Search Results

Search found 33021 results on 1321 pages for 'database sessions'.

Page 322/1321 | < Previous Page | 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329  | Next Page >

  • using dummy row with NOT NULL to solve DEFAULT NULL

    - by Tony38
    I know having DEFAULT NULLS is not a good practice but I have many optional lookup values which are FK in the system so to solve this issue here is what i am doing: I use NOT NULL for every FK / lookup colunms. I have the first row in every lookup table which is PK id = 1 as a dummy row with just "none" in all the columns. This way I can use NOT NULL in my schema and if needed reference to the none row values PK =1 for FKs which do not have any lookup value. Is this a good design or any other work arounds? EDIT: I have: Neighborhood table Postal table. Every neighborhood has a city, so the FK can be NOT NULL. But not every postal code belongs to a neighborhood. Some do, some don't depending on the country. So if i use NOT NULL for the FK between postal and neighborhood then I will be screwed as there has to be some value entered. So what i am doing in essence is: have a row in every table to be a dummy row just to link the FKs. This way row one in neighborhood table will be: n_id = 1 name =none etc... In postal table I can have: postal_code = 3456A3 FK (city) = Moscow FK (neighborhood_id)=1 as a NOT NULL. If I don't have a dummy row in the neighborhood lookup table then I have to declare FK (neighborhood_id) as a Default null column and store blanks in the table. This is an example but there is a huge number of values which will have blanks then in many tables.

    Read the article

  • mysql subquery strangely slow

    - by aviv
    I have a query to select from another sub-query select. While the two queries look almost the same the second query (in this sample) runs much slower: SELECT user.id ,user.first_name -- user.* FROM user WHERE user.id IN (SELECT ref_id FROM education WHERE ref_type='user' AND education.institute_id='58' AND education.institute_type='1' ); This query takes 1.2s Explain on this query results: id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 PRIMARY user index first_name 152 141192 Using where; Using index 2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY education index_subquery ref_type,ref_id,institute_id,institute_type,ref_type_2 ref_id 4 func 1 Using where The second query: SELECT -- user.id -- user.first_name user.* FROM user WHERE user.id IN (SELECT ref_id FROM education WHERE ref_type='user' AND education.institute_id='58' AND education.institute_type='1' ); Takes 45sec to run, with explain: id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 PRIMARY user ALL 141192 Using where 2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY education index_subquery ref_type,ref_id,institute_id,institute_type,ref_type_2 ref_id 4 func 1 Using where Why is it slower if i query only by index fields? Why both queries scans the full length of the user table? Any ideas how to improve? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Autmatically create table on MySQL server based on date?

    - by Anthony
    Is there an equivalent to cron for MySQL? I have a PHP script that queries a table based on the month and year, like: SELECT * FROM data_2010_1 What I have been doing until now is, every time the script executes it does a query for the table, and if it exists, does the work, if it doesn't it creates the table. I was wondering if I can just set something up on the MySQL server itself that will create the table (based on a default table) at the stroke of midnight on the first of the month. Update Based on the comments I've gotten, I'm thinking this isn't the best way to achieve my goal. So here's two more questions: If I have a table with thousands of rows added monthly, is this potentially a drag on resources? If so, what is the best way to partition this table, since the above is verboten? What are the potential problems with my home-grown method I originally thought up?

    Read the article

  • Rails - Scalable calculation model

    - by H O
    I currently have a calculation structure in my rails app that has models metric, operand and operation_type. Presently, the metric model has many operands, and can perform calculations based on the operation_type (e.g. sum, multiply, etc.), and each operand is defined as being right or left (i.e. so that if the operation is division, the numerator and denominator can be identified). Presently, an operand is always an attribute of some model, e.g. @customer.sales.selling_price.sum. In order to make this scalable, in need to allow an operand to be either an attribute of some kind, or the results of a previous operation, i.e. an operand can be a metric. I have included a diagram of how my models currently look: Can anyone assist me with the most elegant way of allowing an operand to be an actual operand, or another metric? Thanks! EDIT: It seems based on the only answer so far that perhaps polymorphic associations are the way to go on this, but the answer is so brief I have no idea how they could be used in this way - can anyone elaborate? EDIT 2: OK, I think I'm getting somewhere - essentially i presently have a metric, which has_many operands, and an operand has_many metrics. I need a polymorphic self join, where a metric can also have many metrics - do I need to call this something else, perhaps calculated_metrics, so that the metric model can use itself? That would leave me with a situation where a metric has_many operands, and a metric has many calculated_metrics.

