Search Results

Search found 28685 results on 1148 pages for 'query performance'.

Page 333/1148 | < Previous Page | 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340  | Next Page >

  • cakephp: how to make NOW() work in search condition ?

    - by kaklon
    I'm trying to get all records with date greater then now. I tried this but it doeasnt work: $all_dates = $this->TourDate->find('all', array('conditions' => array('TourDate.date >=' => 'NOW()'), 'order' => array('TourDate.date ASC'))); If I replace NOW() with the current date it works. Why's that?

    Read the article

  • Using NHibernate's HQL to make a query with multiple inner joins

    - by Abu Dhabi
    The problem here consists of translating a statement written in LINQ to SQL syntax into the equivalent for NHibernate. The LINQ to SQL code looks like so: var whatevervar = from threads in context.THREADs join threadposts in context.THREADPOSTs on threads.thread_id equals threadposts.thread_id join posts1 in context.POSTs on threadposts.post_id equals posts1.post_id join users in context.USERs on posts1.user_id equals users.user_id orderby posts1.post_time where threads.thread_id == int.Parse(id) select new { threads.thread_topic, posts1.post_time, users.user_display_name, users.user_signature, users.user_avatar, posts1.post_body, posts1.post_topic }; It's essentially trying to grab a list of posts within a given forum thread. The best I've been able to come up with (with the help of the helpful users of this site) for NHibernate is: var whatevervar = session.CreateQuery("select t.Thread_topic, p.Post_time, " + "u.User_display_name, u.User_signature, " + "u.User_avatar, p.Post_body, p.Post_topic " + "from THREADPOST tp " + "inner join tp.Thread_ as t " + "inner join tp.Post_ as p " + "inner join p.User_ as u " + "where tp.Thread_ = :what") .SetParameter<THREAD>("what", threadid) .SetResultTransformer(Transformers.AliasToBean(typeof(MyDTO))) .List<MyDTO>(); But that doesn't parse well, complaining that the aliases for the joined tables are null references. MyDTO is a custom type for the output: public class MyDTO { public string thread_topic { get; set; } public DateTime post_time { get; set; } public string user_display_name { get; set; } public string user_signature { get; set; } public string user_avatar { get; set; } public string post_topic { get; set; } public string post_body { get; set; } } I'm out of ideas, and while doing this by direct SQL query is possible, I'd like to do it properly, without defeating the purpose of using an ORM. Thanks in advance! EDIT: The database looks like this: http://i41.tinypic.com/5agciu.jpg (Can't post images yet.)

    Read the article

  • Intersection() and Except() is too slow with large collections of custom objects

    - by Theo
    I am importing data from another database. My process is importing data from a remote DB into a List<DataModel> named remoteData and also importing data from the local DB into a List<DataModel> named localData. I am then using LINQ to create a list of records that are different so that I can update the local DB to match the data pulled from remote DB. Like this: var outdatedData = this.localData.Intersect(this.remoteData, new OutdatedDataComparer()).ToList(); I am then using LINQ to create a list of records that no longer exist in remoteData, but do exist in localData, so that I delete them from local database. Like this: var oldData = this.localData.Except(this.remoteData, new MatchingDataComparer()).ToList(); I am then using LINQ to do the opposite of the above to add the new data to the local database. Like this: var newData = this.remoteData.Except(this.localData, new MatchingDataComparer()).ToList(); Each collection imports about 70k records, and each of the 3 LINQ operation take between 5 - 10 minutes to complete. How can I make this faster? Here is the object the collections are using: internal class DataModel { public string Key1{ get; set; } public string Key2{ get; set; } public string Value1{ get; set; } public string Value2{ get; set; } public byte? Value3{ get; set; } } The comparer used to check for outdated records: class OutdatedDataComparer : IEqualityComparer<DataModel> { public bool Equals(DataModel x, DataModel y) { var e = string.Equals(x.Key1, y.Key1) && string.Equals(x.Key2, y.Key2) && ( !string.Equals(x.Value1, y.Value1) || !string.Equals(x.Value2, y.Value2) || x.Value3 != y.Value3 ); return e; } public int GetHashCode(DataModel obj) { return 0; } } The comparer used to find old and new records: internal class MatchingDataComparer : IEqualityComparer<DataModel> { public bool Equals(DataModel x, DataModel y) { return string.Equals(x.Key1, y.Key1) && string.Equals(x.Key2, y.Key2); } public int GetHashCode(DataModel obj) { return 0; } }

