Search Results

Search found 23955 results on 959 pages for 'insert query'.

Page 219/959 | < Previous Page | 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226  | Next Page >

  • mysql varchar innodb page size limit 8100 bytes

    - by David19801
    Hi, Regarding innodb, someone recently told me: "the varchar content beyond 768 bytes is stored in supplemental 16K pages" This is very interesting. If each varchar will be latin1, which I believe stores as 1byte per letter, would a single varchar(500) (<768 bytes) require an extra i/o as a varchar(1000) (768 bytes) would?? (this question is to find out if all varchars or just big varchars are split into a separate page) Is the 768 limit per varchar or for all varchars in the row added together? (for example, does this get optimized - varchar(300), varchar(300), varchar(300): [where each individual varchar column is below 768 but together they are above 768 characters]? I am confused about if the 768 limit relates to each individual varchar or all varchars in the row totaled (as in the question). Any clarification? EDIT: Removed part about CHARS due to finding out about their limit of 255 max.

    Read the article

  • Stored procs breaking overnight

    - by Chad
    We are running MS SQL 2005 and we have been experiencing a very peculiar problem the past few days. I have two procs, one that creates an hourly report of data. And another that calls it, puts its results in a temp table, and does some aggregations, and returns a summary. They work fine...until the next morning. The next morning, suddenly the calling report, complains about an invalid column name. The fix, is simply a recompile of the calling proc, and all works well again. How can this happen? It's happened three nights in a row since moving these procs into production.

    Read the article

  • Quickly or concisely determine the longest string per column in a row-based data collection

    - by ccornet
    Judging from the failure of my last inquiry, I need to calculate and preset the widths of a set of columns in a table that is being made into an Excel file. Unfortunately, the string data is stored in a row-based format, but the widths must be calculated in a column-based format. The data for the spreadsheets are generated from the following two collections: var dictFiles = l.Items.Cast<SPListItem>().GroupBy(foo => foo.GetSafeSPValue("Category")).ToDictionary(bar => bar.Key); StringDictionary dictCols = GetColumnsForItem(l.Title); Where l is an SPList whose title determines which columns are used. Each SPListItem corresponds to a row of data, which are sorted into separate worksheets based on Category (hence the dictionary). The second line is just a simple StringDictionary that has the column name (A, B, C, etc.) as a key and the corresponding SPListItme field display name as the corresponding value. So for each Category, I enumerate through dictFiles[somekey] to get all the rows in that sheet, and get the particular cell data using SPListItem.Fields[dictCols[colName]]. What I am asking is, is there a quick or concise method, for any one dictFiles[somekey], to retrieve a readout of the longest string in each column provided by dictCols? If it is impossible to get both quickness and conciseness, I can settle for either (since I always have the O(n*m) route of just enumerating the collection and updating an array whenever strCurrent.Length strLongest.Length). For example, if the goal table was the following... Item# Field1 Field2 Field3 1 Oarfish Atmosphere Pretty 2 Raven Radiation Adorable 3 Sunflower Flowers Cute I'd like a function which could cleanly take the collection of items 1, 2, and 3 and output in the correct order... Sunflower, Atmosphere, Adorable Using .NET 3.5 and C# 3.0.

    Read the article

  • Best way to handle MySQL date for performance with thousands of users

    - by bitLost
    I am currently part of a team designing a site that will potentially have thousands of users who will be doing a number of date related searches. During the design phase we have been trying to determine which makes more sense for performance optimization. Should we store the datetime field as a mysql datetime. Or should be break it up into a number of fields (year, month, day, hour, minute, ...) The question is with a large data set and a potentially large set of users, would we gain performance wise breaking the datetime into multiple fields and saving on relying on mysql date functions? Or is mysql already optimized for this?

