Search Results

Search found 27339 results on 1094 pages for 'sql tempdb'.

Page 333/1094 | < Previous Page | 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340  | Next Page >

  • T-SQL Unique constraint locked the SQL server

    - by PaN1C_Showt1Me
    HI ! This is my table: CREATE TABLE [ORG].[MyTable]( .. [my_column2] UNIQUEIDENTIFIER NOT NULL CONSTRAINT FK_C1 REFERENCES ORG.MyTable2 (my_column2), [my_column3] INT NOT NULL CONSTRAINT FK_C2 REFERENCES ORG.MyTable3 (my_column3) .. ) I've written this constraint to assure that combination my_column2 and my_column3 is always unique. ALTER TABLE [ORG].[MyTable] ADD CONSTRAINT UQ_MyConstraint UNIQUE NONCLUSTERED ( my_column2, my_column3 ) But then suddenly.. The DB stopped responding.. there is a lock or something.. Do you have any idea why? What is bad with the constraint?

    Read the article

  • sum of Times in SQL

    - by LIX
    Hello all, I have some records like this: ID Personel_Code Time --- ------------- ------ 1 0011 05:50 3 0011 20:12 4 0012 00:50 I want to have the sum of times for each person. in this example I want to have the result like this : Personel_Code Time ------------- ----- 0011 26:02 0012 00:50 Thank you.

    Read the article

  • SQL n:m Inheritance join

    - by Nightmares
    I want to join a table which contains n:m relationship between groups. (Groups are defined in a separate table). This table only has entries listing a member_group_id and a parent_group_id. Given this structure: id(int) | member_group_id(int) | parent_group_id(int) The "base" query looks like this: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.member_group_id = p1.member_group_id The "base" query correctly shows all relationships (I checked by doing it manually.) The problem is when I try to apply a where clause to this query to filter for a specific group as "point of origin" (the first group for which I want all parent groups) it returns only the closest parents. For example like this: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.member_group_id = p1.member_group_id where p1.group_id = 1 Can anyone give a clue how I can fix this? Or a different approach to realize this. (I suppose I could always do this in my C++ source code on the server side but I would have to transfer a entire table which has a high growth potential to the application server.) UPDATE: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.group_id = p1.member_group_id Typing mistake confirmed. Now I don't get past first level of inheritance period. Thanks at denied for pointing that out.

    Read the article

  • How to track auto-generated id's in select-insert statement

    - by k rey
    I have two tables detail and head. The detail table will be written first. Later, the head table will be written. The head is a summary of the detail table. I would like to keep a reference from the detail to the head table. I have a solution but it is not elegant and requires duplicating the joins and filters that were used during summation. I am looking for a better solution. The below is an example of what I currently have. In this example, I have simplified the table structure. In the real world, the summation is very complex. -- Preparation create table #detail ( detail_id int identity(1,1) , code char(4) , amount money , head_id int null ); create table #head ( head_id int identity(1,1) , code char(4) , subtotal money ); insert into #detail ( code, amount ) values ( 'A', 5 ); insert into #detail ( code, amount ) values ( 'A', 5 ); insert into #detail ( code, amount ) values ( 'B', 2 ); insert into #detail ( code, amount ) values ( 'B', 2 ); -- I would like to somehow simplify the following two queries insert into #head ( code, subtotal ) select code, sum(amount) from #detail group by code update #detail set head_id = h.head_id from #detail d inner join #head h on d.code = h.code -- This is the desired end result select * from #detail Desired end result of detail table: detail_id code amount head_id 1 A 5.00 1 2 A 5.00 1 3 B 2.00 2 4 B 2.00 2

    Read the article

  • Custom Grid LINQ to SQL help

    - by user488361
    Following is my custome cotrol grid... public partial class LinqGrid : UserControl { object tmpDataTable = new object(); public LinqGrid() { InitializeComponent(); } public void Bind(System.Data.Linq.Table listSource) where T : class { Project.dbClassesDataContext dbc = new Project.dbClassesDataContext(); tmpDataTable = listSource; var query = (from c in listSource select c); dgvRecords.DataSource = query.Take(10).ToList(); } private void btnNext_Click(object sender, EventArgs e) { // now what i have to do here if i want next 10 records.....means how to retrive tmpDataTable object here... ??? i can't find Type of variable....?? plz help me.... } }

