Search Results

Search found 27447 results on 1098 pages for 'sql warrior'.

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 341/1098 | < Previous Page | 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348  | Next Page >

  • Trying to use table aliases in SQL...

    - by user366685
    I'm a graphic designer trying my best to understand table aliases, but it's not working. Here's what I have so far: SELECT colours.colourid AS colourid1, combinations.manufacturercolourid AS colourmanid1, colours.colourname AS colourname1, colours.colourhex AS colourhex1, combinations.qecolourid2 AS colouridqe2, colours.colourid AS colourid2, colours.colourname AS colourname2, colours.colourhex AS colourhex2, colours.colourid AS colourid3, combinations.qecolourid3 AS colouridqe3, colours.colourname AS colourname3, colours.colourhex AS colourhex3, colours.colourid AS colourid4, combinations.qecolourid4 AS colouridqe4, colours.colourname AS colourname4, colours.colourhex AS colourhex4, combinations.coloursupplierid FROM combinations INNER JOIN colours ON colours.colourid = combinations.manufacturercolourid; Now, the idea is that in the colours lookup table, the id will pull the colour code, hex and name from the lookup table so that I can pull the colour code, hex and name for the 4 colours that I'm looking for. I can get this to work, but it only pulls up the first name, code and hex and I'm just not seeing what I'm doing wrong.

    Read the article

  • MongoDB equivalent of SQL "OR"

    - by Matt
    So, MongoDB defaults to "AND" when finding records. For example: db.users.find({age: {'$gte': 30}, {'$lte': 40}}); The above query finds users = 30 AND <= 40 years old. How would I find users <= 30 OR = 40 years old?

    Read the article

  • Efficiently select top row for each category in the set

    - by VladV
    I need to select a top row for each category from a known set (somewhat similar to this question). The problem is, how to make this query efficient on the large number of rows. For example, let's create a table that stores temperature recording in several places. CREATE TABLE #t ( placeId int, ts datetime, temp int, PRIMARY KEY (ts, placeId) ) -- insert some sample data SET NOCOUNT ON DECLARE @n int, @ts datetime SELECT @n = 1000, @ts = '2000-01-01' WHILE (@n>0) BEGIN INSERT INTO #t VALUES (@n % 10, @ts, @n % 37) IF (@n % 10 = 0) SET @ts = DATEADD(hour, 1, @ts) SET @n = @n - 1 END Now I need to get the latest recording for each of the places 1, 2, 3. This way is efficient, but doesn't scale well (and looks dirty). SELECT * FROM ( SELECT TOP 1 placeId, temp FROM #t WHERE placeId = 1 ORDER BY ts DESC ) t1 UNION ALL SELECT * FROM ( SELECT TOP 1 placeId, temp FROM #t WHERE placeId = 2 ORDER BY ts DESC ) t2 UNION ALL SELECT * FROM ( SELECT TOP 1 placeId, temp FROM #t WHERE placeId = 3 ORDER BY ts DESC ) t3 The following looks better but works much less efficiently (30% vs 70% according to the optimizer). SELECT placeId, ts, temp FROM ( SELECT placeId, ts, temp, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY placeId ORDER BY ts DESC) rownum FROM #t WHERE placeId IN (1, 2, 3) ) t WHERE rownum = 1 The problem is, during the latter query execution plan a clustered index scan is performed on #t and 300 rows are retrieved, sorted, numbered, and then filtered, leaving only 3 rows. For the former query three times one row is fetched. Is there a way to perform the query efficiently without lots of unions?

    Read the article

  • Modeling many-to-one with constraints?