    Read the article

  • Query distinct list of choices for Django form with App Engine Datastore

    - by Brian
    I've been trying to figure this out for hours across a couple of days, and can not get it to work. I've been everywhere. I'll continue trying to figure it out, but was hoping for a quicker solution. I'm using App Engine datastore + Django. Using a query in a view and custom forms, I was able to get a list to the form but then I was not able to post. I have been trying to figure out how to dynamically add the choices as part of the Django form... I've tried various ways with no success. Help! Below are the two models. I'd like to get a distinct list of address_id to show in the location field in InfoForm. This fields could (and maybe should) be named the same, but I thought it'd be easier if they were named different. class Info(db.Model): user = db.UserProperty() location = db.StringProperty() info = db.StringProperty() created = db.DateTimeProperty(auto_now_add=True) modified = db.DateTimeProperty(auto_now=True) class Locations(db.Model): user = db.UserProperty() address_id = db.StringProperty() address = db.StringProperty() class InfoForm(djangoforms.ModelForm): info = forms.ChoiceField(choices=INFO_CHOICES) location = forms.ChoiceField() class Meta: model = Info exclude = ['user','created','modified']

    Read the article

  • Join unrelated tables through a second level connected table

    - by Andy M
    Hello! I have two tables of activities on a page: Views & Comments. Views id timestamp project_id user_id page_id Comments id timestamp project_id user_id page_id comment Pages id project_id title Now pages are related to projects: Projects id account_id title I am trying to create a summary page that combines views and comments ordered by time (so that the most recent views/comments are at the beginning, grouped by projects. Also, only projects for a specific account. So the result could potentially be: Project 1 View 5 (June 20th) View 4 (June 18th) Comment 5 (June 15th) Comment 4 (June 14th) Comment 3 (June 12th) Project 3 View 3 (June 10th) View 2 (June 8th) Comment 2 (June 7th) Project 2 View 1 (June 5th) Comment 1 (June 4th) If you could help with how to do this using SQL (or even doctrine) that would be awesome. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • In PHP + MySQL, How do I join many tables with conditions

    - by Moe
    Hi, I'm trying to get the users full activity throughout the website. I need to Join many tables throughout the database, with that condition that it is one user. What I currently have written is: SELECT * FROM comments AS c JOIN rphotos AS r ON c.userID = r.userID AND c.userID = '$defineUserID'; But What it is returning is everything about the user, but it repeats rows. For instance, for one user he has 6 photos and 5 comments So I expect the join to return 11 rows. Instead it returns 30 results like so: PhotoID = 1; CommentID = 1; PhotoID = 1; CommentID = 2; PhotoID = 1; CommentID = 3; and so on... What am i doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Joining two tables (through a link), one which may yield multiple rows, together into one result.

    - by Eikern
    Lets say I've got a table listing car brands or models: Cars: Id | Brand ----------- 1 | BMW 2 | Audi 3 | Volvo And I've also got another table which links features. Link: Id | carid | featureid ----------------------- 1 | 1 | 1 2 | 1 | 2 3 | 2 | 2 4 | 3 | 1 5 | 3 | 2 6 | 3 | 3 And I've got the table listing the features. Features: Id | Feature ----------- 1 | A/C 2 | 4WD 3 | Heated seats I want to list these results on my front page like this: BMW A/C 4WD Audi 4WD Volvo A/C 4WD Heated seats What's the best/most efficient way of doing this (using PHP and MySQL)?

    Read the article

  • In mySQL, Is it possible to SELECT from two tables and merge the columns?

    - by Travis
    If I have two tables in mysql that have similar columns... TABLEA id name somefield1 TABLEB id name somefield1 somefield2 How do I structure a SELECT statement so that I can SELECT from both tables simultaneously, and have the result sets merged for the columns that are the same? So for example, I am hoping to do something like... SELECT name, somefield1 FROM TABLEA, TABLEB WHERE name="mooseburgers"; ...and have the name, and somefield1 columns from both tables merged together in the result set. Thank-you for your help!

    Read the article

  • How can I improve this SQL to avoid several problems with its results?

