Search Results

Search found 28930 results on 1158 pages for 'sql ce'.

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 330/1158 | < Previous Page | 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337  | Next Page >

  • Backing up an online database

    - by Veejay
    I havea 70MB db of my website which is hosted with a provider. I am able to access my db using SSMS 2008 remotely. On a running website, which is the best way I can back up the db locally on machine Thanks

    Read the article

  • sql: trying to select the second biggest element but selects the biggest

    - by matthy
    we want to have the second biggest element. We first use ANY to exclude the biggest one. Then we use all to select the biggest. However when we run this query, it shows the biggest and not the second one. Why? SELECT * FROM bestelling WHERE totaalprijs > ALL ( SELECT totaalprijs FROM bestelling WHERE totaalprijs < ANY ( SELECT totaalprijs FROM bestelling ) ) elements in the table: 157.00 5.00 82.80 15.00 20.00 20.00

    Read the article

  • Passing filtering functions to Where() in LINQ-to-SQL

    - by Daniel
    I'm trying to write a set of filtering functions that can be chained together to progressively filter a data set. What's tricky about this is that I want to be able to define the filters in a different context from that in which they'll be used. I've gotten as far as being able to pass a very basic function to the Where() clause in a LINQ statement: filters file: Func<item, bool> returnTrue = (i) => true; repository file: public IQueryable<item> getItems() { return DataContext.Items.Where(returnTrue); } This works. However, as soon as I try to use more complicated logic, the trouble begins: filters file: Func<item, bool> isAssignedToUser = (i) => i.assignedUserId == userId; repository file: public IQueryable<item> getItemsAssignedToUser(int userId) { return DataContext.Items.Where(isAssignedToUser); } This won't even build because userId isn't in the same scope as isAssignedToUser(). I've also tried declaring a function that takes the userId as a parameter: Func<item, int, bool> isAssignedToUser = (i, userId) => i.assignedUserId == userId; The problem with this is that it doesn't fit the function signature that Where() is expecting: Func<item, bool> There must be a way to do this, but I'm at a loss for how. I don't feel like I'm explaining this very well, but hopefully you get the gist. Thanks, Daniel

    Read the article

  • SQL UNION ALL with a INNER JOIN

    - by kOhm
    I'm looking for the best way to display all rows from two tables while joining first by one field (dwg) then where applicable a 2nd join on part. Table1 data consists of schematics(dwg) along with a list of parts required to build the item depicted in the drawing. Table2 consists of data about the actual parts ordered to build the schematic. Some parts in table2 are a combination of parts in table1 (ex: foo and bar in table1 were ordered as foobar in table2). I can display all rows in both tables with UNION ALL, but this doesn't join on both the dwg and part fields. I looked at FULL OUTER JOIN also, but I haven't figured out how to join first by dwg, then by part. Here is an example of the data. table1 table2 dwg part qty order dwg part qty ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 123 foo 1 ord1 123 foobar 1 123 bar 1 ord1 123 bracket 2 123 widget 2 ord2 123 screw 4 123 bracket 4 ord2 123 nut 4 456 foo 1 ord2 123 widget 2 ord2 123 bracket 2 ord3 456 foo 1 Desired output: The goal is to create a view that provides visibility to all parts in table1 and the associated orders in table2 (including those parts that appear in one but not the other table) so that I can see all the drawing parts in table1 and the associated records in table2 along with records in table2 where the part wasn't in table1. part_request_order_report dwg part qty order part qty ----- ----- ----- ------ ----- ----- 123 foo 1 123 bar 1 123 widget 2 ord2 widget 2 123 bracket 4 ord1 bracket 2 123 bracket 4 ord2 bracket 2 123 ord1 foobar 1 123 ord1 screw 4 123 ord1 nut 4 456 foo 1 ord3 foo 1 Is this possible? Or am I better off iterating through the data to build the report table? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • When should I open and close a connection to SQL Server

    - by Martin
    I have a simple static class with a few methods in it. Each of those methods open a SqlConnection, query the database and close the connection. This way, I am sure that I always close the connection to the database, but on the other hand, I don't like to always open and close connection. Below is an example of what my methods look like. public static void AddSomething(string something) { using (SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection("...")) { connection.Open(); // ... connection.Close(); } } Considering that the methods are inside a static class, should I have a static member containing a single SqlConnection? How and when should I drop it? What are the best practices?

    Read the article

  • Why hasn't MSSQL made a WHERE clause mandatory by default?

