Search Results

Search found 36186 results on 1448 pages for 'sql 11'.

Page 333/1448 | < Previous Page | 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340  | Next Page >

  • SELECT Statement without duplicate rows on the multiple join tables

    - by theBo
    I have 4 tables built with JOINS and I would like to SELECT DISTINCT rows on the setsTbl.s_id so they always show regardless if there's relational data against them or not!. This is what I have at present which displays the data but doesn't display all of but not the entire distinct row! SELECT setsTbl.s_id, setsTbl.setName, userProfilesTbl.no + ' ' + userProfilesTbl.surname AS Name, trainingTbl.t_date, userAssessmentTbl.o_id FROM userProfilesTbl LEFT OUTER JOIN userAssessmentTbl ON userProfilesTbl.UserId = userAssessmentTbl.UserId FULL OUTER JOIN trainingTbl ON userAssessmentTbl.tt_id = trainingTbl.tt_id RIGHT OUTER JOIN setsTbl ON trainingTbl.s_id = setsTbl.s_id WHERE (userProfilesTbl.st_id=@st_id AND userProfilesTbl.sh_id=@sh_id) AND (DATEPART(yyyy,t_date) = @y_date ) OR (userAssessmentTbl.o_id IS NULL) ORDER BY setName ASC, t_date ASC With this statement I get some of the rows (the ones with data against them) but as stated the s_id field does not return distinct. This following inner select statement works in part when used in SQL Query analyzer and returns pretty much the data i require s_id setName Name o_id ----- ----- ----- ------ 1 100 Barnes 2 2 100 Beardsley 3 3 101 Aldridge 1 4 102 Molby 2 5 102 Whelan 3 but not when used outside of that environment. select * from ( SELECT userProfilesTbl.serviceNo + ' ' + userProfilesTbl.surname AS Name, userProfilesTbl.st_id, userProfilesTbl.sh_id, userAssessmentTbl.o_id, setsTbl.s_id, setsTbl.setName, row_number() over ( partition by setsTbl.s_id order by setsTbl.s_id ) r FROM userProfilesTbl LEFT OUTER JOIN userAssessmentTbl ON userProfilesTbl.UserId = userAssessmentTbl.UserId FULL OUTER JOIN trainingTbl ON userAssessmentTbl.tt_id = trainingTbl.tt_id RIGHT OUTER JOIN setsTbl ON trainingTbl.s_id = setsTbl.s_id ) x where x.r = 1 Not receiving any errors just not displaying the data?

    Read the article

  • Performance when querying a View

    - by Nate Bross
    I'm wondering if this is a bad practice or if in general this is the correct approach. Lets say that I've created a view that combines a few attributes from a few tables. My question, what do I need to do so I can query against this view as if it were a table without worrying about performance? All attributes in the original tables are indexed, my concern is that the result view will have hundreds of thousands of records, which I will want to narrow down quite a bit based on user input. What I'd like to avoid, is having multiple versions of the code that generates this view floating around with a few extra "where" conditions to facilitate the user input filtering. For example, assume my view has this header VIEW(Name, Type, DateEntered) this may have 100,000+ rows (possibly millions). I'd like to be able to make this view in SQL Server, and then in my application write querlies like this: SELECT Name, Type, DateEntered FROM MyView WHERE DateEntered BETWEEN @date1 and @date2; Basically, I am denormalizing my data for a series of reports that need to be run, and I'd like to centralize where I pull the data from, maybe I'm not looking at this problem from the right angle though, so I'm open to alternative ways to attack this.

    Read the article

  • Conditional WHERE Clauses in SQL Server 2008

    - by user336786
    Hello, I am trying to execute a query on a table in my SQL Server 2008 database. I have a stored procedure that uses five int parameters. Currently, my parameters are defined as follows: @memberType int, @color int, @preference int, @groupNumber int, @departmentNumber int This procedure will be passed -1 or higher for each parameter. A value of -1 means that the WHERE clause should not consider that parameter in the join/clause. If the value of the parameter is greater than -1, I need to consider the value in my WHERE clause. I would prefer to NOT use an IF-ELSE statement because it seems sloppy for this case. I saw this question here. However, it did not work for me. I think the reason why is because each of the columns in my table can have a NULL value. Someone pointed this scenario out in the fifth answer. That appears to be happening to me. Is there a slick approach to my question? Or do I just need to brute force it (I hope not :(). Thank you!