    Read the article

  • How to display SUM fields from a detailed table in a master table

    - by max
    What is the best approach to display the summery of DETAILED.Fields in its master table? E.g. I have a master table called 'BILL' with all the bill related data and a detailed table ('BILL_DETAIL') with the bill detailed related data, like NAME, PRICE, TAX, ... Now I want to list all BILLS, without the details, but with the sum of the PRICE and TAX stored in the detail table. Here is a simplified schema of that tables: TABLE BILL ---------- - ID - NAME - ADDRESS - ... TABLE BILL_DETAIL ----------------- - ID - BILLID - PORDUCT_NAME - PRICE - TAX - ... The retrieved table row should look like this: BILL.CUSTOMER_NAME, BILL.CUSTOMER_ADDRESS, sum(BILL_DETAIL.PRICE), sum(BILL.DETAIL.TAX), ... Any sugguestions?

    Read the article

  • Detecting changes between rows with same ID

    - by Noah
    I have a table containing some names and their associated ID, along with a snapshot: snapshot, id, name I need to identify when a name has changed for an id between snapshots. For example, in the following data: 1, 0, 'MOUSE_SPEED' 1, 1, 'MOUSE_POS' 1, 2, 'KEYBOARD_STATE' 2, 0, 'MOUSE_BUTTONS' 2, 1, 'MOUSE_POS' 2, 2, 'KEYBOARD_STATE' ...the meaning of id 0 changed with snapshot 2, but the others remained the same. I'd like to construct a query that (ideally) returns: 1, 0, 'MOUSE_SPEED' 2, 0, 'MOUSE_BUTTONS' I am using PostgreSQL v8.4.2.

    Read the article

  • More efficient method for grabbing all child units

    - by Hazior
    I have a table in SQL that links to itself through parentID. I want to find the children and their children and so forth until I find all the child objects. I have a recursive function that does this but it seems very ineffective. Is there a way to get sql to find all child objects? If so how?

    Read the article

  • Static DB Provider in ASP.NET MVC Causing Memory Leak

    - by user364685
    Hi, I have got an app I'm going to write in ASP.NET MVC and I want to create a DatabaseFactory object something like this:- public class DatabaseFactory { private string dbConn get { return <gets from config file>; } public IDatabaseTableObject GetDatabaseTable() { IDatabaseTableObject databaseTableObject = new SQLDatabaseObject(dbConn); return databaseTableObject; } } and this works fine, but I obviously have to instantiate the DatabaseFactory in every controller that needs it. If I made this static, so I could, in theory just call DatabaseFactory.GetDatabaseTable() it would cause a memory leak, wouldn't it?

    Read the article

  • Migrating from hand-written persistence layer to ORM

    - by Sergey Mikhanov
    Hi community, We are currently evaluating options for migrating from hand-written persistence layer to ORM. We have a bunch of legacy persistent objects (~200), that implement simple interface like this: interface JDBC { public long getId(); public void setId(long id); public void retrieve(); public void setDataSource(DataSource ds); } When retrieve() is called, object populates itself by issuing handwritten SQL queries to the connection provided using the ID it received in the setter (this usually is the only parameter to the query). It manages its statements, result sets, etc itself. Some of the objects have special flavors of retrive() method, like retrieveByName(), in this case a different SQL is issued. Queries could be quite complex, we often join several tables to populate the sets representing relations to other objects, sometimes join queries are issued on-demand in the specific getter (lazy loading). So basically, we have implemented most of the ORM's functionality manually. The reason for that was performance. We have very strong requirements for speed, and back in 2005 (when this code was written) performance tests has shown that none of mainstream ORMs were that fast as hand-written SQL. The problems we are facing now that make us think of ORM are: Most of the paths in this code are well-tested and are stable. However, some rarely-used code is prone to result set and connection leaks that are very hard to detect We are currently squeezing some additional performance by adding caching to our persistence layer and it's a huge pain to maintain the cached objects manually in this setup Support of this code when DB schema changes is a big problem. I am looking for an advice on what could be the best alternative for us. As far as I know, ORMs has advanced in last 5 years, so it might be that now there's one that offers an acceptable performance. As I see this issue, we need to address those points: Find some way to reuse at least some of the written SQL to express mappings Have the possibility to issue native SQL queries without the necessity to manually decompose their results (i.e. avoid manual rs.getInt(42) as they are very sensitive to schema changes) Add a non-intrusive caching layer Keep the performance figures. Is there any ORM framework you could recommend with regards to that?

    Read the article

  • PHP mySQL - replace some string inside string

    - by apis17
    i want to replace ALL comma , into ,<space> in all address table in my mysql table. For example, +----------------+----------------+ | Name | Address | +----------------+----------------+ | Someone name | A1,Street Name | +----------------+----------------+ Into +----------------+----------------+ | Name | Address | +----------------+----------------+ | Someone name | A1, Street Name| +----------------+----------------+ Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Fact table with multiple facts

    - by Jeff Meatball Yang
    I have a dimension (SiteItem) has two important facts: perUserClicks perBrowserClicks however, within this dimension, I have groups of dimensions based on an attribute column (let's call the groups AboveFoldItems, LeftNavItems, OnTheFlyItems, etc.) each have more facts that are specific to that group: AboveFoldItems: eyeTime, loadTime LeftNavItems: mouseOverTime OnTheFlyItems: doesn't have any extra, but may in the future Is the following fact table schema ok? DateKey SessionKey SiteItemKey perUserClicks perBrowserClicks eyeTime loadTime mouseOverTime It seems a little wasteful since only some columns pertain to some dimension keys (the irrelevant facts are left NULL). But... this seems like it would be a common problem, so there should be a common solution for this, right?

