Search Results

Search found 27348 results on 1094 pages for 't sql snack'.

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

  • Best way to return result from business layer to presentation layer when using LINQ-to-SQL

    - by samsur
    I have a business layer that has DTOs that are used in the presentation layer. This application uses entity framework. Here is an example of a class called RoleDTO: public class RoleDTO { public Guid RoleId { get; set; } public string RoleName { get; set; } public string RoleDescription { get; set; } public int? OrganizationId { get; set; } } In the BLL I want to have a method that returns a list of DTO. I would like to know which is the better approach: returning IQueryable or list of DTOs. Although I feel that returning IQueryable is not a good idea because the connection needs to be open. Here are the 2 different methods using the different approaches: First approach public class RoleBLL { private servicedeskEntities sde; public RoleBLL() { sde = new servicedeskEntities(); } public IQueryable<RoleDTO> GetAllRoles() { IQueryable<RoleDTO> role = from r in sde.Roles select new RoleDTO() { RoleId = r.RoleID, RoleName = r.RoleName, RoleDescription = r.RoleDescription, OrganizationId = r.OrganizationId }; return role; } Note: in the above method the DataContext is a private attribute and set in the constructor, so that the connection stays opened. Second approach public static List<RoleDTO> GetAllRoles() { List<RoleDTO> roleDTO = new List<RoleDTO>(); using (servicedeskEntities sde = new servicedeskEntities()) { var roles = from pri in sde.Roles select new { pri.RoleID, pri.RoleName, pri.RoleDescription }; //Add the role entites to the DTO list and return. This is necessary as anonymous types can be returned acrosss methods foreach (var item in roles) { RoleDTO roleItem = new RoleDTO(); roleItem.RoleId = item.RoleID; roleItem.RoleDescription = item.RoleDescription; roleItem.RoleName = item.RoleName; roleDTO.Add(roleItem); } return roleDTO; } } Please let me know, if there is a better approach.

    Read the article

  • MSSql Query solution cum Suggestion Required

    - by Nirmal
    Hello All... I have a following scenario in my MSSql 2005 database. zipcodes table has following fields and value (just a sample): zipcode latitude longitude ------- -------- --------- 65201 123.456 456.789 65203 126.546 444.444 and "place" table has following fields and value : id name zip latitude longitude -- ---- --- -------- --------- 1 abc 65201 NULL NULL 2 def 65202 NULL NULL 3 ghi 65203 NULL NULL 4 jkl 65204 NULL NULL Now, my requirement is like I want to compare my zip codes of "place" table and update the available latitude and longitude fields from "zipcode" table. And there are some of the zipcodes which has no entry in "zipcode" table, so that should remain null. And the major issue is like I have more then 50,00,000 records in my db. So, query should support this feature. I have tried some of the solutions but unfortunately not getting proper output. Any help would be appreciated...

    Read the article

  • SQL-Server: Impersonation

    - by Falcon
    Hello, is there any way to make a certain session execute all commands as a certain user? I cannot use the execute as clause because it mustn't be hardcoded. I need something along the lines of this pseudocode: ALTER SESSION sessionid SET EXECUTING_USER=someuser

    Read the article

  • Split table and insert with identity link

    - by The King
    Hi.. I have 3 tables similar to the sctructure below CREATE TABLE [dbo].[EmpBasic]( [EmpID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL Primary Key, [Name] [varchar](50), [Address] [varchar](50) ) CREATE TABLE [dbo].[EmpProject]( [EmpID] [int] NOT NULL primary key, // referencing column with EmpBasic [EmpProject] [varchar](50) ) CREATE TABLE [dbo].[EmpFull_Temp]( [ObjectID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL Primary Key, [T1Name] [varchar](50) , [T1Address] [varchar](50) , [T1EmpProject] [varchar](50) ) The EmpFull_Temp table has the records with a dummy object ID column... I want to populate the first 2 tables with the records in this table... But with EmpID as a reference between the first 2 tables. I tried this in a stored procedure... Create Table #IDSS (EmpID bigint, objID bigint) Insert into EmpBasic output Inserted.EmpID, EmpFull_Temp.ObjectID into #IDSS Select T1Name, T1Address from EmpFull_Temp Where ObjectID < 106 Insert into EmpProject Select A.EmpID, B.T1EmpProject from #IDSS as A, EmpFull_Temp as B Where A.ObjID = B.ObjectID But it says.. The multi-part identifier "EmpFull_Temp.ObjectID" could not be bound. Could you please help me in achieving this...