    Read the article

  • LINQ to SQL: NOTing a prebuilt expression

    - by ck
    I'm building a library of functions for one of my core L2S classes, all of which return a bool to allow checking for certain situations. Example: Expression<Func<Account, bool>> IsSomethingX = a => a.AccountSupplementary != null && a.AccountSupplementary.SomethingXFlag != null && a.AccountSupplementary.SomethingXFlag.Value; Now to query where this is not true, I CAN'T do this: var myAccounts= context.Accounts .Where(!IsSomethingX); // does not compile However, using the syntax from the PredicateBuilder class, I've come up with this: public static IQueryable<T> WhereNot<T>(this IQueryable<T> items, Expression<Func<T, bool>> expr1) { var invokedExpr = Expression.Invoke(expr1, expr1.Parameters.Cast<Expression>()); return items.Where(Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>> (Expression.Not(invokedExpr), expr1.Parameters)); } var myAccounts= context.Accounts .WhereNot(IsSomethingX); // does compile which actually produces the correct SQL. Does this look like a good solution, and is there anything I need to be aware of that might cause me problems in future?

    Read the article

  • Replace beginning words(SQL SERVER 2005, SET BASED)

    - by Newbie
    I have the below tables. tblInput Id WordPosition Words -- ----------- ----- 1 1 Hi 1 2 How 1 3 are 1 4 you 2 1 Ok 2 2 This 2 3 is 2 4 me tblReplacement Id ReplacementWords --- ---------------- 1 Hi 2 are 3 Ok 4 This The tblInput holds the list of words while the tblReplacement hold the words that we need to search in the tblInput and if a match is found then we need to replace those. But the problem is that, we need to replace those words if any match is found at the beginning. i.e. in the tblInput, in case of ID 1, the words that will be replaced is only 'Hi' and not 'are' since before 'are', 'How' is there and it is not in the tblReplacement list. in case of Id 2, the words that will be replaced are 'Ok' & 'This'. Since these both words are present in the tblReplacement table and after the first word i.e. 'Ok' is replaced, the second word which is 'This' here comes first in the list of ID category 2 . Since it is available in the tblReplacement, and is the first word now, so this will also be replaced. So the desired output will be Id NewWordsAfterReplacement --- ------------------------ 1 How 1 are 1 you 2 is 2 me My approach so far: ;With Cte1 As( Select t1.Id ,t1.Words ,t2.ReplacementWords From tblInput t1 Cross Join tblReplacement t2) ,Cte2 As( Select Id, NewWordsAfterReplacement = REPLACE(Words,ReplacementWords,'') From Cte1) Select * from Cte2 where NewWordsAfterReplacement <> '' But I am not getting the desired output. It is replacing all the matching words. Urgent help needed*.( SET BASED )* I am using SQL SERVER 2005. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Stored procedure or function expects parameter which is not supplied

    - by user2920046
    I am trying to insert data into a SQL Server database by calling a stored procedure, but I am getting the error Procedure or function 'SHOWuser' expects parameter '@userID', which was not supplied. My stored procedure is called "SHOWuser". I have checked it thoroughly and no parameters is missing. My code is: public void SHOWuser(string userName, string password, string emailAddress, List preferences) { SqlConnection dbcon = new SqlConnection(conn); try { SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand(); cmd.Connection = dbcon; cmd.CommandType = System.Data.CommandType.StoredProcedure; cmd.CommandText = "SHOWuser"; cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@userName", userName); cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@password", password); cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@emailAddress", emailAddress); dbcon.Open(); int i = Convert.ToInt32(cmd.ExecuteScalar()); cmd.Parameters.Clear(); cmd.CommandText = "tbl_pref"; foreach (int preference in preferences) { cmd.Parameters.Clear(); cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@userID", Convert.ToInt32(i)); cmd.Parameters.AddWithValue("@preferenceID", Convert.ToInt32(preference)); cmd.ExecuteNonQuery(); } } catch (Exception) { throw; } finally { dbcon.Close(); } and the stored procedure is: ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[SHOWuser] -- Add the parameters for the stored procedure here ( @userName varchar(50), @password nvarchar(50), @emailAddress nvarchar(50) ) AS BEGIN INSERT INTO tbl_user(userName,password,emailAddress) values(@userName,@password,@emailAddress) select tbl_user.userID,tbl_user.userName,tbl_user.password,tbl_user.emailAddress, stuff((select ',' + preferenceName from tbl_pref_master inner join tbl_preferences on tbl_pref_master.preferenceID = tbl_preferences.preferenceID where tbl_preferences.userID=tbl_user.userID FOR XML PATH ('')),1,1,' ' ) AS Preferences from tbl_user SELECT SCOPE_IDENTITY(); END Pls help, Thankx in advance...

