Search Results

Search found 87305 results on 3493 pages for 'selenium server'.

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 333/3493 | < Previous Page | 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340  | Next Page >

  • Using "CASE" in Where clause to choose various column harm the performance

    - by zivgabo
    I have query which needs to be dynamic on some of the columns, meaning I get a parameter and according its value I decide which column to fetch in my Where clause. I've implemented this request using "CASE" expression: (CASE @isArrivalTime WHEN 1 THEN ArrivalTime ELSE PickedupTime END) >= DATEADD(mi, -@TZOffsetInMins, @sTime) AND (CASE @isArrivalTime WHEN 1 THEN ArrivalTime ELSE PickedupTime END) < DATEADD(mi, -@TZOffsetInMins, @fTime) If @isArrivalTime = 1 then chose ArrivalTime column else chose PickedupTime column. I have a clustered index on ArrivalTime and nonclustered index on PickedupTime. I've noticed that when I'm using this query (with @isArrivalTime = 1), my performance is a lot worse comparing to only using ArrivalTime. Maybe the query optimizer can't use\choose the index properly in this way? I compared the execution plans an noticed that when I'm using the CASE 32% of the time is being wasted on the index scan, but when I didn't use the CASE(just usedArrivalTime`) only 3% were wasted on this index scan. Anyone know the reason for this?

    Read the article

  • Storing DateTime (UTC) vs. storing DateTimeOffset

    - by Frederico
    I usually have an "interceptor" that right before reading/writing from/to the database does datetime conversion (from UTC to localtime, and from localtime to utc), so I can use DateTime.Now (derivations and comparisions) throughout the system without worrying about timezones. Regarding serialization and moving data between computers, there is no need to bother, as the datetime is always UTC. Should I continue storing my dates (SQL 2008 - datetime) in UTC format or should I instead store it using DateTimeOffset (SQL 2008 - datetimeoffset)? UTC Dates in the database (datetime type) have been working and known for so long, why change it? What are the advantages? I have already looked into articles like this one, but I'm not 100% convinced though. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Why do updates inside of a SQL transaction still need disk IO?

    - by usr
    In SQL Profiler you can see that very simple updates to a table by primary key take about 10-30ms each. On about every 10th update the write column shows 1, on all other updates it shows 0. This must mean that about every 10th update statement still requires disk IO. I wonder why that is. Would it not be more efficient queue up all IO until the transaction commits?

    Read the article

  • Can I select a set of rows from a table and directly insert that into a table or the same table in S

    - by VJ
    Hi I guess we cannot do this but was just curious if I could do something like - Select * from Employee where EmployeeId=1 and then use the data in the above statement and directly insert into a table with just changing the employeeid...or just this way- insert into Employee ( Select * from Employee where EmployeeId=1) its probably stupid from my side...but I just felt the need to do this a lot of times...so just was curious if there was any way to achieve it..

    Read the article

  • Trigger an action to increment all rows of an int column which are greater than or equal to the inserted row

    - by Dev
    I am performing some insertion to an SQL table with has three columns and several rows of data The three columns are Id,Product,ProductOrder with the following data Id Product ProductOrder 1 Dell 1 2 HP 3 3 lenovo 2 4 Apple 10 Now, I would like a trigger which fires an action and increments all the ProductOrders by 1which are greater than or equal to the inserted ProductOrder. For example, I am inserting a record with Id=5 Product=Sony, ProductOrder=2 Then it should look for all the products with ProductOrder greater than or equal to 2 and increment them by 1. So, the resultant data in the SQL table should be as follows Id Product ProductOrder 1 Dell 1 2 HP 4 3 lenovo 3 4 Apple 11 5 Sony 2 From above we can see that ProductOrder which are equal or greater than the inserted are incremented by 1 like HP,Lenovo,Apple May I know a way to implement this?

