Search Results

Search found 28024 results on 1121 pages for 'sql 2014'.

Page 344/1121 | < Previous Page | 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351  | Next Page >

  • heirarchial data from self referencing table in tree form

    - by Beta033
    Ii looks like this has been asked and answered in all the simple cases, excluding the one that i'm having trouble with. I've tried using a recursive CTE to generate this, however maybe a cursor would be better? or maybe a set of recursive functions will do the trick? Can this be done in a cte? consider the following table PrimaryKey ParentKey 1 NULL 2 1 3 6 4 7 5 2 6 1 7 NULL should yield PK 1 -2 --5 -6 --3 7 -4 where the number of - marks equal the depth, my primary difficulty is the ordering.

    Read the article

  • SQL CASE Question

    - by docsql
    Hiya, I dont know if this can be done but i'd though i'd ask. What I want to do is have a case statement query and if a 1 begin another action. if 0 dont do anything. For Example select CASE WHEN client.deathofdeath = yes THEN 1 do another select in here (which is another table) Else 0 End AS DeathDate From Client client Can this be done?

    Read the article

  • Unexpected behaviour of Order by clause

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

    Read the article

  • Sql server 2008 query

    - by Prashant
    I am trying to implement versioning of data I have two tables Client and Address. I have to display in the UI, the various updates in the order in which they were made but with the correct client version so, Client Table Address Table ---------- ---------- Client Version Modified Date Address Version ModifiedDate CV1 T1 AV1 T2 CV2 T4 AV2 T3 CV3 T5 My result should be CV1 AV1 (first version) CV1 AV2 (as AV1 was updated at T3) CV2 AV2 (as Client got updated to CV2 at T4) CV3 AV2 (As client has got updated at T5)

    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

  • Keeping DB Table sorted using multi-field formula (Microsoft SQL)

    - by user298167
    Hello Everybody. I have a Job Table which has two interesting columns: Creation Date and Importance (high - 3, medium 2, low - 1). Job's priority calculated like this: Priority = Importance * (time passed since creation). The problem is, Every time I would like to pick 200 jobs with highest priority, I dont want to resort the table. Is there a way to keep rows sorted? I was also thinking about having three tables one for High, Medium and Low and then sort those by Creation Date. Thanks

    Read the article

  • SQL for total count and count within that where condition is true

    - by twmulloy
    Hello, I have a single user table and I'm trying to come up with a query that returns the total count of all users grouped by date along with the total count of users grouped by date who are of a specific client. Here is what I have thus far, where there's the total count of users grouped by date, but can't seem to figure out how to get the count of those users where user.client_id = x SELECT user.created, COUNT(user.id) AS overall_count FROM user GROUP BY DATE(user.created) trying for a row result like this: [created] => 2010-05-15 19:59:30 [overall_count] => 10 [client_count] => (some fraction of overall count, the number of users where user.client_id = x grouped by date)

    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 for sorting boolean column as true, null, false

    - by petehern
    My table has three boolean fields: f1, f2, f3. If I do SELECT * FROM table ORDER BY f1, f2, f3 the records will be sorted by these fields in the order false, true, null. I wish to order them with null in between true and false: the correct order should be true, null, false. I am using PostgreSQL.

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • SQL syntax error in Update statement VB.net

    - by Shane Fagan
    Hi, Im getting a strange syntax error when I run this in VB SQLString = "UPDATE Login SET Password = '" + PasswordTextBox.Text + "'" SQLString += " WHERE UserName = '" + UserNameTextBox.Text + "'" The Username is checked before getting to this part and is definitly in the db. It gives an exception saying syntax error in update statement. Anyone have any ideas whats wrong?

    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

  • Timeout in LINQ to SQL inserting millions of records

    - by Bas
    I'm inserting approximently 3 million records in a database using this solution. Eventually when the application has been inserting records for a while (my last run lasted around 4 hours), it gives a timeout with the following SqlException: "SqlExcepetion: Timeout expired. The timeoutperiod elapsed prior to completion of the operation or the server is not responding." What's the best way to handle this exception? Is there a way to prevent this from happening or should I catch the exception? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • oracle sql query to list all the dates of previous month

    - by Suresh S
    Guys i have a requirement to list all the dates of the previous month like below 20101201 20101202 20101203 20101204 20101205 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 20101231 kindly let me know if any better way to do than this query. select TO_CHAR(TRUNC(SYSDATE,'MM')-1,'YYYYMMDD')-(level-1) as EACH_DATE from dual A connect by level < (TO_NUMBER(TO_CHAR(TRUNC(SYSDATE,'MM')-1,'DD'))+1) Also please let me know the problem with this query it says "missing right parenthesis" SELECT /*+ PARALLEL (A,8) */ /*+ DRIVING_STATE */ TO_CHAR(TRUNC(TRUNC(SYSDATE,'MM')-1,'MM'),'MONYYYY') "MONTH", TYPE AS "TRAFF", COLUMN, A_COUN AS "A_COUNT",COST FROM DATA_P B WHERE EXISTS ( select TO_NUMBER(TO_CHAR(TRUNC(SYSDATE,'MM')-1,'YYYYMMDD')-(level-1)) EACH_DATE from dual A connect by level < TO_NUMBER(TO_CHAR(TRUNC(SYSDATE,'MM')-1,'DD')+1) WHERE A.EACH_DATE = B.DATE order by EACH_DATE ASC )

    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

< Previous Page | 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351  | Next Page >