    Read the article

  • Further filter SQL results

    - by eric
    I've got a query that returns a proper result set, using SQL 2005. It is as follows: select case when convert(varchar(4),datepart(yyyy,bug.datecreated),101)+ ' Q' +convert(varchar(2),datepart(qq,bug.datecreated),101) = '1969 Q4' then '2009 Q2' else convert(varchar(4),datepart(yyyy,bug.datecreated),101)+ ' Q' +convert(varchar(2),datepart(qq,bug.datecreated),101) end as [Quarter], bugtypes.bugtypename, count(bug.bugid) as [Total] from bug left outer join bugtypes on bug.crntbugtypeid = bugtypes.bugtypeid and bug.projectid = bugtypes.projectid where (bug.projectid = 44 and bug.currentowner in (-1000000031,-1000000045) and bug.crntplatformid in (42,37,25,14)) or (bug.projectid = 44 and bug.currentowner in (select memberid from groupmembers where projectid = 44 and groupid in (87,88)) and bug.crntplatformid in (42,37,25,14)) group by case when convert(varchar(4),datepart(yyyy,bug.datecreated),101)+ ' Q' +convert(varchar(2),datepart(qq,bug.datecreated),101) = '1969 Q4' then '2009 Q2' else convert(varchar(4),datepart(yyyy,bug.datecreated),101)+ ' Q' +convert(varchar(2),datepart(qq,bug.datecreated),101) end, bugtypes.bugtypename order by 1,3 desc It produces a nicely grouped list of years and quarters, an associated descriptor, and a count of incidents in descending count order. What I'd like to do is further filter this so it shows only the 10 most submitted incidents per quarter. What I'm struggling with is how to take this result set and achieve that.

    Read the article

  • sql queries slower than expected

    - by neubert
    Before I show the query here are the relevant table definitions: CREATE TABLE phpbb_posts ( topic_id mediumint(8) UNSIGNED DEFAULT '0' NOT NULL, poster_id mediumint(8) UNSIGNED DEFAULT '0' NOT NULL, KEY topic_id (topic_id), KEY poster_id (poster_id), ); CREATE TABLE phpbb_topics ( topic_id mediumint(8) UNSIGNED NOT NULL auto_increment ); Here's the query I'm trying to do: SELECT p.topic_id, p.poster_id FROM phpbb_topics AS t LEFT JOIN phpbb_posts AS p ON p.topic_id = t.topic_id AND p.poster_id <> ... WHERE p.poster_id IS NULL; Basically, the query is an attempt to find all topics where the number of times someone other than the target user has posted in is zero. In other words, the topics where the only person who has posted is the target user. Problem is that query is taking a super long time. My general assumption when it comes to SQL is that JOINs of any are super fast and can be done in no time at all assuming all relevant columns are primary or foreign keys (which in this case they are). I tried out a few other queries: SELECT COUNT(1) FROM phpbb_topics AS t JOIN phpbb_posts AS p ON p.topic_id = t.topic_id; That returns 353340 pretty quickly. I then do these: SELECT COUNT(1) FROM phpbb_topics AS t JOIN phpbb_posts AS p ON p.topic_id = t.topic_id AND p.poster_id <> 77198; SELECT COUNT(1) FROM phpbb_topics AS t JOIN phpbb_posts AS p ON p.topic_id = t.topic_id WHERE p.poster_id <> 77198; And both of those take quite a while (between 15-30 seconds). If I change the < to a = it takes no time at all. Am I making some incorrect assumptions? Maybe my DB is just foobar'd?