    Read the article

  • C++, using one byte to store two variables

    - by 2di
    Hi All I am working on representation of the chess board, and I am planning to store it in 32 bytes array, where each byte will be used to store two pieces. (That way only 4 bits are needed per piece) Doing it in that way, results in a overhead for accessing particular index of the board. Do you think that, this code can be optimised or completely different method of accessing indexes can be used? c++ char getPosition(unsigned char* c, int index){ //moving pointer c+=(index>>1); //odd number if (index & 1){ //taking right part return *c & 0xF; }else { //taking left part return *c>>4; } } void setValue(unsigned char* board, char value, int index){ //moving pointer board+=(index>>1); //odd number if (index & 1){ //replace right part //save left value only 4 bits *board = (*board & 0xF0) + value; }else { //replacing left part *board = (*board & 0xF) + (value<<4); } } int main() { char* c = (char*)malloc(32); for (int i = 0; i < 64 ; i++){ setValue((unsigned char*)c, i % 8,i); } for (int i = 0; i < 64 ; i++){ cout<<(int)getPosition((unsigned char*)c, i)<<" "; if (((i+1) % 8 == 0) && (i > 0)){ cout<<endl; } } return 0; } I am equally interested in your opinions regarding chess representations, and optimisation of the method above, as a stand alone problem. Thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • mysql with 3 group by and sum

    - by cyberfly
    Hi all I have this data in my table (tb_cash_transaction) I want to group the TYPE column, CURRENCY_ID column and AMOUNT column so it will become like below: **Currency** **Cash IN** **Cash OUT** **Balance** 14 40000 30000 10000 15 50000 40000 10000 Rule : 1.Group by currency 2.Then find the sum of cash in for that currency 3.Find the sum of cash out for that currency 4.Get the balance (sum cash in - sum cash out) How to achieve it using mysql? I try using group by but cannot get the desired output. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Database for Large number of 1kB data chunks (MySQL?)

    - by The Unknown
    I have a very large dataset, each item in the dataset being roughly 1kB in size. The data needs to be queried rapidly by many applications distributed over a network. The dataset has more than a million items (so 500 million+ 1kB data chunks). What would be the best method to storing this dataset (need to allow adding more items, and reading them rapidly, but never modifying already added data)? Would using a MySQL DB using the binary blob format be appropriate? Or should each of these be stored as files on a file system? edit: the number is 1 million items now, but needs to be able to scale to well over 500 million items easily.

    Read the article

  • MySQL temp table issue

    - by AmyD
    Hi folks! I'm trying to use temp tables to speed up my MySQL 4.1.22-standard database and what seems like a simple operation is causing me all kinds of issues. My code is below.... CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE nonDerivativeTransaction_temp (accession_number varchar(30), transactionDateValue date)) TYPE=HEAP; INSERT INTO nonDerivativeTransaction_temp VALUES( SELECT accession_number, transactionDateValue FROM nonDerivativeTransaction WHERE transactionDateValue = "2010-06-15"); SELECT * FROM nonDerivativeTransaction_temp; The original table (nonDerivativeTransaction) has two fields, accession_number (varchar(30)) and transactionDateValue (date). Apparently I am getting an issue with the first two statements but I can't seem to nail down what it is. Any help would be appreciated. Amy D.

    Read the article

  • oracle index for string column - does format of data affects quality of index?

    - by Jayan
    We have following type of "Unique ID" column for many tables in the database (Oracle). It is a string with following format <randomnumber>-<ascendingnumber>-<machinename> So we have some thing like this U1234-12345-NBBJD U1234-12346-NBBJD U1234-12347-NBBJD U1234-12348-NBBJD U1234-12349-NBBJD The UID value is unique, we have unique index on them. Does the following format is more efficient than above for index scans? NBBJD-U1234-12345 NBBJD-U1234-12346 NBBJD-U1234-12347 NBBJD-U1234-12348 NBBJD-U1234-12349