    - by Josh Einstein
    It seems like a no brainer to me. I've heard countless stories about people forgetting the WHERE clause in an UPDATE or DELETE and trashing an entire table. I know that careless people shouldn't be issuing queries directly and all that... and that there are legitimate cases where you want to affect all rows, but wouldn't it make sense to have an option on by default that requires such queries to be written like: UPDATE MyTable SET MyColumn = 0 WHERE * Or without changing the language, UPDATE MyTable SET MyColumn = 0 WHERE 1 = 1 -- tacky, I know

    Read the article

  • Many to many table design question

    - by user169867
    Originally I had 2 tables in my DB, [Property] and [Employee]. Each employee can have 1 "Home Property" so the employee table has a HomePropertyID FK field to Property. Later I needed to model the situation where despite having only 1 "Home Property" the employee did work at or cover for multiple properties. So I created an [Employee2Property] table that has EmployeeID and PropertyID FK fields to model this many 2 many relationship. Now I find that I need to create other many-to-many relationships between employees and properties. For example if there are multiple employees that are managers for a property or multiple employees that perform maintenance work at a property, etc. My questions are: 1) Should I create seperate many-to-many tables for each of these situations or should I just create 1 more table like [PropertyAssociatonType] that lists the types of associations an emploee can have with a property and just add a FK field to [Employee2Property] such a PropertyAssociationTypeID that explains what the association is? I'm curious about the pros/cons or if there's another better way. 2) Am I stupid and going about this all worng? Thanks for any suggestions :)

    Read the article

  • SQL Update to the SUM if it's joined values

    - by CL4NCY
    Hi, I'm trying to update a field in the database to the sum of it's joined values: UPDATE P SET extrasPrice = SUM(E.price) FROM dbo.BookingPitchExtras AS E INNER JOIN dbo.BookingPitches AS P ON E.pitchID = P.ID AND P.bookingID = 1 WHERE E.[required] = 1 When I run this I get the following error: "An aggregate may not appear in the set list of an UPDATE statement." Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Using AVG() in Oracle SQL

    - by Viet Anh
    I have a table named Student as followed: CREATE TABLE "STUDENT" ( "ID" NUMBER(*,0), "NAME" VARCHAR2(20), "AGE" NUMBER(*,0), "CITY" VARCHAR2(20), PRIMARY KEY ("ID") ENABLE ) I am trying to get all the records of the students having a larger age than the average age. This is what I tried: SELECT * FROM student WHERE age > AVG(age) and SELECT * FROM student HAVING age > AVG(age) Both ways did not work!

    Read the article

  • Multilingual best practices on SQL Server, EF and MVC combinations

    - by dengereli
    ASP.NET MVC, resource management is look like enough for application multlingual multiculture support. But I am wondering practices about data. User stories; User set culture as en-US and see all product items in English. User set culture as fr-FR and see all product items in French. User set culture as ru-RU and see all product items in Russian. User doesn't have right change culture settings and application never reach multilingual resources, it will use default language and culture.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server last called stored procedures with parameters

    - by Teoman shipahi
    I am using ASP.NET environment. Is it possible to track last N number of stored procedures called with parameters info? I see in this article "Recently executed stored procedures"; http://sqlfool.com/2009/08/find-recently-executed-stored-procedures/ But I need input parameters also. If not what can be the best way to track it? For example, adding an insert statement to a information table for every single procedure beginning? Or is there any better solution for this?

    Read the article

  • Database schemas WAY out of sync - need to get up to date without losing data

    - by Zind
    The problem: we have one application that has a portion which is used by a very small subset of the total users, and that part of the application is running off of a separate database as well. In a perfect world, the schemas of the two databases would be synced up, but such is not the case. Some migrations have been run on the smaller database, most haven't; and furthermore, there is nothing such as revision number to be able to easily identify which have and which haven't. We would like to solve this quandary for future projects. During a discussion we've come up with the following possible plan of action, and I am wondering if anyone knows of any project which has already solved this problem: What we would like to do is create an empty database from the schema of the large fully-migrated database, and then move all of the data from the smaller non-migrated database into that empty one. If it makes things easier, it can probably be assumed for the sake of this problem specifically that no migrations have ever removed anything, only added. Else, if there are other known solutions, I'd like to hear them as well.