    Read the article

  • Parallelizing L2S Entity Retrieval

    - by MarkB
    Assuming a typical domain entity approach with SQL Server and a dbml/L2S DAL with a logic layer on top of that: In situations where lazy loading is not an option, I have settled on a convention where getting a list of entities does not also get each item's child entities (no loading), but getting a single entity does (eager loading). Since getting a single entity also gets children, it causes a cascading effect in which each child then gets its children too. This sounds bad, but as long as the model is not too deep, I usually don't see performance problems that outweigh the benefits of the ease of use. So if I want to get a list in which each of the items is fully hydrated with children, I combine the GetList and GetItem methods. So I'll get a list and then loop through it getting each item with the full cascade. Even this is generally acceptable in many of the projects I've worked on - but I have recently encountered situations with larger models and/or more data in which it needs to be more efficient. I've found that partitioning the loop and executing it on multiple threads yields excellent results. In my first experiment with a list of 50 items from one particular project, I did 5 threads of 10 items each and got a 3X improvement in time. Of course, the mileage will vary depending on the project but all else being equal this is clearly a big opportunity. However, before I go further, I was wondering what others have done that have already been through this. What are some good approaches to parallelizing this type of thing?

    Read the article

  • Error in My Add button SQL Server Management Studio And Visual Basic 2010

    - by user2882523
    Here is the thing i cant use insert querry in my code there is an error in my sqlcommand that says the ExecuteNonQuery() not match with the values blah blah here is my code Dim con As New SqlClient.SqlConnection("Server=.\SQLExpress;AttachDBFilename=C:\Program Files\Microsoft SQL Server\MSSQL10_50.SQLEXPRESS\MSSQL\DATA\Finals.mdf;Database=Finals;Trusted_Connection=Yes;") Dim cmd As New SqlClient.SqlCommand cmd.Connection = con cmd.CommandText = "Insert Into [Finals].[dbo].[Nokia] Values ('" & Unit.Text & "'),('" & Price.Text & " '),('" & Stack.Text & "'),('" & Processor.Text & "'),('" & Size.Text & "'),('" & RAM.Text & "'),('" & Internal.Text & "'),('" & ComboBox1.Text & "')" con.Open() cmd.ExecuteNonQuery() con.Close() } the problem is the cmd.CommandText can anyone pls help me

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008 Prior String Extract

    - by Saidur Rahman
    I have strings like the ones below in a SQL column. I want to extract them as a Gigabyte amount in aggregate. Example: Original Column ---------> Expected Output from a TSQL function ------------------------------------------- $15 / 1GB 24m + Intern 120MB ----------> 1.12 GB $19.95 / 500MB + $49.95 / 9GB Blackberry -----> 9.5GB $174.95 Blackberry 24GB + $10 / 1GB Datapack ----> 25GB $79 / 6GB --> 6GB Null --> Null $20 Plan --> 0GB Note: for our purpose, 1000MB = 1 GB (not 1024). The pattern is numbers followed by GB/MB, usually they are combined like 1GB (without any space but may sometimes may contain a space, it is not particularly important if hard to implement for this exception). Sometimes there are up to three or four instances of GB/MB occurring in the same string which are usually separated by a + sign (see row 2 and 3 of my example above). I have seen how we extract the dollar values in one of the answers where numbers were followed by $ or extract all integers in a string but I don't want to extract the dollar values or all the integers in a string. I just want the sum of GB/MB in the string.

    Read the article

  • Why use shorter VARCHAR(n) fields?

    - by chryss
    It is frequently advised to choose database field sizes to be as narrow as possible. I am wondering to what degree this applies to SQL Server 2005 VARCHAR columns: Storing 10-letter English words in a VARCHAR(255) field will not take up more storage than in a VARCHAR(10) field. Are there other reasons to restrict the size of VARCHAR fields to stick as closely as possible to the size of the data? I'm thinking of Performance: Is there an advantage to using a smaller n when selecting, filtering and sorting on the data? Memory, including on the application side (C++)? Style/validation: How important do you consider restricting colunm size to force non-sensical data imports to fail (such as 200-character surnames)? Anything else? Background: I help data integrators with the design of data flows into a database-backed system. They have to use an API that restricts their choice of data types. For character data, only VARCHAR(n) with n <= 255 is available; CHAR, NCHAR, NVARCHAR and TEXT are not. We're trying to lay down some "good practices" rules, and the question has come up if there is a real detriment to using VARCHAR(255) even for data where real maximum sizes will never exceed 30 bytes or so. Typical data volumes for one table are 1-10 Mio records with up to 150 attributes. Query performance (SELECT, with frequently extensive WHERE clauses) and application-side retrieval performance are paramount.