    Read the article

  • Help Me With This MS-Access Query

    - by yae
    I have 2 tables: "products" and "pieces" PRODUCTS idProd product price PIECES id idProdMain idProdChild quant idProdMain and idProdChild are related with the table: "products". Other considerations is that 1 product can have some pieces and 1 product can be a piece. Price product equal a sum of quantity * price of all their pieces. "Products" table contains all products (p EXAMPLE: TABLE PRODUCTS (idProd - product - price) 1 - Computer - 300€ 2 - Hard Disk - 100€ 3 - Memory - 50€ 4 - Main Board - 100€ 5 - Software - 50€ 6 - CDroms 100 un. - 30€ TABLE PIECES (id - idProdMain - idProdChild - Quant.) 1 - 1 - 2 - 1 2 - 1 - 3 - 2 3 - 1 - 4 - 1 WHAT I NEED? I need update the price of the main product when the price of the product child (piece) is changed. Following the previous example, if I change the price of this product "memory" (is a piece too) to 60€, then product "Computer" will must change his price to 320€ How I can do it using queries? Already I have tried this to obtain the price of the main product, but not runs. This query not returns any value: SELECT Sum(products.price*pieces.quant) AS Expr1 FROM products LEFT JOIN pieces ON (products.idProd = pieces.idProdChild) AND (products.idProd = pieces.idProdChild) AND (products.idProd = pieces.idProdMain) WHERE (((pieces.idProdMain)=5)); MORE INFO The table "products" contains all the products to sell that it is in the shop. The table "pieces" is to take a control of the compound products. To know those who are the products children. For example of compound product: computers. This product is composed by other products (motherboard, hard disk, memory, cpu, etc.)

    Read the article

  • Selecting More Than 1 Table in A Single Query

    - by Kamran
    I have 5 Tables in MS Access as Logs [Title, ID, Date, Author] Tape [Title, ID, Date, Author] Maps [Title, ID, Date, Author] VCDs [Title, ID, Date, Author] Book [Title, ID, Date, Author] I tried my level best through this code SELECT Logs.[Author], Tape.[Author], Maps.[Author], VCDs.[Author], Book.[Author] FROM Logs , Tape , Maps , VCDs, Book WHERE ((([Author] & " " & [Author] & " " & [Author] & " " & [Author]& " " & [Author]) Like "*" & [Type the Title or Any Part of the Title and Press Ok] & "*")); I want to select all of these fields in a single query. Suppose there is Adam as author of works in all tables. So when i put Adam in search box it should result from all tables. I know this can be done by having single table or renaming fields names but that's not required. Please help.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET problem - Firebug shows odd behaviour

    - by Brandi
    I have an ASP.NET application that does a large database read. It loads up a gridview inside an update panel. In VS2008, just running on my local machine, it runs fantastically. In production (identical code, just published and put on one of our network servers), it runs slow as dirt. Debug is set to false, so this is not the cause of the slow down. I'm not an experienced web developer, so besides that, feel free to suggest the obvious. I have been using Firebug to determine what's going on, and here is what that has turned up: On production, there are around 500 requests. The timeline bar is very short. The size column varies from run to run, but is always the same for the duration of the run. Locally, there are about 30 requests. The timeline bar takes up the entire space. Can anyone shed some light on why this is happening and what I can do to fix it? Also, I can't find much of anything on the web about this, so any references are helpful too.

    Read the article

  • SQL Profiles showing high activity

    - by Wong Chi
    I am running my application locally -- ie. No external traffic and very low number of queries, fully under my control. I see tons of 'Audit Login' and 'Audit Logout' events. What are these and where are they actually stored (ie. Where is this audit log)? Are these a hint of a problem with connections, because I have only a simple connection string within my app and thought that connections would remain active throughout the operation of my app (ie. a single login at launch, and then a single logout when terminating).

