Search Results

Search found 31328 results on 1254 pages for 'sql join'.

Page 360/1254 | < Previous Page | 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367  | Next Page >

  • Where do objects merge/join data in a 3-tier model?

    - by BerggreenDK
    Its probarbly a simple 3-tier problem. I just want to make sure we use the best practice for this and I am not that familiary with the structures yet. We have the 3 tiers: GUI: ASP.NET for Presentation-layer (first platform) BAL: Business-layer will be handling the logic on a webserver in C#, so we both can use it for webforms/MVC + webservices DAL: LINQ to SQL in the Data-layer, returning BusinessObjects not LINQ. DB: The SQL will be Microsoft SQL-server/Express (havent decided yet). Lets think of setup where we have a database of [Persons]. They can all have multiple [Address]es and we have a complete list of all [PostalCode] and corresponding citynames etc. The deal is that we have joined a lot of details from other tables. {Relations}/[tables] [Person]:1 --- N:{PersonAddress}:M --- 1:[Address] [Address]:N --- 1:[PostalCode] Now we want to build the DAL for Person. How should the PersonBO look and when does the joins occure? Is it a business-layer problem to fetch all citynames and possible addressses pr. Person? or should the DAL complete all this before returning the PersonBO to the BAL ? Class PersonBO { public int ID {get;set;} public string Name {get;set;} public List<AddressBO> {get;set;} // Question #1 } // Q1: do we retrieve the objects before returning the PersonBO and should it be an Array instead? or is this totally wrong for n-tier/3-tier?? Class AddressBO { public int ID {get;set;} public string StreetName {get;set;} public int PostalCode {get;set;} // Question #2 } // Q2: do we make the lookup or just leave the PostalCode for later lookup? Can anyone explain in what order to pull which objects? Constructive criticism is very welcome. :o)

    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

  • getting sql records

    - by droidus
    when i run this code, it returns the topic fine... $query = mysql_query("SELECT topic FROM question WHERE id = '$id'"); if(mysql_num_rows($query) > 0) { $row = mysql_fetch_array($query) or die(mysql_error()); $topic = $row['topic']; } but when I change it to this, it doesn't run at all. why is this happening? $query = mysql_query("SELECT topic, lock FROM question WHERE id = '$id'"); if(mysql_num_rows($query) > 0) { $row = mysql_fetch_array($query) or die(mysql_error()); $topic = $row['topic']; $lockedThread = $row['lock']; echo "here: " . $lockedThread; }

    Read the article

  • sql insert query needed

    - by masfenix
    Hey guys, so I have two tables. They are pictured below. I have a master table "all_reports". And a user table "user list". The master table may have users that do not exist in the user list. I need to add them to the user list. The master table may have duplicates in them (check picture). The master list does not contain all the information that the user list requires (no manager, no HR status, no department.. again check picture).

    Read the article

  • Choosing proper database for a few users application

    - by tomo
    Requirements: tiny WinForms client app (C# 4.0, WinForms or WPF) a few users working simultinausly no database service at all - the whole engine as *.DLLs inside client apps database available as shared folder on one computer at least simple concurrrency checks compatible with nHibernate or EntityFramework / NET 4.0 backup as simple as copying files from shared folder - assuming no running clients at the moment no stored procedures/triggers required data size - a few tables and a few thousands rows after 2 years Nice to have: user access rights encrypted data I'm trying to choose between: MS Access SqlLite SqlServer Compact Edition. Can you recommend which one should be the best for these requirements?

    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 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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 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 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

< Previous Page | 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367  | Next Page >