Search Results

Search found 62701 results on 2509 pages for 'sql function'.

Page 364/2509 | < Previous Page | 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • How Serializable works with insert in SQL Server 2005

    - by Spence
    G'day I think I have a misunderstanding of serializable. I have two tables (data, transaction) which I insert information into in a serializable transaction (either they are both in, or both out, but not in limbo). SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE BEGIN TRANSACTION INSERT INTO dbo.data (ID, data) VALUES (@Id, data) INSERT INTO dbo.transactions(ID, info) VALUES (@ID, @info) COMMIT TRANSACTION I have a reconcile query which checks the data table for entries where there is no transaction at read committed isolation level. INSERT INTO reconciles (ReconcileID, DataID) SELECT Reconcile = @ReconcileID, ID FROM Data WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM TRANSACTIONS WHERE data.id = transactions.id) Note that the ID is actually a composite (2 column) key, so I can't use a NOT IN operator My understanding was that the second query would exclude any values written into data without their transaction as this insert was happening at serializable and the read was occurring at read committed. I have evidence that reconcile is picking up entries

    Read the article

  • Excel VBA / SQL Union

    - by Edge
    Hi, I am trying to Join 2 seperate columns from 2 different sheets to make a longer column from which i can then use a Vlookup from. Sheet1 A, B, C, D, E, F, G Sheet2 A, B, C, D, E, F, G I want to Join(Union) Columns B from sheet1 and C from sheet2 together and find the Distinct values of the new list. I have been working on this for weeks. Thanks

    Read the article

  • SQL Agent Job - to execute as queue

    - by BINEESHTHOMAS
    I have a job which is calling 10 other jobs using sp_start_job. The job is having 10 steps, each step calling each sub jobs, When i execute the main job, i can see it started with step 1 and in a few secods it shows 'finished successfully' But the jobs take long time time, and when i see the log mechanism i have put inside , it shows the all the 10 steps are running simultaniously at the back, till it finishes after few hours. My requirement is, it should finish step 1 first and then only step2 should start. aNY HELP PLS ?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • IF statement error

    - by Jasl
    I have the following columns in TableA TableA Column1 varchar Column2 int Column3 bit I am using this statement IF Column3 = 0 SELECT Column1, Column2 FROM TableA WHERE Column2 > 200 ELSE SELECT Column1, Column2 FROM TableA WHERE Column2 < 200 But the statment does not compile. It says Invalid Column Name 'Column3'

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Update table without using cursor and on date

    - by Muhammad Kashif Nadeem
    Please copy and run following script DECLARE @Customers TABLE (CustomerId INT) DECLARE @Orders TABLE ( OrderId INT, CustomerId INT, OrderDate DATETIME ) DECLARE @Calls TABLE (CallId INT, CallTime DATETIME, CallToId INT, OrderId INT) ----------------------------------------------------------------- INSERT INTO @Customers SELECT 1 INSERT INTO @Customers SELECT 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------- INSERT INTO @Orders SELECT 10, 1, DATEADD(d, -20, GETDATE()) INSERT INTO @Orders SELECT 11, 1, DATEADD(d, -10, GETDATE()) ----------------------------------------------------------------- INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 101, DATEADD(d, -19, GETDATE()), 1, NULL INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 102, DATEADD(d, -17, GETDATE()), 1, NULL INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 103, DATEADD(d, -9, GETDATE()), 1, NULL INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 104, DATEADD(d, -6, GETDATE()), 1, NULL INSERT INTO @Calls SELECT 105, DATEADD(d, -5, GETDATE()), 1, NULL ----------------------------------------------------------------- I want to update @Calls table and need following results. I am using the following query UPDATE @Calls SET OrderId = ( CASE WHEN (s.CallTime > e.OrderDate) THEN e.OrderId END ) FROM @Calls s INNER JOIN @Orders e ON s.CallToId = e.CustomerId and the result of my query is not what I need. Requirement: As you can see there are two orders. One is on 2010-12-12 and one is on 2010-12-22. I want to update @Calls table with relevant OrderId with respect to CallTime. In short If subsequent Orders are added, and there are further calls then we assume that a new call is associated with the most recent Order Note: This is sample data so this is not the case that I always have two Orders. There might be 10+ Orders and 100+ calls. Note2 I could not find good title for this question. Please change it if you think of any better. Thanks.

    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

  • 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

  • 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 - get latest records from table where field is unique

    - by 89stevenharris
    I have a table of data as follows id status conversation_id message_id date_created 1 1 1 72 2012-01-01 00:00:00 2 2 1 87 2012-03-03 00:00:00 3 2 2 95 2012-05-05 00:00:00 I want to get all the rows from the table in date_created DESC order, but only one row per conversation_id. So in the case of the example data above, I would want to get the rows with id 2 and 3. Any advice is much appreciated.

    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 INSERT performance omitting field names?

    - by Marco Demaio
    Does anyone knows if removing the field names from an INSERT query results in some performance improvements? I mean is this: INSERT INTO table1 VALUES (value1, value2, ...) faster for DB to be accomplished rather than doing this: INSERT INTO table1 (field1, field2, ...) VALUES (value1, value2, ...) ? I know it might be probably a meaningless performance difference, but just to know.

    Read the article

  • CASE statement within WHERE statement

    - by niao
    Greetings, I would like to include CASE Statement inside my where statement as follows: SELECT a1.ROWGUID FROM Table1 a1 INNER JOIN Table2 a2 on a1.ROWGUID=a2.Table1ROWGUID WHERE a1.Title='title' AND (CASE WHEN @variable is not null THEN a1.ROWGUID in (SELECT * FROM #TempTable)) However, this 'CASE' statement does not work inside 'WHERE' statement. How can I do it correct?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371  | Next Page >