    Read the article

  • TSQL, select values from large many-to-many relationship

    - by eugeneK
    I have two tables Publishers and Campaigns, both have similar many-to-many relationships with Countries,Regions,Languages and Categories. more info Publisher2Categories has publisherID and categoryID which are foreign keys to publisherID in Publishers and categoryID in Categories which are identity columns. On other side i have Campaigns2Categories with campaignID and categoryID columns which are foreign keys to campaignID in Campaigns and categoryID in Categories which again are identities. Same goes for Regions, Languages and Countries relationships I pass to query certain publisherID and want to get campaignIDs of Campaigns that have at least one equal to Publisher value from regions, countries, language or categories thanks

    Read the article

  • Parse multiple filters in SQL

    - by Jeff Meatball Yang
    I have a problem parsing a stored procedure parameter in the form: declare @S varchar(100) set @S = '4=2,24=1534' Here's the query: select cast(idx as varchar(100)) 'idx' , value , SUBSTRING(value, 1, charindex(value, '=')+1) 'first' , SUBSTRING(value, charindex(value, '=')+1, LEN(value)-charindex(value, '=')-1) 'second' from Common.SplitToTable(@S, ',') -- returns (idx int, value varchar(max)) where len(value) > 0 But here is the result I get: idx value first second 0 4=2 4 4= 1 24=1534 2 24=153 Here's what I expected: idx value first second 0 4=2 4 2 1 24=1534 2 1534 Help?

    Read the article

  • LINQ to SQL filter combobox output

    - by Brendan
    OK so I've got 2 tables for this instance, Users{UserID, Name}, Company{CompanyID, UserID, Name, Payrate} i also have 2 combo boxes, first one is for Users which Displays Name, and the Value is UserID i need the second combobox to get the Names from the Company table, but only showing Companies that are relevant to the selected user. I cant work out how to get it to go... Any ideas???

    Read the article

  • how to remove repeated record's from results linq to sql

    - by Sadegh
    hi, i want to remove repeated record's from results but distinct don't do this for me! why??? var results = (from words in _Xplorium.Words join wordFiles in _Xplorium.WordFiles on words.WordId equals wordFiles.WordId join files in _Xplorium.Files on wordFiles.FileId equals files.FileId join urls in _Xplorium.Urls on files.UrlId equals urls.UrlId where files.Title.Contains(query) || files.Description.Contains(query) orderby wordFiles.Count descending select new SearchResultItem() { Title = files.Title, Url = urls.Address, Count = wordFiles.Count, CrawledOn = files.CrawledOn, Description = files.Description, Lenght = files.Lenght, UniqueKey = words.WordId + "-" + files.FileId + "-" + urls.UrlId }).Distinct();

    Read the article

  • Is it a good idea to use a computed column as part of a primary key ?

    - by Brann
    I've got a table defined as : OrderID bigint NOT NULL, IDA varchar(50) NULL, IDB bigint NULL, [ ... 50 other non relevant columns ...] The natural primary key for this table would be (OrderID,IDA,IDB), but this it not possible because IDA and IDB can be null (they can both be null, but they are never both defined at the same time). Right now I've got a unique constraint on those 3 columns. Now, the thing is I need a primary key to enable transactional replication, and I'm faced with two choices : Create an identity column and use it as a primary key Create a non-null computed column C containing either IDA or IDB or '' if both columns were null, and use (OrderID,C) as my primary key. The second alternative seams cleaner as my PK would be meaningful, and is feasible (see msdn link), but since I've never seen this done anywhere, I was wondering if they were some cons to this approach.

    Read the article

  • Using SQL to get the Last Reply on a Post

    - by Anraiki
    I am trying to replicate a forum function by getting the last reply of a post. For clarity, see PHPBB: there are four columns, and the last column is what I like to replicate. I have my tables created as such: discussion_id (primary key) user_id parent_id comment status pubdate I was thinking of creating a Link Table that would update for each time the post is replied to. The link table would be as follow: discussion_id (primary key) last_user_id last_user_update However, I am hoping that theres a advance query to achieve this method. That is, grabbing each Parent Discussion, and finding the last reply in each of those Parent Discussions. Am I right that there is such a query?