    - by Josh Curren
    I am having some problems with trying to search. Currently this will only return results that have at least 1 row in the maintenance_parts table. I would like it to return results even if there are 0 parts rows. My second problem is that when you search for a vehicle and it should return multiple results (multiple maintenance rows) it will only return 1 result for that vehicle. Some Background Info: The user has 2 fields to fill out. The fields are vehicle and keywords. The vehicle field is meant to allow searching based on the make, model, VIN, truck number (often is 2 - 3 digits or a letter prefix followed by 2 digits), and a few other fields that belong to the truck table. The keywords are meant to search most fields in the maintenance and maintenance_parts tables (things like the description of the work, parts name, parts number). The maintenance_parts table can contain 0, 1, or more rows for each maintenance row. The truck table contains exactly 1 row for every maintenance row. A truck can have multiple maintenance records. "SELECT M.maintenance_id, M.some_id, M.type_code, M.service_date, M.mileage, M.mg_id, M.mg_type, M.comments, M.work_done, MATCH( M.comments, M.work_done) AGAINST( '$keywords' ) + MATCH( P.part_num, P.part_desc, P.part_ref) AGAINST( '$keywords' ) + MATCH( T.truck_number, T.make, T.model, T.engine, T.vin_number, T.transmission_number, T.comments) AGAINST( '$vehicle' ) AS score FROM maintenance M, maintenance_parts P, truck T WHERE M.maintenance_id = P.maintenance_id AND M.some_id = T.truck_id AND M.type_code = 'truck' AND ( (MATCH( T.truck_number, T.make, T.model, T.engine, T.vin_number, T.transmission_number, T.comments) AGAINST( '$vehicle' ) OR T.truck_number LIKE '%$vehicle%') OR MATCH( P.part_num, P.part_desc, P.part_ref) AGAINST( '$keywords' ) OR MATCH( M.comments, M.work_done) AGAINST( '$keywords' ) ) AND M.status = 'A' GROUP BY maintenance_id ORDER BY score DESC, maintenance_id DESC LIMIT 0, $limit"

    Read the article

  • Can I concatenate multiple MySQL rows into one field?

    - by Dean
    Using MySQL, I can do something like select hobbies from peoples_hobbies where person_id = 5; and get: shopping fishing coding but instead I just want 1 row, 1 col: shopping, fishing, coding The reason is that I'm selecting multiple values from multiple tables, and after all the joins I've got a lot more rows than I'd like. I've looked for a function on MySQL Doc and it doesn't look like the CONCAT or CONCAT_WS functions accept result sets, so does anyone here know how to do this?

    Read the article

  • MySQL 5 in MySQL 4 compatible mode for one database?

    - by Horace Ho
    In a recent project, I have to maintain some PHP code. I set up a development server and installed MySQL, Apache, PHP, ..etc. The program is terminated with an error: Unknown column _ _ _ in 'on clause' Cannot select .... Google shows that it's a change of syntax around JOINs, parentheses are needed. As you may imagine, fixing all that PHP SQL strings will be the last resort. _< Is is possible to config MySQL 5 to run at MySQL 4 compatible mode? Or even better, for only one database? Thanks! p.s. Since we are going to host the code on a new production server (MySQL 5 on a CentOS box), the chance to install MySQL 4 on the new server might be slim.

    Read the article

  • Entering Content Into A MySQL Database Via A Form

    - by ThatMacLad
    I've been working on creating a form that submits content into my database but I decided that rather than using a drop down menu to select the date I'd rather use a textfield. I was wondering what changes I will need to make to my table creation file. <?php mysql_connect ('localhost', 'root', 'root') ; mysql_select_db ('tmlblog'); $sql = "CREATE TABLE php_blog ( id int(20) NOT NULL auto_increment, timestamp int(20) NOT NULL, title varchar(255) NOT NULL, entry longtext NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id) )"; $result = mysql_query($sql) or print ("Can't create the table 'php_blog' in the database.<br />" . $sql . "<br />" . mysql_error()); mysql_close(); if ($result != false) { echo "Table 'php_blog' was successfully created."; } ?> It's the timestamp that I need to edit to enter in via a textfield. The Title and Entry are currently being entered via that method anyway.

    Read the article

  • Need help with an xpath query!

    - by gerrod
    Can anyone help with the following XPath question? Given the node-set: <table> <rows> <row> <value column="Product">Coal</value> <value column="Quantity">10000</value> </row> <row> <value column="Product">Iron</value> <value column="Quantity">5000</value> </row> <row> <value column="Product">Ore</value> <value column="Quantity">4000</value> </row> </rows> </table> I want to query to find the node sub-set with a given product name. Note that the product name is being supplied by an attribute of the current node being processed (i.e. "@name"). So when the @name attribute has the value of "Coal" I would expect this to be returned: <row> <value column="Product">Coal</value> <value column="Quantity">10000</value> </row> This is what I've come up with; I know it's wrong, because I don't get anything back. $table/rows/row[value[@column='Product'][text()=@name]] </code>

    Read the article

  • Mysql Limit column value repetition N times

    - by Paper-bat
    Hi at all, is my first question here, so be patient ^^ I'll go directly to problem, I have two table Customer (idCustomer, ecc.. ecc..) Comment (idCustomer, idComment, ecc.. ecc..) obviosly the two table are joined togheter, for example SELECT * FROM Comment AS co JOIN Customer AS cu ON cu.idCustomer = co.idCustomer With this I select all comment from that table associated with is Customer, but now I wanna limit the number of Comment by 2 max Comment per Customer. The first thing I see is to use 'GROUP BY cu.idCustomer' but it limit only 1 Comment per Customer, but I wanna 2 Comment per Customer.. how now to proceed?