    Read the article

  • Optimizing T-SQL where an array would be nice

    - by Polatrite
    Alright, first you'll need to grab a barf bag. I've been tasked with optimizing several old stored procedures in our database. This SP does the following: 1) cursor loops through a series of "buildings" 2) cursor loops through a week, Sunday-Saturday 3) has a huge set of IF blocks that are responsible for counting how many Objects of what Types are present in a given building Essentially what you'll see in this code block is that, if there are 5 objects of type #2, it will increment @Type_2_Objects_5 by 1. IF @Number_Type_1_Objects = 0 BEGIN SET @Type_1_Objects_0 = @Type_1_Objects_0 + 1 END IF @Number_Type_1_Objects = 1 BEGIN SET @Type_1_Objects_1 = @Type_1_Objects_1 + 1 END IF @Number_Type_1_Objects = 2 BEGIN SET @Type_1_Objects_2 = @Type_1_Objects_2 + 1 END IF @Number_Type_1_Objects = 3 BEGIN SET @Type_1_Objects_3 = @Type_1_Objects_3 + 1 END [... Objects_4 through Objects_20 for Type_1] IF @Number_Type_2_Objects = 0 BEGIN SET @Type_2_Objects_0 = @Type_2_Objects_0 + 1 END IF @Number_Type_2_Objects = 1 BEGIN SET @Type_2_Objects_1 = @Type_2_Objects_1 + 1 END IF @Number_Type_2_Objects = 2 BEGIN SET @Type_2_Objects_2 = @Type_2_Objects_2 + 1 END IF @Number_Type_2_Objects = 3 BEGIN SET @Type_2_Objects_3 = @Type_2_Objects_3 + 1 END [... Objects_4 through Objects_20 for Type_2] In addition to being extremely hacky (and limited to a quantity of 20 objects), it seems like a terrible way of handling this. In a traditional language, this could easily be solved with a 2-dimensional array... objects[type][quantity] += 1; I'm a T-SQL novice, but since writing stored procedures often uses a lot of temporary tables (which could essentially be a 2-dimensional array) I was wondering if someone could illuminate a better way of handling a situation like this with two dynamic pieces of data to store. Requested in comments: The columns are simply Number_Type_1_Objects, Number_Type_2_Objects, Number_Type_3_Objects, Number_Type_4_Objects, Number_Type_5_Objects, and CurrentDateTime. Each row in the table represents 5 minutes. The expected output is to figure out what percentage of time a given quantity of objects is present throughout each day. Sunday - Object Type 1 0 objects - 69 rows, 5:45, 34.85% 1 object - 85 rows, 7:05, 42.93% 2 objects - 44 rows, 3:40, 22.22% On Sunday, there were 0 objects of type 1 for 34.85% of the day. There was 1 object for 42.93% of the day, and 2 objects for 22.22% of the day. Repeat for each object type.

    Read the article

  • Unexpected behaviour of Order by clause

    - by Newbie
    I have a table which looks like Col1 col2 col3 col4 col5 1 5 1 4 6 1 4 0 3 7 0 1 5 6 3 1 8 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 4 The script is declare @t table(col1 int, col2 int, col3 int,col4 int,col5 int) insert into @t select 1,5,1,4,6 union all select 1,4,0,3,7 union all select 0,1,5,6,3 union all select 1,8,2,1,5 union all select 4,3,2,1,4 If I do a sorting (ascending), the output is Col1 col2 col3 col4 col5 0 1 5 6 3 1 4 0 3 7 1 5 1 4 6 1 8 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 4 The query is Select * from @t order by col1,col2,col3,col4,col5 But as can be seen that the sorting output is wrong (col2 to col5). I want the output to be every column being sorted in ascending order i.e. Col1 col2 col3 col4 col5 0 1 0 1 3 1 3 1 1 4 1 4 2 3 5 1 5 2 4 6 4 8 5 6 7 Why so and how to overcome this? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • What are the differences between these?