    Read the article

  • Slow first page load on asp.net site

    - by Tabloo Quijico
    Hi, Every now and then (always after a long period of idle-time, e.g. overnight) when I access a site built using asp.net - it takes around 15 seconds to load the page (15 seconds before I see any progress whatsoever, then the page comes up fast). Further pages on that site, or refreshes, are quick as usual - they are also fast on other machines, only the first one seems to take the 'hit'. Page tracing never through anything up (whole cycle was a fraction of a second) So my question is where else should I be looking? Perhaps IIS? Or could it still be my asp.net app and I'm just looking in the wrong place (the trace) for clues? As I don't have much control over the IIS server, anything I can check through asp.net would be more helpful, before I go ask that particular admin. cheers :D

    Read the article

  • A SELECT statement for Mysql

    - by Hossein
    I have this table: id,bookmarkID,tagID I want to fetch the top N bookmarkIDs for a given list of tags. Does anyone know a very fast solution for this? the table is quite large(12 million records) I am using MySql

    Read the article

  • Are conditional subqueries optimized out, if the condition is false?

    - by Tobias Schulte
    I have a table foo and a table bar, where each foo might have a bar (and a bar might belong to multiple foos). Now I need to select all foos with a bar. My sql looks like this SELECT * FROM foo f WHERE [...] AND ($param IS NULL OR (SELECT ((COUNT(*))>0) FROM bar b WHERE f.bar = b.id)) with $param being replaced at runtime. The question is: Will the subquery be executed even if param is null, or will the dbms optimize the subquery out? We are using mysql, mssql and oracle. Is there a difference between these regarding the above?

    Read the article

  • Counting context switches per thread

    - by Sarmun
    Is there a way to see how many context switches each thread generates? (both in and out if possible) Either in X/s, or to let it run and give aggregated data after some time. (either on linux or on windows) I have found only tools that give aggregated context-switching number for whole os or per process. My program makes many context switches (50k/s), probably a lot not necessary, but I am not sure where to start optimizing, where do most of those happen.

    Read the article

  • How to output multiple rows from an SQL query using the mysqli object

    - by Jonathan
    Assuming that the mysqli object is already instantiatied (and connected) with the global variable $mysql, here is the code I am trying to work with. class Listing { private $mysql; function getListingInfo($l_id = "", $category = "", $subcategory = "", $username = "", $status = "active") { $condition = "`status` = '$status'"; if (!empty($l_id)) $condition .= "AND `L_ID` = '$l_id'"; if (!empty($category)) $condition .= "AND `category` = '$category'"; if (!empty($subcategory)) $condition .= "AND `subcategory` = '$subcategory'"; if (!empty($username)) $condition .= "AND `username` = '$username'"; $result = $this->mysql->query("SELECT * FROM listing WHERE $condition") or die('Error fetching values'); $this->listing = $result->fetch_array() or die('could not create object'); foreach ($this->listing as $key => $value) : $info[$key] = stripslashes(html_entity_decode($value)); endforeach; return $info; } } there are several hundred listings in the db and when I call $result-fetch_array() it places in an array the first row in the db. however when I try to call the object, I can't seem to access more than the first row. for instance: $listing_row = new Listing; while ($listing = $listing_row-getListingInfo()) { echo $listing[0]; } this outputs an infinite loop of the same row in the db. Why does it not advance to the next row? if I move the code: $this->listing = $result->fetch_array() or die('could not create object'); foreach ($this->listing as $key => $value) : $info[$key] = stripslashes(html_entity_decode($value)); endforeach; if I move this outside the class, it works exactly as expected outputting a row at a time while looping through the while statement. Is there a way to write this so that I can keep the fetch_array() call in the class and still loop through the records?

    Read the article

  • Would you allow this type of query?