    Read the article

  • Get a unique data in a SQL query

    - by Jensen
    Hi, I've a database who contain some datas in that form: icon(name, size, tag) (myicon.png, 16, 'twitter') (myicon.png, 32, 'twitter') (myicon.png, 128, 'twitter') (myicon.png, 256, 'twitter') (anothericon.png, 32, 'facebook') (anothericon.png, 128, 'facebook') (anothericon.png, 256, 'facebook') So as you see it, the name field is not uniq I can have multiple icons with the same name and they are separated with the size field. Now in PHP I have a query that get ONE icon set, for example : $dbQueryIcons = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM pl_icon WHERE tag LIKE '%".$SEARCH_QUERY."%' GROUP BY name ORDER BY id DESC LIMIT ".$firstEntry.", ".$CONFIG['icon_per_page']."") or die(mysql_error()); With this example if $tag contain 'twitter' it will show ONLY the first SQL data entry with the tag 'twitter', so it will be : (myicon.png, 16, 'twitter') This is what I want, but I would prefer the '128' size by default. Is this possible to tell SQL to send me only the 128 size when existing and if not another size ? In an another question someone give me a solution with the GROUP BY but in this case that don't run because we have a GROUP BY name. And if I delete the GROUP BY, it show me all size of the same icons. Thanks !

    Read the article

  • NUll exception in filling a querystring by mocing framework

    - by user564101
    There is a simple controller that a querystring is read in constructor of it. public class ProductController : Controller { parivate string productName; public ProductController() { productName = Request.QueryString["productname"]; } public ActionResult Index() { ViewData["Message"] = productName; return View(); } } Also I have a function in unit test that create an instance of this Controller and I fill the querystring by a Mock object like below. [TestClass] public class ProductControllerTest { [TestMethod] public void test() { // Arrange var querystring = new System.Collections.Specialized.NameValueCollection { { "productname", "sampleproduct"} }; var mock = new Mock<ControllerContext>(); mock.SetupGet(p => p.HttpContext.Request.QueryString).Returns(querystring); var controller = new ProductController(); controller.ControllerContext = mock.Object; // Act var result = controller.Index() as ViewResult; // Assert Assert.AreEqual("Index", result.ViewName); } } Unfortunately Request.QueryString["productname"] is null in constructor of ProductController when I run test unit. Is ther any way to fill a querystrin by a mocking and get it in constructor of a control?

    Read the article

  • How can I join 3 tables with mysql & php?

    - by steven
    check out the page [url]http://www.mujak.com/test/test3.php[/url] It pulls the users Post,username,xbc/xlk tags etc which is perfect... BUT since I am pulling information from a MyBB bulletin board system, its quite different. When replying, people are are allowed to change the "Thread Subject" by simplying replying and changing it. I dont want it to SHOW the changed subject title, just the original title of all posts in that thread. By default it repies with "RE:thread title". They can easily edit this and it will show up in the "Subject" cell & people wont know which thread it was posted in because they changed their thread to when replying to the post. So I just want to keep the orginial thread title when they are replying. Make sense~?? Tables:mybb_users Fields:uid,username Tables:mybb_userfields Fields:ufid Tables:mybb_posts Fields:pid,tid,replyto,subject,ufid,username,uid,message Tables:mybb_threads Fields:tid,fid,subject,uid,username,lastpost,lastposter,lastposteruid I haev tried multiple queries with no success: $result = mysql_query(" SELECT * FROM mybb_users LEFT JOIN (mybb_posts, mybb_userfields, mybb_threads) ON ( mybb_userfields.ufid=mybb_posts.uid AND mybb_threads.tid=mybb_posts.tid AND mybb_users.uid=mybb_userfields.ufid ) WHERE mybb_posts.fid=42"); $result = mysql_query(" SELECT * FROM mybb_users LEFT JOIN (mybb_posts, mybb_userfields, mybb_threads) ON ( mybb_userfields.ufid=mybb_posts.uid AND mybb_threads.tid=mybb_posts.tid AND mybb_users.uid=mybb_posts.uid ) WHERE mybb_threads.fid=42"); $result = mysql_query(" SELECT * FROM mybb_posts LEFT JOIN (mybb_userfields, mybb_threads) ON ( mybb_userfields.ufid=mybb_posts.uid AND mybb_threads.tid=mybb_posts.tid ) WHERE mybb_posts.fid=42");