    - by Amit Ranjan
    What are the differences between the two queries? SELECT CountryMaster.Id FROM Districts INNER JOIN CountryMaster ON Districts.CountryId = CountryMaster.Id SELECT CountryMaster.Id FROM CountryMaster INNER JOIN Districts ON Districts.CountryId = CountryMaster.Id Please mind the i) Table positions and second ii) On Fields As I know, output will be same. But I want to know, is there any drastic effects of the same if I neglect positions of tables and columns in complex queries or tables having tons of data like thousands and lakhs of rows...

    Read the article

  • Help needed in AdventureWorks in a sql query.

    - by vaibhav
    I was just playing with adventureworks database in sqlserver. I got stuck in a query. I wanted to Select all titles from HumanResources.Employee which are either 'Male' or 'Female' but not both. i.e if title Accountant is Male and Female both I want to leave that title. I need only those titles where Gender is either Male or Female. I have done this till yet. select distinct(title) from humanresources.employee where gender='M' select distinct(title) from humanresources.employee where gender='F' Probably a join between these two queries, would work. But If you have any other solution, please let me know. It is not a homework. :) Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • BULK INSERT from one table to another all on the server

    - by steve_d
    I have to copy a bunch of data from one database table into another. I can't use SELECT ... INTO because one of the columns is an identity column. Also, I have some changes to make to the schema. I was able to use the export data wizard to create an SSIS package, which I then edited in Visual Studio 2005 to make the changes desired and whatnot. It's certainly faster than an INSERT INTO, but it seems silly to me to download the data to a different computer just to upload it back again. (Assuming that I am correct that that's what the SSIS package is doing). Is there an equivalent to BULK INSERT that runs directly on the server, allows keeping identity values, and pulls data from a table? (as far as I can tell, BULK INSERT can only pull data from a file) Edit: I do know about IDENTITY_INSERT, but because there is a fair amount of data involved, INSERT INTO ... SELECT is kinda of slow. SSIS/BULK INSERT dumps the data into the table without regards to indexes and logging and whatnot, so it's faster. (Of course creating the clustered index on the table once it's populated is not fast, but it's still faster than the INSERT INTO...SELECT that I tried in my first attempt) Edit 2: The schema changes include (but are not limited to) the following: 1. Splitting one table into two new tables. In the future each will have its own IDENTITY column, but for the migration I think it will be simplest to use the identity from the original table as the identity for the both new tables. Once the migration is over one of the tables will have a one-to-many relationship to the other. 2. Moving columns from one table to another. 3. Deleting some cross reference tables that only cross referenced 1-to-1. Instead the reference will be a foreign key in one of the two tables. 4. Some new columns will be created with default values. 5. Some tables aren’t changing at all, but I have to copy them over due to the "put it all in a new DB" request.

    Read the article

  • All possible combinations for two column data

    - by Alec Dobbie
    I have a two column view Product Id Tag ---------------------- 1 Leather 1 Watch 2 Red 2 Necklace 2 Pearl I'm trying to get all possible combinations of tags for a product as such: 1 Leather 1 Leather,Watch 2 Pearl 2 Pearl,Necklace 2 Pearl Necklace,Red 2 Necklace 2 Necklace, Red 2 Red I've found and stolen some SQL that give me the complete list for all but not the small versions, its below. Any ideas, it's started to make my head hurt. A virtual pint for the best answer. SELECT ProductId, (SELECT CAST(Tag + ', ' AS VARCHAR(MAX)) FROM ProductByTagView WHERE Product.ProductId = ProductByTagView.ProductId order by tag FOR XML PATH ('')) AS Tags FROM Product

    Read the article

  • Committing Transaction

    - by Costa
    Hi http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189797.aspx In this link they are committing a transaction within catch clause IF (XACT_STATE()) = 1, I don't get it, if there is an error why they are committing it? even if the problem in select statement and there is no big deal committing it, why don't just roll it back. Thanks

    Read the article

  • SQL aggregation query, grouping by entries in junction table

    - by cm007
    I have TableA in a many-to-many relationship with TableC via TableB. That is, TableA TableB TableC id | val fkeyA | fkeyC id | data I wish the do select sum(val) on TableA, grouping by the relationship(s) to TableC. Every entry in TableA has at least one relationship with TableC. For example, TableA 1 | 25 2 | 30 3 | 50 TableB 1 | 1 1 | 2 2 | 1 2 | 2 2 | 3 3 | 1 3 | 2 should output 75 30 since rows 1 and 3 in Table have the same relationships to TableC, but row 2 in TableA has a different relationship to TableC. How can I write a SQL query for this?