    Read the article

  • Every 3rd Insert Is Slow On Ms Sql 2008

    - by Chris
    I have a function that writes 3 lines into a empty table like so: INSERT [dbo].[yaf_ForumAccess] ([GroupID], [ForumID], [AccessMaskID]) VALUES (1, 8, 1) INSERT [dbo].[yaf_ForumAccess] ([GroupID], [ForumID], [AccessMaskID]) VALUES (2, 8, 4) INSERT [dbo].[yaf_ForumAccess] ([GroupID], [ForumID], [AccessMaskID]) VALUES (3, 8, 3) For some reason only the third query takes a long time to execute - and with each insert it grows longer. Profiler Image I have tried disabling all constraints on the table - same result. I just can't figure out why the first two would run so fast - and the last one would take so long. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Here is the statistics for a query ran MSSMS: Query: ALTER TABLE [dbo].[yaf_ForumAccess] NOCHECK CONSTRAINT ALL INSERT [dbo].[yaf_ForumAccess] ([GroupID], [ForumID], [AccessMaskID]) VALUES (1, 9, 1) INSERT [dbo].[yaf_ForumAccess] ([GroupID], [ForumID], [AccessMaskID]) VALUES (2, 9, 4) INSERT [dbo].[yaf_ForumAccess] ([GroupID], [ForumID], [AccessMaskID]) VALUES (3, 9, 3) ALTER TABLE [dbo].[yaf_ForumAccess] CHECK CONSTRAINT ALL Stats: Stats

    Read the article

  • Problem with update sql with excel

    - by phenevo
    Hi, I have a problem with this query: Update Provinces Set Provinces.DefaultName=T2.Defaultname from Provinces inner join OPENROWSET('Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0', 'Excel 8.0;Database=C:\provinces.xlsx;HDR=YES', 'SELECT Code, Defaultname FROM [Arkusz1$]') T2 On Provinces.Code = t2.Code where Provinces.Code = T2.Code I get error: Msg 7399, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 The OLE DB provider "Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0" for linked server "(null)" reported an error. The provider did not give any information about the error. Msg 7303, Level 16, State 1, Line 1 Cannot initialize the data source object of OLE DB provider "Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0" for linked server "(null)". What is a reason of this unpleasent situation ?

    Read the article

  • LINQ to Sql: Insert instead of Update

    - by Christina Mayers
    I am stuck with this problems for a long time now. Everything I try to do is insert a row in my DB if it's new information - if not update the existing one. I've updated many entities in my life before - but what's wrong with this code is beyond me (probably something pretty basic) I guess I can't see the wood for the trees... private Models.databaseDataContext db = new Models.databaseDataContext(); internal void StoreInformations(IEnumerable<EntityType> iEnumerable) { foreach (EntityType item in iEnumerable) { EntityType type = db.EntityType.Where(t => t.Room == item.Room).FirstOrDefault(); if (type == null) { db.EntityType.InsertOnSubmit(item); } else { type.Date = item.Date; type.LastUpdate = DateTime.Now(); type.End = item.End; } } } internal void Save() { db.SubmitChanges(); } Edit: just checked the ChangeSet, there are no updates only inserts. For now I've settled with foreach (EntityType item in iEnumerable) { EntityType type = db.EntityType.Where(t => t.Room == item.Room).FirstOrDefault(); if (type != null) { db.Exams.DeleteOnSubmit(type); } db.EntityType.InsertOnSubmit(item); } but I'd love to do updates and lose these unnecessary delete statements.

    Read the article

  • SQL - Multiple join conditions using OR?

    - by Brandi
    I have a query that is using multiple joins. The goal is to say "Out of table A, give me all the customer numbers in which you can match table A's EmailAddress with either email_to or email_from of table B. Ignore nulls, internal emails, etc.". It seems like it would be better to use an or condition in the join than multiple joins since it is the same table. When I try to use AND/OR it does not give the behaviour I expect... AND finishes in a reasonable time, but yields no results (I know that there are matches, so it must be some flaw in my logic) and OR never finishes (I have to kill it). Here is example code to illustrate the question: --my original query SELECT DISTINCT a.CustomerNo FROM A a WITH (NOLOCK) LEFT JOIN B e WITH (NOLOCK) ON a.EmailAddress = e.email_from RIGHT JOIN B f WITH (NOLOCK) ON a.EmailAddress = f.email_to WHERE a.EmailAddress NOT LIKE '%@mydomain.___' AND a.EmailAddress IS NOT NULL AND (e.email_from IS NOT NULL OR f.email_to IS NOT NULL) Here is what I tried, (I am attempting logical equivalence): SELECT DISTINCT a.CustomerNo FROM A a WITH (NOLOCK) LEFT JOIN B e WITH (NOLOCK) ON a.EmailAddress = e.email_from OR a.EmailAddress = e.email_to WHERE a.EmailAddress NOT LIKE '%@mydomain.___' AND a.EmailAddress IS NOT NULL AND (e.email_from IS NOT NULL OR e.email_to IS NOT NULL) So my question is two-fold: Why does having AND in the above query work in a few seconds and OR goes for minutes and never completes? What am I missing to make a logically equivalent statement that has only one join?