    Read the article

  • SQL Standard Regarding Left Outer Join and Where Conditions

    - by Ryan
    I am getting different results based on a filter condition in a query based on where I place the filter condition. My questions are: Is there a technical difference between these queries? Is there anything in the SQL standard that explains the different resultsets in the queries? Given the simplified scenario: --Table: Parent Columns: ID, Name, Description --Table: Child Columns: ID, ParentID, Name, Description --Query 1 SELECT p.ID, p.Name, p.Description, c.ID, c.Name, c.Description FROM Parent p LEFT OUTER JOIN Child c ON (p.ID = c.ParentID) WHERE c.ID IS NULL OR c.Description = 'FilterCondition' --Query 2 SELECT p.ID, p.Name, p.Description, c.ID, c.Name, c.Description FROM Parent p LEFT OUTER JOIN Child c ON (p.ID = c.ParentID AND c.Description = 'FilterCondition') I assumed the queries would return the same resultsets and I was surprised when they didn't. I am using MS SQL2005 and in the actual queries, query 1 returned ~700 rows and query 2 returned ~1100 rows and I couldn't detect a pattern on which rows were returned and which rows were excluded. There were still many rows in query 1 with child rows with data and NULL data. I prefer the style of query 2 (and I think it is more optimal), but I thought the queries would return the same results.

    Read the article

  • LINQ To SQL Dynamic Select

    - by mcass20
    Can someone show me how to indicate which columns I would like returned at run-time from a LINQ To SQL statement? I am allowing the user to select items in a checkboxlist representing the columns they would like displayed in a gridview that is bound to the results of a L2S query. I am able to dynamically generate the WHERE clause but am unable to do the same with the SELECT piece. Here is a sample: var query = from log in context.Logs select log; query = query.Where(Log => Log.Timestamp > CustomReport.ReportDateStart); query = query.Where(Log => Log.Timestamp < CustomReport.ReportDateEnd); query = query.Where(Log => Log.ProcessName == CustomReport.ProcessName); foreach (Pair filter in CustomReport.ExtColsToFilter) { sExtFilters = "<key>" + filter.First + "</key><value>" + filter.Second + "</value>"; query = query.Where(Log => Log.FormattedMessage.Contains(sExtFilters)); }

    Read the article

  • MS SQL - High performance data inserting with stored procedures

    - by Marks
    Hi. Im searching for a very high performant possibility to insert data into a MS SQL database. The data is a (relatively big) construct of objects with relations. For security reasons i want to use stored procedures instead of direct table access. Lets say i have a structure like this: Document MetaData User Device Content ContentItem[0] SubItem[0] SubItem[1] SubItem[2] ContentItem[1] ... ContentItem[2] ... Right now I think of creating one big query, doing somehting like this (Just pseudo-code): EXEC @DeviceID = CreateDevice ...; EXEC @UserID = CreateUser ...; EXEC @DocID = CreateDocument @DeviceID, @UserID, ...; EXEC @ItemID = CreateItem @DocID, ... EXEC CreateSubItem @ItemID, ... EXEC CreateSubItem @ItemID, ... EXEC CreateSubItem @ItemID, ... ... But is this the best solution for performance? If not, what would be better? Split it into more querys? Give all Data to one big stored procedure to reduce size of query? Any other performance clue? I also thought of giving multiple items to one stored procedure, but i dont think its possible to give a non static amount of items to a stored procedure. Since 'INSERT INTO A VALUES (B,C),(C,D),(E,F) is more performant than 3 single inserts i thought i could get some performance here. Thanks for any hints, Marks

