Search Results

Search found 35121 results on 1405 pages for 'sql stored procedure'.

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 360/1405 | < Previous Page | 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367  | Next Page >

  • Date range intersection in SQL

    - by Will
    I have a table where each row has a start and stop date-time. These can be arbitrarily short or long spans. I want to query the sum duration of the intersection of all rows with two start and stop date-times. How can you do this in MySQL? Or do you have to select the rows that intersect the query start and stop times, then calculate the actual overlap of each row and sum it client-side?

    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

  • php, sql selection

    - by cosy
    I have a stupid question, I have this table : id_product name value 1 price 10-20 1 type computer 2 price 20-30 3 price 100-200 and I want to select from this table GROUP BY id_product and ORDER BY value WHERE name='price' how can i do this? Thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • 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

  • Invalid SQL Query

    - by svovaf
    I have the next query that in my opinion is a valid one, but I keep getting error telling me that there is a proble on "WHERE em.p4 = ue.p3" - Unknown column 'ue.p3' in 'where clause'. This is the query: SELECT DISTINCT ue.p3 FROM table1 AS ue INNER JOIN table2 AS e ON ue.p3 = e.p3 WHERE EXISTS( SELECT 1 FROM ( SELECT (COUNT(*) >= 1) AS MinMutual FROM table4 AS smm WHERE smm.p1 IN ( SELECT sem.p3 FROM table3 AS sem INNER JOIN table2 AS em ON sem.p3 = em.p3 WHERE em.p4 = ue.p3 AND sem.type = 'friends' AND em.p2 = 'normal' ) AND smm.p5 IN ( 15000,15151 ) ) AS Mutual WHERE Mutual.MinMutual = TRUE) LIMIT 11 If I execute the sub-query which is inside the EXISTS function, everything is O.K. PLEASE HELP!

    Read the article

  • Is adding a bit mask to all tables in a database useful?

    - by Tom
    A colleague is adding a bit mask to all our database tables. In theory this is so we can track certain properties of each row across the entire system. For example... Is the row shipped with the system or added by the client once they've started using the system Has the row been deleted from the table (soft deletes) Is the row a default value within a set of rows Is this a good idea? Are there other uses where this approach would be beneficial? My preference is these properties are obviously important, and having a dedicated column for each property is justified to make what is happening clearer to fellow developers.

    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 Grouping with multiple joins combining results incorrectly

    - by Matt
    Hi I'm having trouble with my query combining records when it shouldn't. I have two tables Authors and Publications, they are related by Publication ID in a many to many relationship. As each author can have many publications and each publication has many Authors. I want my query to return every publication for a set of authors and include the ID of each of the other authors that have contributed to the publication grouped into one field. (I am working with mySQL) I have tried to picture it graphically below Table: authors Table:publications AuthorID | PublicationID PublicationID | PublicationName 1 | 123 123 | A 1 | 456 456 | B 2 | 123 789 | C 2 | 789 3 | 123 3 | 456 I want my result set to be the following AuthorID | PublicationID | PublicationName | AllAuthors 1 | 123 | A | 1,2,3 1 | 456 | B | 1,3 2 | 123 | A | 1,2,3 2 | 789 | C | 2 3 | 123 | A | 1,2,3 3 | 456 | B | 1,3 This is my query Select Author1.AuthorID, Publications.PublicationID, Publications.PubName, GROUP_CONCAT(TRIM(Author2.AuthorID)ORDER BY Author2.AuthorID ASC)AS 'AuthorsAll' FROM Authors AS Author1 LEFT JOIN Authors AS Author2 ON Author1.PublicationID = Author2.PublicationID INNER JOIN Publications ON Author1.PublicationID = Publications.PublicationID WHERE Author1.AuthorID ="1" OR Author1.AuthorID ="2" OR Author1.AuthorID ="3" GROUP BY Author2.PublicationID But it returns the following instead AuthorID | PublicationID | PublicationName | AllAuthors 1 | 123 | A | 1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,3 1 | 456 | B | 1,1,3,3 2 | 789 | C | 2 It does deliver the desired output when there is only one AuhorID in the where statement. I have not been able to figure it out, does anyone know where i'm going wrong?