    Read the article

  • "select * into table" Will it work for inserting data into existing table

    - by Shantanu Gupta
    I am trying to insert data from one of my existing table into another existing table. Is it possible to insert data into any existing table using select * into query. I think it can be done using union but in that case i need to record all data of my existing table into temporary table, then drop that table and finally than apply union to insert all records into same table eg. select * into #tblExisting from tblExisting drop table tblExisting select * into tblExisting from #tblExisting union tblActualData Here tblExisting is the table where I actually want to store all data tblActualData is the table from where data is to be appended to tblExisting. Is it right method. Do we have some other alternative ?

    Read the article

  • Selecting random top 3 listings per shop for a range of active advertising shops

    - by GraGra33
    I’m trying to display a list of shops each with 3 random items from their shop, if they have 3 or more listings, that are actively advertising. I have 3 tables: one for the shops – “Shops”, one for the listings – “Listings” and one that tracks active advertisers – “AdShops”. Using the below statement, the listings returned are random however I’m not getting exactly 3 listings (rows) returned per shop. SELECT AdShops.ID, Shops.url, Shops.image_url, Shops.user_name AS shop_name, Shops.title, L.listing_id AS listing_id, L.title AS listing_title, L.price as price, L.image_url AS listing_image_url, L.url AS listing_url FROM AdShops INNER JOIN Shops ON AdShops.user_id = Shops.user_id INNER JOIN Listings AS L ON Shops.user_id = L.user_id WHERE (Shops.is_vacation = 0 AND Shops.listing_count > 2 AND L.listing_id IN (SELECT TOP 3 L2.listing_id FROM Listings AS L2 WHERE L2.listing_id IN (SELECT TOP 100 PERCENT L3.listing_id FROM Listings AS L3 WHERE (L3.user_id = L.user_id) ) ORDER BY NEWID() ) ) ORDER BY Shops.shop_name I’m stumped. Anyone have any ideas on how to fix it? The ideal solution would be one record per store with the 3 listings (and associated data) were in columns and not rows – is this possible?

    Read the article

  • building list of child objects inside main object

    - by Asdfg
    I have two tables like this: Category: Id Name ------------------ 1 Cat1 2 Cat2 Feature: Id Name CategoryId -------------------------------- 1 F1 1 2 F2 1 3 F3 2 4 F4 2 5 F5 2 In my .Net classes, i have two POCO classes like this: public class Category { public int Id {get;set;} public int Name {get;set;} public IList<Feature> Features {get;set;} } public class Feature { public int Id {get;set;} public int CategoryId {get;set;} public int Name {get;set;} } I am using a stored proc that returns me a result set by joining these 2 tables. This is how my Stored Proc returns the result set. SELECT c.CategoryId, c.Name Category, f.FeatureId, f.Name Feature FROM Category c INNER JOIN Feature f ON c.CategoryId = f.CategoryId ORDER BY c.Name --Resultset produced by the above query CategoryId CategoryName FeatureId FeatureName --------------------------------------------------- 1 Cat1 1 F1 1 Cat1 2 F2 2 Cat2 3 F3 2 Cat2 4 F4 2 Cat2 5 F5 Now if i want to build the list of categories in my .Net code, i have to loop thru the result set and add features unless the category changes. This is how my .Net code looks like that builds Categories and Features. List<Category> categories = new List<Category>(); Int32 lastCategoryId = 0; Category c = new Category(); using (SqlDataReader reader = cmd.ExecuteReader()) { while (reader.Read()) { //Check if the categoryid is same as previous one. //If Not, add new category. //If Yes, dont add the category. if (lastCategoryId != Convert.ToInt32(reader["CategoryId"])) { c = new Category { Id = Convert.ToInt32(reader["CategoryId"]), Name = reader["CategoryName"].ToString() }; c.Features = new List<Feature>(); categories.Add(c); } lastCategoryId = Convert.ToInt32(reader["CategoryId"]); //Add Feature c.Features.Add(new Feature { Name = reader["FeatureName"].ToString(), Id = Convert.ToInt32(reader["FeatureId"]) }); } return categories; } I was wondering if there is a better way to do build the list of Categories?