    Read the article

  • SQL DataReader how to show null-values from query

    - by cc0
    I have a DataReader and a StringBuilder (C#.NET) used in the following way; while (reader.Read()) { sb.AppendFormat("{0},{1},{2},",reader["Col1"], reader["Col2"], reader["Col3"]); } Which works great for my use, but when a row is null I need it to return "null", instead of just "". What would be a good way of accomplishing that? Suggestions are very appreciated

    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

  • 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 to get friends AND friends of friends of a user

    - by Enrique
    My MySQL tables structure is like this. USER int id varchar username FRIEND_LIST int user_id int friend_id For each friend relationship I insert 2 records in FRIEND_LIST. If user 1 is friend of user 2 then the next rows are inserted into FRIEND_LIST 1,2 2,1 I want to get the friends and friends of friends of an specific user. The select should return columns a, b, c. a: user_id b: friend_id c: username (username of friend_id ) If 1 is friend of 2 and 3. 2 is friend of 3, 4 and 5 3 is friend of 5,6,7 Then the query to get 1's friends and friends of friends should return: 1 2 two 1 3 three 2 1 one 2 3 three 2 4 four 2 5 five 3 1 one 3 5 five 3 6 six 3 7 seven Can I get this rows with a single query?

    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

  • return only the last select results from stored procedure

    - by Madalina Dragomir
    The requirement says: stored procedure meant to search data, based on 5 identifiers. If there is an exact match return ONLY the exact match, if not but there is an exact match on the not null parameters return ONLY these results, otherwise return any match on any 4 not null parameters... and so on My (simplified) code looks like: create procedure xxxSearch @a nvarchar(80), @b nvarchar(80)... as begin select whatever from MyTable t where ((@a is null and t.a is null) or (@a = t.a)) and ((@b is null and t.b is null) or (@b = t.b))... if @@ROWCOUNT = 0 begin select whatever from MyTable t where ((@a is null) or (@a = t.a)) and ((@b is null) or (@b = t.b))... if @@ROWCOUNT = 0 begin ... end end end As a result there can be more sets of results selected, the first ones empty and I only need the last one. I know that it is easy to get the only the last result set on the application side, but all our stored procedure calls go through a framework that expects the significant results in the first table and I'm not eager to change it and test all the existing SPs. Is there a way to return only the last select results from a stored procedure? Is there a better way to do this task ?

    Read the article

  • SQL timetable for employee

    - by latinunit-net
    Hi guys, i need to create an employee shift database. so i have 3 tables so far, employee, employee_shift, and shift im suppose to calculate how many shifts an employee has done at the end of the month, my question means, because a month has 30 days some have 28 and 31 days. this means i need to create in the shift table 31 different variations? one for each day of the month? in order to calculate which employee has worked the most? in my business relation it says an employee has either 1 or 2 shifts per day therefore do i have to have 60 different rows of variations? im i right or is there an easy way to work it out

    Read the article

  • SQL Querying for Threaded Messages

    - by Harper
    My site has a messaging feature where one user may message another. The messages support threading - a parent message may have any number of children but only one level deep. The messages table looks like this: Messages - Id (PK, Auto-increment int) - UserId (FK, Users.Id) - FromUserId (FK, Users.Id) - ParentMessageId (FK to Messages.Id) - MessageText (varchar 200) I'd like to show messages on a page with each 'parent' message followed by a collapsed view of the children messages. Can I use the GROUP BY clause or similar construct to retrieve parent messages and children messages all in one query? Right now I am retrieving parent messages only, then looping through them and performing another query for each to get all related children messages. I'd like to get messages like this: Parent1 Child1 Child2 Child3 Parent2 Child1 Parent3 Child1 Child2

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Need help tuning a SQL statement

    - by jeffself
    I've got a table that has two fields (custno and custno2) that need to be searched from a query. I didn't design this table, so don't scream at me. :-) I need to find all records where either the custno or custno2 matches the value returned from a query on the same table based on a titleno. In other words, the user types in 1234 for the titleno. My query searches the table to find the custno associated with the titleno. It also looks for the custno2 for that titleno. Then it needs to do a search on the same table for all other records that have either the custno or custno2 returned in the previous search in the custno or custno2 fields for those other records. Here is what I've come up with: SELECT BILLYR, BILLNO, TITLENO, VINID, TAXPAID, DUEDATE, DATEPIF, PROPDESC FROM TRCDBA.BILLSPAID WHERE CUSTNO IN (select custno from trcdba.billspaid where titleno = '1234' union select custno2 from trcdba.billspaid where titleno = '1234' and custno2 != '') OR CUSTNO2 IN (select custno from trcdba.billspaid where titleno = '1234' union select custno2 from trcdba.billspaid where titleno = '1234' and custno2 != '') The query takes about 5-10 seconds to return data. Can it be rewritten to work faster?