    Read the article

  • SQL Server insert performance with and without primary key

    - by Eric
    Summary: I have a table populated via the following: insert into the_table (...) select ... from some_other_table Running the above query with no primary key on the_table is ~15x faster than running it with a primary key, and I don't understand why. The details: I think this is best explained through code examples. I have a table: create table the_table ( a int not null, b smallint not null, c tinyint not null ); If I add a primary key, this insert query is terribly slow: alter table the_table add constraint PK_the_table primary key(a, b); -- Inserting ~880,000 rows insert into the_table (a,b,c) select a,b,c from some_view; Without the primary key, the same insert query is about 15x faster. However, after populating the_table without a primary key, I can add the primary key constraint and that only takes a few seconds. This one really makes no sense to me. More info: The estimated execution plan shows 0% total query time spent on the clustered index insert SQL Server 2008 R2 Developer edition, 10.50.1600 Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Linq to SQL Intersect help needed

    - by mohang
    Hi, I have tried various suggestions given in SO. I still did not get the answers needed. Kindly help me. I appreciate your help. I have two sets. I need help to get the linq to sql intersection done. I have two sets. IQueryable<BusinessEntity> firstSet = from ent in all entities where ... // Code to get the first set. IQueryable<BusinessEntity> secondSet = from ent in all entities where... // Code to get the second set. Now I want the intersection, that is common elements of these sets. I have tried various ways including the following and I did not get the result I wanted. Please help me to get the right result. var commonEntities = (from ent1 in firstSet from ent2 in secondSet where ent1.BusinessEntityId == ent2.BusinessEntityId select ent1);

    Read the article

  • SQL query for the latest record for each day

    - by Mac
    I've got an Oracle 10g database with a table with a structure and content very similar to the following: CREATE TABLE MyTable ( id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, otherData VARCHAR2(100), submitted DATE ); INSERT INTO MyTable VALUES (1, 'a', TO_DATE('28/04/2010 05:13', ''DD/MM/YYYY HH24:MI)); INSERT INTO MyTable VALUES (2, 'b', TO_DATE('28/04/2010 03:48', ''DD/MM/YYYY HH24:MI)); INSERT INTO MyTable VALUES (3, 'c', TO_DATE('29/04/2010 05:13', ''DD/MM/YYYY HH24:MI)); INSERT INTO MyTable VALUES (4, 'd', TO_DATE('29/04/2010 17:16', ''DD/MM/YYYY HH24:MI)); INSERT INTO MyTable VALUES (5, 'e', TO_DATE('29/04/2010 08:49', ''DD/MM/YYYY HH24:MI)); What I need to do is query the database for the latest record submitted on each given day. For example, with the above data I would expect the records with ID numbers 1 and 4 to be returned, as these are the latest each for 28 April and 29 April respectively. Unfortunately, I have little expertise as far as SQL is concerned. Could anybody possibly provide some insight as to how to achieve this? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • NHibernate not dropping foreign key constraints.

    - by Kendrick
    I'm new to NHibernate, so this is probably my mistake, but when I use: schema.Create(true, true); I get: SchemaExport [(null)]- There is already an object named 'XXX' in the database. System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: There is already an object named 'XXX' in the database. I grabbed the SQL code nHibernate was using, ran it directly from MSSMS, and recieved similar errors. Looking into it, the generated code is not properly dropping the foreign key constraints. The drop looks like this: if exists (select 1 from sysobjects where id = OBJECT_ID(N'dbo[FK22212EAFBFE4C58]') AND parent_obj = OBJECT_ID('YYY')) alter table dbo.YYY drop constraint FK22212EAFBFE4C58 Doing a "select OBJECT_ID(N'dbo[FK22212EAFBFE4C58]')" I get null. If I take out the "dbo" (i.e. "select OBJECT_ID(N'[FK22212EAFBFE4C58]')") then the ID is returned. So, my question is, why is nHibernate adding the dbo, and why does that prevent the object from being returned (since the table owning the constraint is dbo.XXX) One of my mapping files: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <hibernate-mapping namespace="CanineApp.Model" assembly="CanineApp.Model" xmlns="urn:nhibernate-mapping-2.2"> <class name="MedicalLog" table="MedicalLog" schema="dbo"> <id name="MedicalLogID" type="Int64"> <generator class="identity" /> </id> <property name="InvoiceAmount" type="Decimal" not-null="true" /> ... <many-to-one name="Canine" class="Canine" column="CanineID" not-null="true" fetch="join" /> <many-to-one name="TreatmentCategory" class="TreatmentCategory" column="TreatmentCategoryID" not-null="true" access="field.camelcase-underscore" /> </class> </hibernate-mapping>

