Search Results

Search found 34274 results on 1371 pages for 'mysql table'.

Page 268/1371 | < Previous Page | 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275  | Next Page >

  • Creating a mySQL query using PHP form dropdowns - If user ignores dropdown, do not filter by that pa

    - by user303043
    Hello, I am creating a simple MySQL query that will be built from the user selecting options from 2 dropdowns. The issue I am having is that I would like each drop down to default that if they do not actually choose an option, do not filter by that dropdown parameter. So, if they come in, and simply hit submit without choosing from a dropdown they should see everything. If they come in and pick from only one of the dropdowns, the query will basically ignore filtering by the other dropdown. I tried making <OPTION VALUE='any'>Choose but my query didn't know what to do with the 'any' and just shows no results. Here is my code. Thank you very much for whatever help you can provide. FORM <form method="POST" action="<?php echo $_SERVER['REQUEST_URI']; ?>"> <select name="GameType"> <OPTION VALUE='any'>Choose Game Type <option value="Game1">Option 1</option> <option value="Game2">Option 2</option> <option value="Game3">Option 3</option> </select> <select name="Instructor"> <OPTION VALUE='any'>Choose Instructor <option VALUE="InstructorA">Instructor A</option> <option value="InstructorB">Instructor B</option> <option value="InstructorC">Instructor C</option> </select> <input type='submit' value='Search Videos'> </form> MYSQL <?PHP connection stuff $db_handle = mysql_connect($server, $user_name, $password); $db_found = mysql_select_db($database, $db_handle); if ($db_found) { $SQL = "SELECT * FROM Videos WHERE GameType=\"{$_POST['GameType']}\" AND Instructor=\"{$_POST['Instructor']}\""; $result = mysql_query($SQL); while ($db_field = mysql_fetch_assoc($result)) { echo $db_field['ShortDescription'] . ", "; echo $db_field['LongDescription'] . ", "; echo $db_field['GameType'] . ", "; echo $db_field['NumberOfPlayers'] . ", "; echo $db_field['Instructor'] . ", "; echo $db_field['Stakes'] . ", "; echo $db_field['UserPermissionLevel'] . ", "; echo $db_field['DateCreated'] . "<BR>"; } mysql_close($db_handle); } else { print "Database NOT Found "; mysql_close($db_handle); } ?>

    Read the article

  • Clustered index on frequently changing reference table of one or more foreign keys

    - by Ian
    My specific concern is related to the performance of a clustered index on a reference table that has many rapid inserts and deletes. Table 1 "Collection" collection_pk int (among other fields) Table 2 "Item" item_pk int (among other fields) Reference Table "Collection_Items" collection_pk int, item_pk int (combined primary key) Because the primary key is composed of both pks, a clustered index is created and the data physically ordered in the table according to the combined keys. I have many users creating and deleting collections and adding and removing items to those collections very frequently affecting the "Collection_Items" table, and its clustered index. QUESTION PART: Since the "Collection_Items" table is so dynamic, wouldn't there be a big performance hit on constantly resorting the table rows because of the clustered index ? If yes, what should I do to minimize this ?

    Read the article

  • Table Variables in SSIS

    - by aceinthehole
    In one SQL Task can I create a table variable DELCARE @TableVar TABLE (...) Then in another SQL Task or DataSource destination and select or insert into the table variable? The other option I have considered is using a Temp Table. CREATE TABLE #TempTable (...) I would prefer to use Table Variable so that it remains in memory. But can use temp table if it is not possible to use table variable. Also I cannot use the record set destination as I need to preform straight SQL tasks on it later on.

    Read the article

  • how do I integrate the aspnet_users table (asp.net membership) into my existing database

    - by ooo
    i have a database that already has a users table COLUMNS: userID - int loginName - string First - string Last - string i just installed the asp.net membership table. Right now all of my tables are joined into my users table foreign keyed into the "userId" field How do i integrate asp.net_users table into my schema? here are the ideas i thought of: Add a membership_id field to my users table and on new inserts, include that new field in my users table. This seems like the cleanest way as i dont need to break any existing relationships. break all existing relationship and move all of the fields in my user table into the asp.net_users table. This seems like a pain but ultimately will lead to the most simple, normalized solution any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • MYSQL trigger to select from and update the same table gives error #1241 - Operand should contain 1 column(s)

    - by Bipin
    when i try to select and update the same table mysql gives error error #1241 - Operand should contain 1 column(s) The trigger is DELIMITER $$ CREATE TRIGGER visitor_validation BEFORE INSERT ON ratingsvisitors FOR EACH ROW BEGIN SET @ifexists = (SELECT * FROM ratingcounttracks WHERE userid=New.vistorid AND likedate=New.likevalidation AND countfor=New.likeordislike); IF (@ifexists = NULL) THEN INSERT INTO ratingcounttracks(userid, likedate, clickcount,countfor) values (New.vistorid, New.likevalidation ,'1',New.likeordislike); ELSE UPDATE ratingcounttracks SET clickcount=clickcount+1 WHERE userid=New.vistorid AND likedate=New.likevalidation AND countfor=New.likeordislike; END IF; END$$

    Read the article

  • How do I select a random record efficiently in MySQL?

    - by user198729
    mysql> EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM urls ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1; +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+-------+---------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+-------+---------------------------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | urls | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 62228 | Using temporary; Using filesort | +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+-------+---------------------------------+ The above doesn't qualify as efficient,how should I do it properly?