    Read the article

  • Update table without using cursor and on date

    - by Muhammad Kashif Nadeem
    Please copy and run following script DECLARE @Customers TABLE (CustomerId INT) DECLARE @Orders TABLE ( OrderId INT, CustomerId INT, OrderDate DATETIME ) DECLARE @Calls TABLE (CallId INT, CallTime DATETIME, CallToId INT, OrderId INT) ----------------------------------------------------------------- INSERT INTO @Customers SELECT 1 INSERT INTO @Customers SELECT 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------- INSERT INTO @Orders SELECT 10, 1, DATEADD(d, -20, GETDATE()) INSERT INTO @Orders SELECT 11, 1, DATEADD(d, -10, GETDATE()) ----------------------------------------------------------------- INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 101, DATEADD(d, -19, GETDATE()), 1, NULL INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 102, DATEADD(d, -17, GETDATE()), 1, NULL INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 103, DATEADD(d, -9, GETDATE()), 1, NULL INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 104, DATEADD(d, -6, GETDATE()), 1, NULL INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 105, DATEADD(d, -5, GETDATE()), 1, NULL ----------------------------------------------------------------- I want to update @Calls table and need following results. I am using the following query UPDATE @Calls SET OrderId = ( CASE WHEN (s.CallTime > e.OrderDate) THEN e.OrderId END ) FROM @Calls s INNER JOIN @Orders e ON s.CallToId = e.CustomerId and the result of my query is not what I need. Requirement: As you can see there are two orders. One is on 2010-12-12 and one is on 2010-12-22. I want to update @Calls table with relevant OrderId with respect to CallTime. In short If subsequent Orders are added, and there are further calls then we assume that a new call is associated with the most recent Order Note: This is sample data so this is not the case that I always have two Orders. There might be 10+ Orders and 100+ calls. Note2 I could not find good title for this question. Please change it if you think of any better. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • List all the months using oracle sql .

    - by Suresh S
    Guys is there any better way to list all the months other than this select to_char(add_months(to_date('01/01/1000', 'DD/MM/RRRR'), ind.l-1), 'MONTH') as month_descr , ind.l as month_ind from dual descr , ( select l from (select level l from dual connect by level <= 12) ) ind order by 2; ANSWER : SELECT to_char(add_months(SYSDATE, (LEVEL-1 )),'MONTH') as months FROM dual CONNECT BY LEVEL <= 12

    Read the article

  • Mysql SQL join question

    - by David
    I am trying to find all deals information along with how many comments they have received. My query select deals.*, count(comments.comments_id) as counts from deals left join comments on comments.deal_id=deals.deal_id where cancelled='N' But now it only shows the deals that have at least one comment. What is the problem?

    Read the article

  • LINQ to SQL: Reusable expression for property?

    - by coenvdwel
    Pardon me for being unable to phrase the title more exact. Basically, I have three LINQ objects linked to tables. One is Product, the other is Company and the last is a mapping table Mapping to store what Company sells which products and by which ID this Company refers to this Product. I am now retrieving a list of products as follows: var options = new DataLoadOptions(); options.LoadWith<Product>(p => p.Mappings); context.LoadOptions = options; var products = ( from p in context.Products select new { ProductID = p.ProductID, //BackendProductID = p.BackendProductID, BackendProductID = (p.Mappings.Count == 0) ? "None" : (p.Mappings.Count > 1) ? "Multiple" : p.Mappings.First().BackendProductID, Description = p.Description } ).ToList(); This does a single query retrieving the information I want. But I want to be able to move the logic behind the BackendProductID into the LINQ object so I can use the commented line instead of the annoyingly nested ternary operator statements for neatness and re-usability. So I added the following property to the Product object: public string BackendProductID { get { if (Mappings.Count == 0) return "None"; if (Mappings.Count > 1) return "Multiple"; return Mappings.First().BackendProductID; } } The list is still the same, but it now does a query for every single Product to get it's BackendProductID. The code is neater and re-usable, but the performance now is terrible. What I need is some kind of Expression or Delegate but I couldn't get my head around writing one. It always ended up querying for every single product, still. Any help would be appreciated!