    Read the article

  • SQL statement to split a table based on a join

    - by williamjones
    I have a primary table for Articles that is linked by a join table Info to a table Tags that has only a small number of entries. I want to split the Articles table, by either deleting rows or creating a new table with only the entries I want, based on the absence of a link to a certain tag. There are a few million articles. How can I do this? Not all of the articles have any tag at all, and some have many tags. Example: table Articles primary_key id table Info foreign_key article_id foreign_key tag_id table Tags primary_key id It was easy for me to segregate the articles that do have the match right off the bat, so I thought maybe I could do that and then use a NOT IN statement but that is so slow running it's unclear if it's ever going to finish. I did that with these commands: INSERT INTO matched_articles SELECT * FROM articles a LEFT JOIN info i ON a.id = i.article_id WHERE i.tag_id = 5; INSERT INTO unmatched_articles SELECT * FROM articles a WHERE a.id NOT IN (SELECT m.id FROM matched_articles m); If it makes a difference, I'm on Postgres.

    Read the article

  • c# - SQL - speed up code to DB

    - by user228058
    I have a page with 26 sections - one for each letter of the alphabet. I'm retrieving a list of manufacturers from the database, and for each one, creating a link - using a different field in the Database. So currently, I leave the connection open, then do a new SELECT by each letter, WHERE the Name LIKE that letter. It's very slow, though. What's a better way to do this? TIA

    Read the article

  • Get records using left outer join

    - by Devendra Gohil
    I have two tables as given below Table A Table B Table C ============= ============== ========= Id Name Id AId CId Id Name 1 A 1 1 1 1 x 2 B 2 1 1 2 y 3 C 3 2 1 3 z 4 D 4 2 3 4 w 5 E 5 3 2 5 v Now I want all the records of Table A with matching Id column CId from Table B where CId = 1. So the output should be like below : Id Name CId 1 A 1 2 B 1 3 C 1 4 D Null 5 E Null Can anyone help me please?

    Read the article

  • MS SQL: Primary file group is full

    - by aximili
    I have a very large table in my database and I am starting to get this error Could not allocate a new page for database 'mydatabase' because of insufficient disk space in filegroup 'PRIMARY'. Create the necessary space by dropping objects in the filegroup, adding additional files to the filegroup, or setting autogrowth on for existing files in the filegroup. How do you fix this error? I don't understand the suggestions there.

    Read the article

  • Guid Primary /Foreign Key dilemma SQL Server

    - by Xience
    Hi guys, I am faced with the dilemma of changing my primary keys from int identities to Guid. I'll put my problem straight up. It's a typical Retail management app, with POS and back office functionality. Has about 100 tables. The database synchronizes with other databases and receives/ sends new data. Most tables don't have frequent inserts, updates or select statements executing on them. However, some do have frequent inserts and selects on them, eg. products and orders tables. Some tables have upto 4 foreign keys in them. If i changed my primary keys from 'int' to 'Guid', would there be a performance issue when inserting or querying data from tables that have many foreign keys. I know people have said that indexes will be fragmented and 16 bytes is an issue. Space wouldn't be an issue in my case and apparently index fragmentation can also be taken care of using 'NEWSEQUENTIALID()' function. Can someone tell me, from there experience, if Guid will be problematic in tables with many foreign keys. I'll be much appreciative of your thoughts on it...

    Read the article

  • Question About DateCreated and DateModified Columns - SQL Server

    - by user311509
    CREATE TABLE Customer ( customerID int identity (500,20) CONSTRAINT . . dateCreated datetime DEFAULT GetDate() NOT NULL, dateModified datetime DEFAULT GetDate() NOT NULL ); When i insert a record, dateCreated and dateModified gets set to default date/time. When i update/modify the record, dateModified and dateCreated remains as is? What should i do? Obviously, i need to dateCreated value to remain as was inserted the first time and dateModified keeps changing when a change/modification occurs in the record fields. In other words, can you please write a sample quick trigger? I don't know much yet...

    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 | 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337  | Next Page >