    Read the article

  • sql query not executing

    - by sarah
    Hi, Not able to execute a query ,i need to check if end date is greater than today in the following query Getting an error invalid query select * from table1 where user in ('a') and END_DATE >'2010-05-22' getting an error liter string does not match

    Read the article

  • How to include SqlExpresss 2008 (conveniently)

    - by Henk Holterman
    When I make a setup project in VS 2008, and select <Setup Project>, Properties, PreRequisites then i can select SqlExpress2005 to be automatically included. What I am looking for is a walkthrough of how to get SqlExpress2008 included in the same manner. Second choice would be how to get (or make) a MergeModule (MSM) file to do the same.

    Read the article

  • SQL statement HAVING MAX(some+thing)=some+thing

    - by Andreas
    I'm having trouble with Microsoft Access 2003, it's complaining about this statement: select cardnr from change where year(date)<2009 group by cardnr having max(time+date) = (time+date) and cardto='VIP' What I want to do is, for every distinct cardnr in the table change, to find the row with the latest (time+date) that is before year 2009, and then just select the rows with cardto='VIP'. This validator says it's OK, Access says it's not OK. This is the message I get: "you tried to execute a query that does not include the specified expression 'max(time+date)=time+date and cardto='VIP' and cardnr=' as part of an aggregate function." Could someone please explain what I'm doing wrong and the right way to do it? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Difficulty restoring a differential backup in SQL Server, 2 media families are expected or no files are ready for rollforward

    - by digiguru
    I have sql backups copied from server A to server B on a nightly basis. We want to move the sql server from server A to server B without much downtime, but the files are very large. I assumed that performing a differential backup and restore would solve the problem with the databases. Copy full backup from server A to copy to server B (10+gb) Open SQL Server Managment Studio on server B Right mouse on databases Restore Database Type in the new DB-name Choose "From Device" and browse to the backup file Click Okay. This is now resorting the original "full" backup. Test new db with dev application - everything works :) On original database rightmouse on DB Tasks Backup... Backup Type = Differential, Backup to disk, add a new file, and remove the old one (it needs to be a small file to transfer for the smallest amount of outage) Copy the diff backup onto the new db Right mouse on DB Tasks Restore Database This is where I get stuck. If I add both the new differential file, and the original backup to the restore process I get an error The media loaded on "M:\path\to\backup\full.bak" is formatted to support 1 media families, but 2 media families are expected according to the backup device specification. RESTORE HEADERONLY is terminating abnormally. But if I try to restore using just the differential file I get System.Data.SqlClient.SqlError: The log or differential backup cannot be restored because no files are ready to rollforward. (Microsoft.SqlServer.Smo) Any idea how to do it? Is there a better way of restoring backups with limited downtime?

    Read the article

  • Mass update of data in sql from int to varchar

    - by Christopher Kelly
    we have a large table (5608782 rows and growing) that has 3 columns Zip1,Zip2, distance all columns are currently int, we would like to convert this table to use varchars for international usage but need to do a mass import into the new table convert zip < 5 digits to 0 padded varchars 123 becomes 00123 etc. is there a way to do this short of looping over each row and doing the translation programmaticly?

    Read the article

  • Updating table takes very long time

    - by rrejc
    Hi all, I have a table in MsSQL Server 2008 (SP2) containing 30 millios of rows, table size 150GB, there are a couple of int columns and two nvarchar(max) columns: one containing text (from 1-30000 characters) and one containg xml (up to 100000 characters). Table doesn't have any primary keys or indexes (its is a staging table). So atm I am running a query: UPDATE [dbo].[stage_table] SET [column2] = SUBSTRING([column1], 1, CHARINDEX('.', [column1])-1); the query is running for 3 hours (and it is still not completed), which I think is too long. Is It? I can see that there is constant read rate of 5MB/s and write rate of 10MB/s to .mdf file. How can I find out why the query is running so long? The "server" is i7, 24GB of ram, SATA disks on RAID 10. Many thanks!

    Read the article

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