    - by Greg Beech
    I'm attempting to create a database model for movie classifications, where each movie could have a single classification from each of one of multiple rating systems (e.g. BBFC, MPAA). This is the current design, with all implied PKs and FKs: TABLE Movie ( MovieId INT ) TABLE ClassificationSystem ( ClassificationSystemId TINYINT ) TABLE Classification ( ClassificationId INT, ClassificationSystemId TINYINT ) TABLE MovieClassification ( MovieId INT, ClassificationId INT, Advice NVARCHAR(250) -- description of why the classification was given ) The problem is with the MovieClassification table whose constraints would allow multiple classifications from the same system, whereas it should ideally only permit either zero or one classifications from a given system. Is there any reasonable way to restructure this so that a movie having exactly zero or one classifications from any given system is enforced by database constraints, given the following requirements? Do not duplicate information that could be looked up (i.e. duplicating ClassificationSystemId in the MovieClassification table is not a good solution because this could get out of sync with the value in the Classification table) Remain extensible to multiple classification systems (i.e. a new classification system does not require any changes to the table structure)? Note also the Advice column - each mapping of a movie to a classification needs to have a textual description of why that classification was given to that movie. Any design would need to support this.

    Read the article

  • sql rowlock on select statement

    - by David
    I have an ASP.Net webpage where the user selects a row for editing. I want to use the row lock on that row and once the user finishes the editing and updates another user can edit that row i.e. How can I use rowlock so that only one user can edit a row? Thank you

    Read the article

  • Sum two rows in one - My Sql

    - by user303832
    I have found some similar posts, but I didn't find them useful. But I didn't know how to group them. I would like to Sum 'No' and 'Not Set' to one row, and to lose 'Not Set' row. So : 'No' = 'No' + 'Not Set' I have something like this : TEST TestCount Month 'Yes' 123 March 'No' 432 March 'Not Set' 645 March 'Yes' 13 April 'No' 42 April 'Not Set' 45 April 'Yes' 133 May 'No' 41 May 'Not Set' 35 May .... And I would like something like this : TEST TestCount Month 'Yes' 423 March 'No' 410 March 'Yes' 154 April 'No' 192 April 'Yes' 130 May 'No' 149 May .... Can anybody help me with this, tnx in advance

    Read the article

  • Can a Snapshot transaction fail and only partially commit in a TransactionScope?

    - by Travis Brooks
    Greetings I stumbled onto a problem today that seems sort of impossible to me, but its happening...I'm calling some database code in c# that looks something like this: using(var tran = MyDataLayer.Transaction()) { MyDataLayer.ExecSproc(new SprocTheFirst(arg1, arg2)); MyDataLayer.CallSomethingThatEventuallyDoesLinqToSql(arg1, argEtc); tran.Commit(); } I've simplified this a bit for posting, but whats going on is MyDataLayer.Transaction() makes a TransactionScope with the IsolationLevel set to Snapshot and TransactionScopeOption set to Required. This code gets called hundreds of times a day, and almost always works perfectly. However after reviewing some data I discovered there are a handful of records created by "SprocTheFirst" but no corresponding data from "CallSomethingThatEventuallyDoesLinqToSql". The only way that records should exist in the tables I'm looking at is from SprocTheFirst, and its only ever called in this one function, so if its called and succeeded then I would expect CallSomethingThatEventuallyDoesLinqToSql would get called and succeed because its all in the same TransactionScope. Its theoretically possible that some other dev mucked around in the DB, but I don't think they have. We also log all exceptions, and I can find nothing unusual happening around the time that the records from SprocTheFirst were created. So, is it possible that a transaction, or more properly a declarative TransactionScope, with Snapshot isolation level can fail somehow and only partially commit?

    Read the article

  • Linq 2 SQL Grouping Question

    - by Jack Marchetti
    var groups = from p in dc.Pool join pm in dc.PoolMembers on p.ID equals pm.PoolID group p by p.Group into grp select new { grp.ID }; This isn't working. Basically I want to do the grouping, and then select certain columns, but when I do select new { grp. } I get no intellisense, so I'm obviously doing something wrong. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2005: Insert a row in a table and update the same row

    - by vikas
    eg:table pkey --guid annualpay datefrom dateto--if null means current record percentannualincrease percent annual increase will be calculated only if there is a difference in newly inserted and previously existing last differing value. percentannualincrease = ([newannualpay-just previous pay(if different from current)]/newannualpay)*100 eg newid(),5000,today,null,0--very first row newid(),5000,today+1,null(*),0 newid,5500,today+2,null(*),?????????????--> need to be calculated before insert *--insert will close the previous record by updating dateto=null to todays date How can I do this stuff in a trigger???