    Read the article

  • T-SQL: How to make a positive value turn into the equivalent negative value (e.g "10.00" to "-10.00"

    - by RPM1984
    Ok so i have a DECIMAL field called "Score". (e.g 10.00) Now, in my SP, i want to increment/decrement the value of this field in update transactions. So i might want to do this: SET @NewScore = @CurrentScore + @Points Where @Points is the value im going to increment/decrement. Now lets say @Points = 10.00. In a certain scenario, i want 10.00 to become -10.00 So the statement would be translated to: SET @NewScore = @CurrentScore + -10.00 How can i do that? I know its a strange question, but basically i want that statement to be dynamic, in that i dont want to have a different statement for incrementing/decrementing the value. I just want something like this: SET @Points = 10.00 IF @ActivityBeingPerformedIsFoo BEGIN -- SET @Points to be equivalent negative value, (e.g -10.00) END SET @NewScore = @CurrentScore + @Points

    Read the article

  • how to enter manual time stamp in get date ()

    - by Arunachalam
    how to enter manual time stamp in get date () ? select conver(varchar(10),getdate(),120) returns 2010-06-07 now i want to enter my own time stamp in this like 2010-06-07 10.00.00.000 i m using this in select * from sample table where time_stamp ='2010-06-07 10.00.00.000' since i m trying to automate this query i need the current date but i need different time stamp can it be done .

    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 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

  • 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 Server 2005 Create Table with Column Default value range

    - by Matt
    Trying to finish up some homework and ran into a issue for creating tables. How do you declare a column default for a range of numbers. Its reads: "Column Building (default to 1 but can be 1-10)" I can't seem to find ...or know where to look for this information. CREATE TABLE tblDepartment ( Department_ID int NOT NULL IDENTITY, Department_Name varchar(255) NOT NULL, Division_Name varchar(255) NOT NULL, City varchar(255) default 'spokane' NOT NULL, Building int default 1 NOT NULL, Phone varchar(255) ) I tried Building int default 1 Between 1 AND 10 NOT NULL, that didn't work out I tried Building int default 1-10, the table was created but I don't think its correct.

    Read the article

  • Round time to 5 minute nearest SQL Server

    - by Drako
    i don't know if it can be usefull to somebody but I went crazy looking for a solution and ended up doing it myself. Here is a function that (according to a date passed as parameter), returns the same date and approximate time to the nearest multiple of 5. It is a slow query, so if anyone has a better solution, it is welcome. A greeting. CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[RoundTime] (@Time DATETIME) RETURNS DATETIME AS BEGIN DECLARE @min nvarchar(50) DECLARE @val int DECLARE @hour int DECLARE @temp int DECLARE @day datetime DECLARE @date datetime SET @date = CONVERT(DATETIME, @Time, 120) SET @day = (select DATEADD(dd, 0, DATEDIFF(dd, 0, @date))) SET @hour = (select datepart(hour,@date)) SET @min = (select datepart(minute,@date)) IF LEN(@min) > 1 BEGIN SET @val = CAST(substring(@min, 2, 1) as int) END else BEGIN SET @val = CAST(substring(@min, 1, 1) as int) END IF @val <= 2 BEGIN SET @val = CAST(CAST(@min as int) - @val as int) END else BEGIN IF (@val <> 5) BEGIN SET @temp = 5 - CAST(@min%5 as int) SET @val = CAST(CAST(@min as int) + @temp as int) END IF (@val = 60) BEGIN SET @val = 0 SET @hour = @hour + 1 END IF (@hour = 24) BEGIN SET @day = DATEADD(day,1,@day) SET @hour = 0 SET @min = 0 END END RETURN CONVERT(datetime, CAST(DATEPART(YYYY, @day) as nvarchar) + '-' + CAST(DATEPART(MM, @day) as nvarchar) + '-' + CAST(DATEPART(dd, @day) as nvarchar) + ' ' + CAST(@hour as nvarchar) + ':' + CAST(@val as nvarchar), 120) END

    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

  • 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

  • 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 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

  • 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

  • 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

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