    Read the article

  • How to emulate a BEFORE DELETE trigger in SQL Server 2005

    - by Mark
    Let's say I have three tables, [ONE], [ONE_TWO], and [TWO]. [ONE_TWO] is a many-to-many join table with only [ONE_ID and [TWO_ID] columns. There are foreign keys set up to link [ONE] to [ONE_TWO] and [TWO] to [ONE_TWO]. The FKs use the ON DELETE CASCADE option so that if either a [ONE] or [TWO] record is deleted, the associated [ONE_TWO] records will be automatically deleted as well. I want to have a trigger on the [TWO] table such that when a [TWO] record is deleted, it executes a stored procedure that takes a [ONE_ID] as a parameter, passing the [ONE_ID] values that were linked to the [TWO_ID] before the delete occurred: DECLARE @Statement NVARCHAR(max) SET @Statement = '' SELECT @Statement = @Statement + N'EXEC [MyProc] ''' + CAST([one_two].[one_id] AS VARCHAR(36)) + '''; ' FROM deleted JOIN [one_two] ON deleted.[two_id] = [one_two].[two_id] EXEC (@Statement) Clearly, I need a BEFORE DELETE trigger, but there is no such thing in SQL Server 2005. I can't use an INSTEAD OF trigger because of the cascading FK. I get the impression that if I use a FOR DELETE trigger, when I join [deleted] to [ONE_TWO] to find the list of [ONE_ID] values, the FK cascade will have already deleted the associated [ONE_TWO] records so I will never find any [ONE_ID] values. Is this true? If so, how can I achieve my objective? I'm thinking that I'd need to change the FK joining [TWO] to [ONE_TWO] to not use cascades and to do the delete from [ONE_TWO] manually in the trigger just before I manually delete the [TWO] records. But I'd rather not go through all that if there is a simpler way.

    Read the article

  • Processing a resultset to look up foriegn keys (and poulate a new table!)

    - by Gilly
    Hi, I've been handed a dataset that has some fairly basic table structures with no keys at all. eg {myRubishTable} - Area(varchar),AuthorityName(varchar),StartYear(varchar),StartMonth(varcha),EndYear(varchar),EndMonth(varchar),Amount(Money) there are other tables that use the Area and AuthorityName columns as well as a general use of Month and Years so I I figured a good first step was to pull Area and Authority into their own tables. I now want to process the data in the original table and lookup the key value to put into my new table with foreign keys which looks like this. (lookup Tables) {Area} - id (int, PK), name (varchar(50)) {AuthorityName} - id(int, PK), name(varchar(50) (TargetTable) {myBetterTable} - id (int,PK), area_id(int FK-Area),authority_name_id(int FK-AuthorityName),StartYear (varchar),StartMonth(varchar),EndYear(varchar),EndMonth(varchar),Amount(money) so row one in the old table read MYAREA, MYAUTHORITY,2009,Jan,2010,Feb,10000 and I want to populate the new table with 1,1,1,2009,Jan,2010,Feb,10000 where the first '1' is the primary key and the second two '1's are the ids in the lookup tables. Can anyone point me to the most efficient way of achieving this using just SQL? Thanks in advance Footnote:- I've achieved what I needed with some pretty simple WHERE clauses (I had left a rogue tablename in the FROM which was throwing me :o( ) but would be interested to know if this is the most efficient. ie SELECT [area].[area_id], [authority].[authority_name_id], [myRubishTable].[StartYear], [myRubishTable].[StartMonth], [myRubishTable].[EndYear], [myRubishTable].[EndMonth], [myRubishTable].[Amount] FROM [myRubishTable],[Area],[AuthorityName] WHERE [myRubishTable].[Area]=[Area].[name] AND [myRubishTable].[Authority Name]=[dim_AuthorityName].[name] TIA