    Read the article

  • Stored Procedure IDENTITY_INSERT

    - by Jacob
    I'm recently change my data table, I remove column and add a new column that define as identity = True and identity seed = 1, identity increment = 1. When i tried to insert data to this table by STORE PROCEDURE i get this exception: An explicit value for the identity column in table 'AirConditioner' can only be specified when a column list is used and IDENTITY_INSERT is ON. I saw that i need to add this lines: SET IDENTITY_INSERT [dbo].[AirConditioner] ON and finally OFF I added and its still throw an exception... My store procedure is attached as a picture

    Read the article

  • Simple calculation in SQL Server

    - by meep
    I got a distance field in my database that stores the distance traveled on a specific route. I need to select all the distance fields and plus them together, then returning the result from my stored procedure. How can this be done?

    Read the article

  • Strange LINQ to SQL Behavior

    - by mcass20
    What is wrong with the last query? Is it a bug or am I missing something? This query returns 2 records (correct): query = query.Where(Log => SqlMethods.Like(Log.FormattedMessage, "%<key>Name</key><value>David</value>%")); This query returns 2 records (correct): query = query.Where(Log => SqlMethods.Like(Log.FormattedMessage, "%<key>Name</key><value>%David%</value>%")); This query returns 0 records (correct): query = query.Where(Log => SqlMethods.Like(Log.FormattedMessage, "%<key>Name</key><value>av</value>%")); This query returns 2 records (correct): query = query.Where(Log => SqlMethods.Like(Log.FormattedMessage, "%<key>Name</key><value>%av%</value>%")); This query returns 0 records (correct): query = query.Where(Log => SqlMethods.Like(Log.FormattedMessage, "%<key>Name</key><value>v</value>%")); This query returns 15 records (incorrect, should return 2): query = query.Where(Log => SqlMethods.Like(Log.FormattedMessage, "%<key>Name</key><value>%v%</value>%"));

    Read the article

  • SSIS Null Value Questions

    - by Saobi
    I have a table with 5 string columns, all can be NULLs. After I read the data from this table, I want to convert any null values into empty strings. The reason is that I need to compare these columns with columns in another table of the same schema (using conditional split), and null values would cause the comparison to evaluate to NULL. Is there any functionality in SSIS that allows me to convert NULL's to empty strings, or just not having to deal with NULL's at all?

    Read the article

  • integrity Constraints on a table.

    - by Dinesh
    See this sample schema Passenger(id PK, Name) Plane(id PK, capacity, type); Flight(id PK, planeId FK(Plane), flightDate, StartLocation, destination) CREATE TABLE Reservation(PassengerId, flightId, PRIMARY KEY (passengerId, flightId), FOREIGN KEY (passengerId) REFERENCES Passenger, FOREIGN KEY (flightId) REFERENCES Flight); I need to define an integrity constraint that enforces the restriction that the number of passengers on a plane cannot exceed the plane’s capacity. I have tried and achieved so far is this. CREATE TABLE Reservation( passengerId INTEGER, flightId INTEGER, PRIMARY KEY (passengerId, flightId), FOREIGN KEY (passengerId) REFERENCES Passenger, FOREIGN KEY (flightId) REFERENCES Flight, Constraint check1 check(Not Exists(select * from Flight s, (select count(*) as totalRes from Reservation group by flightId) t where t.totalRes > s.capacity ) ) ); I am not sure i am doing in right way or not. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Use Linq to SQL to generate sales report

