do is create a view that has as columns all the ROWS in Properties and has as rows the entries in Customers. The column values are populated from PropertyValues. e.g. customerId Age Weight 1 34 80KG 2 24 53KG I'm thinking I need a stored procedure to do this and perhaps a materialised view (the entries in the table "Properties" change rarely). Any tips?

    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 | 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179  | Next Page >