    Read the article

  • Summing Row in SQL query for time range

    - by user3703334
    I'm trying to group a large amount of data into smaller bundles. Currently the code for my query is as follows SELECT [DateTime] ,[KW] FROM [POWER] WHERE datetime >= '2014-04-14 06:00:00' and datetime < '2014-04-21 06:00:00' ORDER BY datetime which gives me DateTime KW 4/14/2014 6:00:02.0 1947 4/14/2014 6:00:15.0 1946 4/14/2014 6:00:23.0 1947 4/14/2014 6:00:32.0 1011 4/14/2014 6:00:43.0 601 4/14/2014 6:00:52.0 585 4/14/2014 6:01:02.0 582 4/14/2014 6:01:12.0 580 4/14/2014 6:01:21.0 579 4/14/2014 6:01:32.0 579 4/14/2014 6:01:44.0 578 4/14/2014 6:01:53.0 578 4/14/2014 6:02:01.0 577 4/14/2014 6:02:12.0 577 4/14/2014 6:02:22.0 577 4/14/2014 6:02:32.0 576 4/14/2014 6:02:42.0 578 4/14/2014 6:02:52.0 577 4/14/2014 6:03:02.0 577 4/14/2014 6:03:12.0 577 4/14/2014 6:03:22.0 578 . . . . 4/21/2014 5:59:55.0 11 Now there is a reading every 10 seconds from a substation. Now I want to group this data into hourly readings. Thus 00:00-01:00 = sum([KW]] for where datetime >= '^date^ 00:00:00' and datetime < '^date^ 01:00:00' I've tried using a convert to change the datetime into date and time field and then only to add all the time fields together with no success. Can someone please assist me, I'm not sure what is right way of doing this. Thanks ADDED Ok so the spilt between Datetime is working nicely, but as if I add a SUM([KW]) function SQL gives an error. And if I include any of the group functions it also nags. Below is what works, I still need to sum the KW per the grouping of hours. I've tried using Group By Hour and Group by DATEPART(Hour,[DateTime]) Both didn't work. SELECT DATEPART(Hour,[DateTime]) Hour ,DATEPART(Day,[DateTime]) Day ,DATEPART(Month,[DateTime]) Month ,([KVAReal]) ,([KVAr]) ,([KW]) FROM [POWER].[dbo].[IT10t_PAC3200] WHERE datetime >= '2014-04-14 06:00:00' and datetime < '2014-04-21 06:00:00' order by datetime

    Read the article

  • How to update a single table using trigger in MS SQL 2008

    - by Yakob-Jack
    I have a table PeroidicDeduction and the fields are ID(auto-increment),TotalDeduction(e.g.it can be loan),Paid(on which the deduction for each month),RemainingAmount, What I want is when every time I insert or update the table---RemainingAmount will get the value of TotalDeduction-SUM(Paid)....and writ the following trigger...but dosen't work for me CREATE TRIGGER dbo.UpdatePD ON PeroidicDedcution AFTER INSERT,UPDATE AS BEGIN UPDATE PeroidicDedcution SET REmaininAmoubnt=(SELECT TotalDeduction-(SELECT SUM(Paid) FROM PeroidicDeduction) FROM PeroidicDeduction) END NOTE: it is on a Single table

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