    - by Richard Reddy
    I currently have the following code to generate a sales report over the last 30 days. I'd like to know if it would be possible to use linq to generate this report in one step instead of the rather basic loop I have here. For my requirement, every day needs to return a value to me so if there are no sales for any day then a 0 is returned. Any of the Sum linq examples out there don't explain how it would be possible to include a where filter so I am confused on how to get the total amount per day, or a 0 if no sales, for the last days I pass through. Thanks for your help, Rich //setup date ranges to use DateTime startDate = DateTime.Now.AddDays(-29); DateTime endDate = DateTime.Now.AddDays(1); TimeSpan startTS = new TimeSpan(0, 0, 0); TimeSpan endTS = new TimeSpan(23, 59, 59); using (var dc = new DataContext()) { //get database sales from 29 days ago at midnight to the end of today var salesForDay = dc.Orders.Where(b => b.OrderDateTime > Convert.ToDateTime(startDate.Date + startTS) && b.OrderDateTime <= Convert.ToDateTime(endDate.Date + endTS)); //loop through each day and sum up the total orders, if none then set to 0 while (startDate != endDate) { decimal totalSales = 0m; DateTime startDay = startDate.Date + startTS; DateTime endDay = startDate.Date + endTS; foreach (var sale in salesForDay.Where(b => b.OrderDateTime > startDay && b.OrderDateTime <= endDay)) { totalSales += (decimal)sale.OrderPrice; } Response.Write("From Date: " + startDay + " - To Date: " + endDay + ". Sales: " + String.Format("{0:0.00}", totalSales) + "<br>"); //move to next day startDate = startDate.AddDays(1); } }

    Read the article

  • Fill in missing values in a SELECT statement

    - by benjamin button
    If i have a table with two fields.customer id and order. let's say i have in total order ID 1,2,3,4 all the customer can have all the four orders.like below 1234 1 1234 2 1234 3 1234 4 3245 3 3245 4 5436 2 5436 4 you can see above that 3245 customer doesnt have order id 1 and 2. how could i print in the query output like 3245 1 3245 2 5436 1 5436 3 EDIT: i dont have order table but i have list of order's like we can hard code it in the query(1,2,3,4) i dont have an orders table.

    Read the article

  • SQL LIKE question

    - by user176121
    I was wondering if there's a drawback (other than bad practice) to using something like this SELECT * FROM my_table WHERE id LIKE '1'; where id is an integer. I know you're supposed to use id=1 but I am writing a java program and if everything can use LIKE it'll be a lot easier for me. Also, so far, everything works fine; I get the correct query results, so if there is no drawback I will continue doing it like this. edit: I am using MySQL.

    Read the article

  • sql query without subquery

    - by user1285737
    I need to rewrite this query and I'm not allowed to use a subquery. I need to select the name and color of the parts that are heavier than the wheel. SELECT name, color FROM parts WHERE weight > (SELECT weight FROM parts WHERE name="wheel"); This is the table: PARTS ID NAME COLOR WEIGHT 1 wheel black 100 2 tire black 50 3 gear red 20 Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Multiple column sorting (SQL SERVER 2005)

    - 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 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 I already solved tye problem by the folowing program Select x1.col1 ,x2.col2 ,x3.col3 ,x4.col4 ,x5.col5 From (Select Row_Number() Over(Order By col1) rn1, col1 From @t)x1 Join(Select Row_Number() Over(Order By col2) rn2, col2 From @t)x2 On x1.rn1=x2.rn2 Join(Select Row_Number() Over(Order By col3) rn3, col3 From @t)x3 On x1.rn1=x3.rn3 Join(Select Row_Number() Over(Order By col4) rn4, col4 From @t)x4 On x1.rn1=x4.rn4 Join(Select Row_Number() Over(Order By col5) rn5, col5 From @t)x5 On x1.rn1=x5.rn5 But I am not happy with this solution. Is there any better way to achieve the same? (Using set based approach) If so, could any one please show an example. Thanks

    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 | 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348  | Next Page >