    Read the article

  • Query table value aliasing in Oracle SQL

    - by Strata
    I have a homework assignment in SQL for Oracle 10g where I have to apply union to two different select statements, to return two columns. I need the values of each cell under vendor_state to indicate CA and every other value in another state to return "Outside CA", to indicate they're elsewhere. I applied the union and produced the two columns and the listings for CA, but many other state IDs were listed and I couldn't find an explanation for how to change the actual values in the query itself. Eventually, I stumbled on an answer, but I can't explain why this works. The code is as follows: SELECT vendor_name, vendor_state FROM vendors WHERE vendor_state IN 'CA' UNION SELECT vendor_name, 'Outside CA' AS vendor_state FROM vendors WHERE vendor_state NOT IN 'CA' ORDER BY vendor_name This gives me the exact answer I need, but I don't know why the aliasing in the second select statement can behave this way....no explanation is given in my textbook and nothing I've read indicates that column aliasing can be done like this. But, by switching the column name and the alias value, I have replaced the value being returned rather than the column name itself...I'm not complaining about the result, but it would help if I knew how I did it.

    Read the article

  • Are multiline queries sql-injection safe?

    - by acmatos
    This might be a stupid question. Or maybe my hacking skills are limited (I don't practice them at all). I have a query that looks like this: <?php $query =<<<eot SELECT table_x.field1, table_x.field2, table_y.*, table_z.field4 FROM ( SELECT ... ) as table_y LEFT JOIN table_x ON table_x.field1 = table_y.field_x LEFT JOIN table_z ON table_z.field1 = table_y.field_z WHERE table_x.field3 = '$something' AND table_z.field4 = '1' AND table_z.field5 = '2' eot; ?> I have a lot of other tests on $something before it gets used, like $something = explode(' ',$something); (which later result in a string) none of them intend to prevent injection but they make it hard for the given injection to get as is to the actual query. However, there are ways. We all know how easy it is to replace a space for something else which is still valid.. So, it's not really a problem to make a potentially harmful piece of SQL reach that $something... But is there any way to comment the rest of the original query string if it is multi-line? I can comment AND table_z.field4 = '1' using ;-- but can't comment the following AND table_z.field5 = '2' Is it possible to open a multi-line comment /* without closing it or something looked like and therefore allow the injection to ignore the multi-line query?

    Read the article

  • Managing modes in Windows application working directly with SQL Server 2008

    - by hgulyan
    Hi, I have a MS Access 97 application (but the question is general) working directly with SQL Server 2008 (without application server or anything). Numbers of users can be up to 1000. Windows Authentication is used. The question is: How to handle modes, so some users will be allowed to work in read-only mode some users won't have access to db for some time My versions: Using a table with a mode id for every group of users, that will work the same way. On Form Load application will query that table for mode id. Using trigger on the tables, that must work according to that mode. The trigger will query mode value and doesn't work if access is closed or it's in read-only mode I know it's not these are not the best solutions, that's why I'm asking for your advice. There's one more point. If the mode is changed to "access-is-closed" for a group of users, that group must not be able to query to DB starting that moment. With first solution I wrote it won't work, because user can be in application at that moment and no form load event will work. How can I do this? Is there any optimal solution? Thank you. Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Strangest LINQ to SQL case I have ever seen

    - by kubaw
    OK, so this is the strangest issue in .net programming I have ever seen. It seems that object fields are serialized in .net web services in order of field initialization. It all started with Flex not accepting SOAP response from .net web service. I have found out that it was due to the order of serialized fields was statisfying the order of fields in declared serializable class. It had something to do with generic lists and LINQ to SQL but I can't find out what. This one is really hard to reproduce. Example to get the idea: [Serializable] public class SomeSample { public int A; public int B; public int C; } I was querying some data tables within asmx web service using linq and returning list of SomeSample objects: var r = (from ...... select new SomeSample { A = 1, C = 3 }).ToList(); Now the list was once more iterated and B field was applied some value (ex. 2). However the returned soap envelope contained following excerpt: <A>1</A><C>3</C><B>2</B> Please notice the order of serialization. If I initially initialized all fields: var r = (from ...... select new SomeSample { A = 1, B = 2, C = 3 }).ToList(); object was serialized in correct order. I must add, that in both cases the debugger shows exactly the same content of "r" variable. Am I losing my mind or is this normal behavior? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

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