    - by user564577
    I'm exploring using an ORM tool in our development shop, and in particular Entity Framework 4.0. Since we work with VERY large databases, I'm a bit concerned about the query's it generates. Doing something simple like getting clients with an address in a state looks like below. As a database developer or admin would you allow this? Is it as bad as it looks? Assume every join is on a clustered index. SELECT [Project2].[ClientKey] AS [ClientKey], [Project2].[FirstName] AS [FirstName], [Project2].[LastName] AS [LastName], [Project2].[IsEnabled] AS [IsEnabled], [Project2].[ChangeUser] AS [ChangeUser], [Project2].[ChangeDate] AS [ChangeDate], [Project2].[C1] AS [C1], [Project2].[AddressKey] AS [AddressKey], [Project2].[ClientKey1] AS [ClientKey1], [Project2].[AddressTypeCode] AS [AddressTypeCode], [Project2].[PrimaryAddress] AS [PrimaryAddress], [Project2].[AddressLine1] AS [AddressLine1], [Project2].[AddressLine2] AS [AddressLine2], [Project2].[City] AS [City], [Project2].[State] AS [State], [Project2].[ZIP] AS [ZIP] FROM ( SELECT [Distinct1].[ClientKey] AS [ClientKey], [Distinct1].[FirstName] AS [FirstName], [Distinct1].[LastName] AS [LastName], [Distinct1].[IsEnabled] AS [IsEnabled], [Distinct1].[ChangeUser] AS [ChangeUser], [Distinct1].[ChangeDate] AS [ChangeDate], [Extent3].[AddressKey] AS [AddressKey], [Extent3].[ClientKey] AS [ClientKey1], [Extent3].[AddressTypeCode] AS [AddressTypeCode], [Extent3].[PrimaryAddress] AS [PrimaryAddress], [Extent3].[AddressLine1] AS [AddressLine1], [Extent3].[AddressLine2] AS [AddressLine2], [Extent3].[City] AS [City], [Extent3].[State] AS [State], [Extent3].[ZIP] AS [ZIP], CASE WHEN ([Extent3].[AddressKey] IS NULL) THEN CAST(NULL AS int) ELSE 1 END AS [C1] FROM (SELECT DISTINCT [Extent1].[ClientKey] AS [ClientKey], [Extent1].[FirstName] AS [FirstName], [Extent1].[LastName] AS [LastName], [Extent1].[IsEnabled] AS [IsEnabled], [Extent1].[ChangeUser] AS [ChangeUser], [Extent1].[ChangeDate] AS [ChangeDate] FROM [Common].[Clients] AS [Extent1] INNER JOIN [Common].[ClientAddresses] AS [Extent2] ON [Extent1].[ClientKey] = [Extent2].[ClientKey] WHERE (( CAST(CHARINDEX(UPPER('D'), UPPER([Extent1].[LastName])) AS int)) > 0) AND ([Extent1].[IsEnabled] = 1) AND ([Extent2].[City] IS NOT NULL) AND ((UPPER([Extent2].[City])) = (UPPER('Colorado Springs'))) ) AS [Distinct1] LEFT OUTER JOIN [Common].[ClientAddresses] AS [Extent3] ON [Distinct1].[ClientKey] = [Extent3].[ClientKey] ) AS [Project2] ORDER BY [Project2].[ClientKey] ASC, [Project2].[FirstName] ASC, [Project2].[LastName] ASC, [Project2].[IsEnabled] ASC, [Project2].[ChangeUser] ASC, [Project2].[ChangeDate] ASC, [Project2].[C1] ASC

    Read the article

  • Beginner having difficulty with SQL query

    - by Vulcanizer
    Hi, I've been studying SQL for 2 weeks now and I'm preparing for an SQL test. Anyway I'm trying to do this question: For the table: 1 create table data { 2 id int, 3 n1 int not null, 4 n2 int not null, 5 n3 int not null, 6 n4 int not null, 7 primary key (id) 8 } I need to return the relation with tuples (n1, n2, n3) where all the corresponding values for n4 are 0. The problem asks me to solve it WITHOUT using subqueries(nested selects/views) It also gives me an example table and the expected output from my query: 01 insert into data (id, n1, n2, n3, n4) 02 values (1, 2,4,7,0), 03 (2, 2,4,7,0), 04 (3, 3,6,9,8), 05 (4, 1,1,2,1), 06 (5, 1,1,2,0), 07 (6, 1,1,2,0), 08 (7, 5,3,8,0), 09 (8, 5,3,8,0), 10 (9, 5,3,8,0); expects (2,4,7) (5,3,8) and not (1,1,2) since that has a 1 in n4 in one of the cases. The best I could come up with was: 1 SELECT DISTINCT n1, n2, n3 2 FROM data a, data b 3 WHERE a.ID <> b.ID 4 AND a.n1 = b.n1 5 AND a.n2 = b.n2 6 AND a.n3 = b.n3 7 AND a.n4 = b.n4 8 AND a.n4 = 0 but I found out that also prints (1,1,2) since in the example (1,1,2,0) happens twice from IDs 5 and 6. Any suggestions would be really appreciated.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340  | Next Page >