    Read the article

  • Maximum Row in DBMS

    - by Am1rr3zA
    Is there any limit to maximum row of table in DBMS (specially MySQL)? I want create table for saving logfile and it's row increase so fast I want know what shoud I do to prevent any problem.

    Read the article

  • Using NULLs in matchup table

    - by TomWilsonFL
    I am working on the accounting portion of a reservation system (think limo company). In the system there are multiple objects that can either be paid or submit a payment. I am tracking all of these "transactions" in three tables called: tx, tx_cc, and tx_ch. tx generates a new tx_id (for transaction ID) and keeps the information about amount, validity, etc. Tx_cc and tx_ch keep the information about the credit card or check used, respectively, which link to other tables (credit_card and bank_account among others). This seems fairly normalized to me, no? Now here is my problem: The payment transaction can take place for a myriad of reasons. Either a reservation is being paid for, a travel agent that booked a reservation is being paid, a driver is being paid, etc. This results in multiple tables, one for each of the entities: agent_tx, driver_tx, reservation_tx, etc. They look like this: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `driver_tx` ( `tx_id` int(10) unsigned zerofill NOT NULL, `driver_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `reservation_id` int(11) default NULL, `reservation_item_id` int(11) default NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`tx_id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8; Now this transaction is for a driver, but could be applied to an individual item on the reservation or the entire reservation overall. Therefore I demand either reservation_id OR reservation_item_id to be null. In the future there may be other things which a driver is paid for, which I would also add to this table, defaulting to null. What is the rule on this? Opinion? Obviously I could break this out into MANY three column tables, but the amount of OUTER JOINing needed seems outrageous. Your input is appreciated. Peace, Tom

    Read the article

  • WPF: How to bind and update display with DataContext

    - by Am
    I'm trying to do the following thing: I have a TabControl with several tabs. Each TabControlItem.Content points to PersonDetails which is a UserControl Each BookDetails has a dependency property called IsEditMode I want a control outside of the TabControl , named ToggleEditButton, to be updated whenever the selected tab changes. I thought I could do this by changing the ToggleEditButton data context, by it doesn't seem to work (but I'm new to WPF so I might way off) The code changing the data context: private void tabControl1_SelectionChanged(object sender, SelectionChangedEventArgs e) { if (e.Source is TabControl) { if (e.Source.Equals(tabControl1)) { if (tabControl1.SelectedItem is CloseableTabItem) { var tabItem = tabControl1.SelectedItem as CloseableTabItem; RibbonBook.DataContext = tabItem.Content as BookDetails; ribbonBar.SelectedTabItem = RibbonBook; } } } } The DependencyProperty under BookDetails: public static readonly DependencyProperty IsEditModeProperty = DependencyProperty.Register("IsEditMode", typeof (bool), typeof (BookDetails), new PropertyMetadata(true)); public bool IsEditMode { get { return (bool)GetValue(IsEditModeProperty); } set { SetValue(IsEditModeProperty, value); SetValue(IsViewModeProperty, !value); } } And the relevant XAML: <odc:RibbonTabItem Title="Book" Name="RibbonBook"> <odc:RibbonGroup Title="Details" Image="img/books2.png" IsDialogLauncherVisible="False"> <odc:RibbonToggleButton Content="Edit" Name="ToggleEditButton" odc:RibbonBar.MinSize="Medium" SmallImage="img/edit_16x16.png" LargeImage="img/edit_32x32.png" Click="Book_EditDetails" IsChecked="{Binding Path=IsEditMode, Mode=TwoWay}"/> ... There are two things I want to accomplish, Having the button reflect the IsEditMode for the visible tab, and have the button change the property value with no code behind (if posible) Any help would be greatly appriciated.