    Read the article

  • SQL Update to the SUM of its joined values

    - by CL4NCY
    Hi, I'm trying to update a field in the database to the sum of its 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

  • LINQ2SQL: orderby note.hasChildren(), name ascending

    - by Peter Bridger
    I have a hierarchical data structure which I'm displaying in a webpage as a treeview. I want to data to be ordered to first show nodes ordered alphabetically which have no children, then under these nodes ordered alphabetically which have children. Currently I'm ordering all nodes in one group, which means nodes with children appear next to nodes with no children. I'm using a recursive method to build up the treeview, which has this LINQ code at it's heart: var filteredCategory = from c in category orderby c.Name ascending where c.ParentCategoryId == parentCategoryId && c.Active == true select c; So this is the orderby statement I want to enhance. Shown below is the database table structure: [dbo].[Category]( [CategoryId] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [Name] [varchar](100) NOT NULL, [Level] [tinyint] NOT NULL, [ParentCategoryId] [int] NOT NULL, [Selectable] [bit] NOT NULL CONSTRAINT [DF_Category_Selectable] DEFAULT ((1)), [Active] [bit] NOT NULL CONSTRAINT [DF_Category_Active] DEFAULT ((1))

    Read the article

  • Help with Oracle SQL Count function! =)

    - by user363024
    Hi guys.. The question im struggling with is this: i have a list of helicopter names in different charters and i need to find out WHICH helicopter has the least amount of charters booked. Once i find that out i need to ONLY display the one that has the least. I so far have this: SELECT Helicopter_Name COUNT (Distinct Charter_NUM) FROM Charter_Table GROUP BY Helicopter Name ^ this is where i am stuck, i realise MIN could be used to pick out the value that is the smallest but i am not sure how to integrate this into the command. Something like Where MIN = MIN Value Id really appreciate it

    Read the article

  • SQL Agent Job - to execute as queue

    - by BINEESHTHOMAS
    I have a job which is calling 10 other jobs using sp_start_job. The job is having 10 steps, each step calling each sub jobs, When i execute the main job, i can see it started with step 1 and in a few secods it shows 'finished successfully' But the jobs take long time time, and when i see the log mechanism i have put inside , it shows the all the 10 steps are running simultaniously at the back, till it finishes after few hours. My requirement is, it should finish step 1 first and then only step2 should start. aNY HELP PLS ?

    Read the article

  • Oracle SQL Update query takes days to update

    - by B Senthil Kumar
    I am trying to update a record in the target table based on the record coming in from source. For instance, if the incoming record is present in the target table I would update them in the target else I would simply insert. I have over one million records in my source while my target has 46 million records. The target table is partitioned based on calendar key. I implement this whole logic using Informatica. I find that the Informatica code is perfectly fine looking at the Informatica session log but its in the update it takes long time (more than 5 days to update one million records). Any suggestions as to what can be done on the scenario to improve the performance?

    Read the article

  • SQL Structure of DB table with different types of columns

    - by Dmitry Dvornikov
    I have a problem with the optimization of the structure of the database. I'll try to explain it exactly. I create a project, where we can add different values??, but this values must have different types of the columns in the database (eg, int, double , varchar). What is the best way to store the different types of values ??in the database. In the project I'm using Propel 1.6. The point is availability to add value with 'int', 'varchar' and other columns types, to search the table was efficient. In total, I have two ideas. The first is to create a table of "value", which will have columns: "id ", "value_int", "value_double", "value_varchar", etc - with the corresponding column types. Depending on the type of values??, records will be saved with the value in the appropriate column (the rest will be NULL). The second solution is to create separate tables such as "value_int", "value_varchar" etc. There would be columns: "id", "value", which correspond to the relevant types of "value" (ie, such as int, varchar, etc). I must admit that I do not believe any of the above solutions, originally I was thinking about one table "value", where the column would be a "text" type - but this solution would probably be even worse. I would like to know your opinion on this topic, maybe something else would be better. Thanks in advance. EDIT: For example : We have three tables: USER: [table of users] * id * name FIELD: [table of profile fields - where the column 'type' is the type of field, eg int or varchar) * id * type * name VALUE : * id * User_id - ( FK user.id ) * Field_id - ( FK field.id ) * value So we have in each row an user in USER table, and the profile is stored in the VALUE table. Bit each profile field may have a different type (column 'type' in the FIELD table), and based on that I would want this value to add to the appropriate column of the appropriate type.

    Read the article

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