    Read the article

  • Query performs poorly unless a temp table is used

    - by Paul McLoughlin
    The following query takes about 1 minute to run, and has the following IO statistics: SELECT T.RGN, T.CD, T.FUND_CD, T.TRDT, SUM(T2.UNITS) AS TotalUnits FROM dbo.TRANS AS T JOIN dbo.TRANS AS T2 ON T2.RGN=T.RGN AND T2.CD=T.CD AND T2.FUND_CD=T.FUND_CD AND T2.TRDT<=T.TRDT JOIN TASK_REQUESTS AS T3 ON T3.CD=T.CD AND T3.RGN=T.RGN AND T3.TASK = 'UPDATE_MEM_BAL' GROUP BY T.RGN, T.CD, T.FUND_CD, T.TRDT (4447 row(s) affected) Table 'TRANSACTIONS'. Scan count 5977, logical reads 7527408, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0. Table 'TASK_REQUESTS'. Scan count 1, logical reads 11, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0. SQL Server Execution Times: CPU time = 58157 ms, elapsed time = 61437 ms. If I instead introduce a temporary table then the query returns quickly and performs less logical reads: CREATE TABLE #MyTable(RGN VARCHAR(20) NOT NULL, CD VARCHAR(20) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY([RGN],[CD])); INSERT INTO #MyTable(RGN, CD) SELECT RGN, CD FROM TASK_REQUESTS WHERE TASK='UPDATE_MEM_BAL'; SELECT T.RGN, T.CD, T.FUND_CD, T.TRDT, SUM(T2.UNITS) AS TotalUnits FROM dbo.TRANS AS T JOIN dbo.TRANS AS T2 ON T2.RGN=T.RGN AND T2.CD=T.CD AND T2.FUND_CD=T.FUND_CD AND T2.TRDT<=T.TRDT JOIN #MyTable AS T3 ON T3.CD=T.CD AND T3.RGN=T.RGN GROUP BY T.RGN, T.CD, T.FUND_CD, T.TRDT (4447 row(s) affected) Table 'Worktable'. Scan count 5974, logical reads 382339, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0. Table 'TRANSACTIONS'. Scan count 4, logical reads 4547, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0. Table '#MyTable________________________________________________________________000000000013'. Scan count 1, logical reads 2, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0. SQL Server Execution Times: CPU time = 1420 ms, elapsed time = 1515 ms. The interesting thing for me is that the TASK_REQUEST table is a small table (3 rows at present) and statistics are up to date on the table. Any idea why such different execution plans and execution times would be occuring? And ideally how to change things so that I don't need to use the temp table to get decent performance? The only real difference in the execution plans is that the temp table version introduces an index spool (eager spool) operation.

    Read the article

  • Sum of distinc rows after a 1-many table join

    - by Lock
    I have 2 tables that I am joining. Table 1 has 1-many relationship with table 2. That is, table 2 can return multiple rows for a single row of table 1. Because of this, the records of table 1 is duplicated for as many rows as are on table 2.. which is expected. Now, I have a sum on one of the columns from table 1, but because of the multiple rows that get returned on the join, the sum is obviously multiplying. Is there a way to get this number back to its original number? I tried dividing by the count of rows from table 2 but this didnt quite give me the expected result. Are there any analytical functions that could do this? I almost want something like "if this row has not yet been counted in the sum, add it to the sum"

    Read the article

  • Is there a standard SQL Table design for overriding 'big picture' default values with lower level de

    - by RichardHowells
    Here's an example. Suppose we are trying to calculate a service charge. Say sales in the USA attract a 10 dollar charge, sales in the UK attract a 20 dollar charge So far it's easy - we are starting to imagine a table that lists charges by country. Now lets assume that Alaska and Hawaii are treated as special cases they are both 15 dollars That suggests a table with states, Alaska and Hawaii are charged at 15, but presumably we need 48 (redundant) rows all saying 10. This gives us a maintainance problem, our user only wants to type 10 once NOT 48 times. It does not sit well with the UK either. The UK does not have states. Suppose we throw in another couple of cross cutting rules. If you order by phone there is a 10% supplement on the charge. If you order via the web there is a 10% discount. But for some reason best known to the owners of the business the web/phone supplement/discount are not applied in Hawaii. It seems to me that this is quite a common kind of problem and there is probably a well known arrangement of tables to store the data. Most cases get handled by broad brush answers, but there are some very detailed low level variations that give rise to a huge number of theoretical combinations, most of which are not used.

    Read the article

  • How would i output a message that says "values inserted to table" ?

    - by ranlo
    <?php error_reporting(0); $con=mysql_connect("localhost","root",""); if (!$con) { die('could not connect:'.mysql_error()); } mysql_select_db("final?orgdocs",$con); $org_name = $_POST["org_name"]; $org_type = $_POST["org_type"]; $org_code = $_POST["org_code"]; $description = $_POST["description"]; $stmt = "INSERT INTO organization VALUES('".$org_name."','".$org_type."','".$org_code."','".$description."')"; $result = mysql_query("SELECT * FROM organization WHERE org_name = '$org_name' "); echo '<TABLE BORDER = "1">'; $result1 = $result; while ($row = mysql_fetch_array($result1)){ echo '<TR>'.'<TD>'.'Organization Name'.'</TD>'.'<TD>'.'Organization Type'.'</TD>'.'<TD>'.'Organization Code'.'</TD>'.'<TD>'.'Description'.'</TD>'.'<TD>'.'Constitution'.'</TD>'; echo '</TR>'; echo '<TR>'.'<TD>'.$row['org_name'].'</TD>'.'<TD>'.$row['org_type'].'</TD>'; echo '<TD>'.$row['org_code'].'</TD>'.'<TD>'.$row['description'].'</TD>'.'<TD>'; echo '</TR>'; } echo '</TABLE>'; ?>

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275  | Next Page >