    Read the article

  • Getting wierd issue with TO_NUMBER function in Oracle

    - by Fazal
    I have been getting an intermittent issue when executing to_number function in the where clause on a varchar2 column if number of records exceed a certain number n. I used n as there is no exact number of records on which it happens. On one DB it happens after n was 1 million on another when it was 0.1. million. E.g. I have a table with 10 million records say Table Country which has field1 varchar2 containing numberic data and Id If I do a query as an example select * from country where to_number(field1) = 23 and id 1 and id < 100000 This works But if i do the query select * from country where to_number(field1) = 23 and id 1 and id < 100001 It fails saying invalid number Next I try the query select * from country where to_number(field1) = 23 and id 2 and id < 100001 It works again As I only got invalid number it was confusing, but in the log file it said Memory Notification: Library Cache Object loaded into SGA Heap size 3823K exceeds notification threshold (2048K) KGL object name :with sqlplan as ( select c006 object_owner, c007 object_type,c008 object_name from htmldb_collections where COLLECTION_NAME='HTMLDB_QUERY_PLAN' and c007 in ('TABLE','INDEX','MATERIALIZED VIEW','INDEX (UNIQUE)')), ws_schemas as( select schema from wwv_flow_company_schemas where security_group_id = :flow_security_group_id), t as( select s.object_owner table_owner,s.object_name table_name, d.OBJECT_ID from sqlplan s,sys.dba_objects d It seems its related to SGA size, but google did not give me much help on this. Does anyone have any idea about this issue with TO_NUMBER or oracle functions for large data?

    Read the article

  • Performance of VIEW vs. SQL statement

    - by Matt W.
    I have a query that goes something like the following: select <field list> from <table list> where <join conditions> and <condition list> and PrimaryKey in (select PrimaryKey from <table list> where <join list> and <condition list>) and PrimaryKey not in (select PrimaryKey from <table list> where <join list> and <condition list>) The sub-select queries both have multiple sub-select queries of their own that I'm not showing so as not to clutter the statement. One of the developers on my team thinks a view would be better. I disagree in that the SQL statement uses variables passed in by the program (based on the user's login Id). Are there any hard and fast rules on when a view should be used vs. using a SQL statement? What kind of performance gain issues are there in running SQL statements on their own against regular tables vs. against views. (Note that all the joins / where conditions are against indexed columns, so that shouldn't be an issue.) EDIT for clarification... Here's the query I'm working with: select obj_id from object where obj_id in( (select distinct(sec_id) from security where sec_type_id = 494 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) and sec_obj_id in ( select obj_id from object where obj_ot_id in (select of_ot_id from obj_form left outer join obj_type on ot_id = of_ot_id where ot_app_id = 87 and of_id in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 493 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) ) and of_usage_type_id = 131 ) ) ) ) or (obj_ot_id in (select of_ot_id from obj_form left outer join obj_type on ot_id = of_ot_id where ot_app_id = 87 and of_id in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 493 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) ) and of_usage_type_id = 131 ) and obj_id not in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 494) )

    Read the article

  • Creating an appropriate index for a frequently used query in SQL Server

    - by Slauma
    In my application I have two queries which will be quite frequently used. The Where clauses of these queries are the following: WHERE FieldA = @P1 AND (FieldB = @P2 OR FieldC = @P2) and WHERE FieldA = @P1 AND FieldB = @P2 P1 and P2 are parameters entered in the UI or coming from external datasources. FieldA is an int and highly on-unique, means: only two, three, four different values in a table with say 20000 rows FieldB is a varchar(20) and is "almost" unique, there will be only very few rows where FieldB might have the same value FieldC is a varchar(15) and also highly distinct, but not as much as FieldB FieldA and FieldB together are unique (but do not form my primary key, which is a simple auto-incrementing identity column with a clustered index) I'm wondering now what's the best way to define an index to speed up specifically these two queries. Shall I define one index with... FieldB (or better FieldC here?) FieldC (or better FieldB here?) FieldA ... or better two indices: FieldB FieldA and FieldC FieldA Or are there even other and better options? What's the best way and why? Thank you for suggestions in advance!

    Read the article

  • MSSQL 2005: Rename DB Server Instance Name?

    - by Code Sherpa
    Hi, Can somebody tell me how to rename the DB server instance name and a DB name in MSSQL 2005? Right Now I Have SERVER/OLDNAME -- oldnameDB I want to change the server instance and also change the db name. I have tried: EXEC sp_renamedb 'oldName', 'newName' and that has changed the dbname as it appers in the tree directory. But, when I do "select @@servername" it is the old name. Also, the MDF and LDF files are still the old name. How do change instance and db names as a clean sweep across the server? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Creating Two Cascading Foreign Keys Against Same Target Table/Col

    - by alram
    I have the following tables: user (userid int [pk], name varchar(50)) action (actionid int [pk], description nvarchar(50)) being referenced by another table that captures the relationship: <user1> <action>'s <user2>. I did this with the following table: userAction (userActionId int [pk], actionid int [fk: action.actionid], **userId1 int [fk ref's user.userid; on del/update cascade], userId2 int [fk ref's user.userid; on del/update cascade]**). However, when I try to save the userAction table i get an error because I have two cascading fk's against user.userid. Is there any way to remedy this or must I use a trigger?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329  | Next Page >