    Read the article

  • MySQL::Eliminating redundant elements from a table?

    - by Legend
    I have a table like this: +-------+---------+------+-----+---------+-------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-------+---------+------+-----+---------+-------+ | v1 | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | | | v2 | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | | +-------+---------+------+-----+---------+-------+ There is a tremendous amount of duplication in this table. For instance, elements like the following: +------+------+ | v1 | v2 | +------+------+ | 1 | 2 | | 1 | 3 | | 1 | 4 | | 1 | 5 | | 1 | 6 | | 1 | 7 | | 1 | 8 | | 1 | 9 | | 2 | 1 | | 4 | 1 | | 5 | 1 | | 6 | 1 | | 7 | 1 | | 8 | 1 | | 9 | 1 | +------+------+ The table is large with 1540000 entries. To remove the redundant entries (i.e. to get a table having only (1,9) and no (9,1) entries), I was thinking of doing it with a subquery but is there a better way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • Composite primary keys in N-M relation or not?

    - by BerggreenDK
    Lets say we have 3 tables (actually I have 2 at the moment, but this example might illustrate the thought better): [Person] ID: int, primary key Name: nvarchar(xx) [Group] ID: int, primary key Name: nvarchar(xx) [Role] ID: int, primary key Name: nvarchar(xx) [PersonGroupRole] Person_ID: int, PRIMARY COMPOSITE OR NOT? Group_ID: int, PRIMARY COMPOSITE OR NOT? Role_ID: int, PRIMARY COMPOSITE OR NOT? Should any of the 3 ID's in the relation PersonGroupRole be marked as PRIMARY key or should they all 3 be combined into one composite?? whats the real benefit of doing it or not? I can join anyways as far as I know, so Person JOIN PersonGroupRole JOIN Group gives me which persons are in which Groups etc. I will be using LINQ/C#/.NET on top of SQL-express and SQL-server, so if there is any reasons regarding language/SQL that might make the choice more clear, thats the platform I ask about. Looking forward to see what answers pops up, as I have thought of these primary keys/indexes many times when making combined ones.

    Read the article

  • Setting parameters after obtaining their values in stored procedures

    - by user1260028
    Right now I have an upload field while uploads files to the server. The prefix is saved so that it can later be obtained for retrieval. For this I need to attach the ID of the form to the prefix. I would like to be able to do this as such: @filePrefix = SCOPE_IDENTITY() + @filePrefix; However I am not so sure this would work because the record has not been created yet. If anything I could call an update function which obtains the ID and then injects it into the row after it has been created. To speed things up, I don't want to do this on the server but rather do this on the database. Regardless of what the approach is, I would still like to know if something like the above is possible (at least for future reference?) So if we replace that with @filePrefix = 5 + @filePrefix; would that be possible? SQL doesn't seem to like the current syntax very much...

    Read the article

  • Wordpress Query Compare operator not working?

    - by Liam
    I have the following wordpress query... $args = array('orderby' => 'meta_value_num', 'meta_key' => 'order', 'order' => 'ASC', 'meta_query' => array( array( 'key' => $customkey, 'value' => $customvalue, 'compare' => '=' ), array( 'key' => $customkey1, 'value' => $customvalue1, 'compare' => '=' ), array( 'key' => 'coverageRegion', 'value' => 'national', 'compare' => '=' ), array( 'key' => 'vehicleType', 'value' => 'psv', 'compare' => '!=' ) ) ); I want to return posts where there custom field 'Vechicle Type' is not PSV, The above however returns posts with exactly that, has anybody come across this before? Seems im not the only one neither... http://wordpress.org/support/topic/meta_query-without-key-results-in-compare-of-not-like-not-working

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226  | Next Page >