Search Results

Search found 79588 results on 3184 pages for 'sql data storage'.

Page 377/3184 | < Previous Page | 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384  | Next Page >

  • using indexer to retrieve Linq to SQL object from datastore

    - by fearofawhackplanet
    class UserDatastore : IUserDatastore { ... public IUser this[Guid userId] { get { User user = (from u in _dataContext.Users where u.Id == userId select u).FirstOrDefault(); return user; } } ... } One of the developers in our team is arguing that an indexer in the above situation is not appropriate and that a GetUser(Guid id) method should be prefered. The arguments being that: 1) We aren't indexing into an in-memory collection, the indexer is basically performing a hidden SQL query 2) Using a Guid in an indexer is bad (FxCop flagged this also) 3) Returning null from an indexer isn't normal behaviour 4) An API user generally wouldn't expect any of this behaviour I agree to an extent with (most of) these points. But I'm also inclined to argue that one of the characteristics of Linq is to abstract the database access to make it appear that you're simply working with a bunch of collections, even though the lazy evaluation paradigm means those collections aren't evaluated until you run a query over them. It doesn't seem inconsistent to me to access the datastore in the same manner as if it was a concrete in-memory collection here. Also bearing in mind this is an inherited codebase which uses this pattern extensively and consistently, is it worth the refactoring? I accept that it might have been better to use a Get method from the start, but I'm not yet convinced that it's completely incorrect to be using an indexer. I'd be interested to hear all opinions, thanks.

    Read the article

  • Core Data and NSDate

    - by Pierre
    Hi ! I read this post but I don't really understand the code... I have a core data database with an Entity and some attributes. One of them is named "myDate" and has for type NSDate. Now I want to to display each date but eliminate dates with same day-month-year and display them ascendantly . Have you got an idea? Thanks a lot !

    Read the article

  • using a JOIN in an UPDATE in SQL

    - by SDLFunTimes
    Hi, I'm having trouble formulating a legal statement to double the statuses of the suppliers (s) who have shipped (sp) more than 500 units. I've been trying: update s set s.status = s.status * 2 from s join sp on (sp.sno = s.sno) group by sno having sum(qty) > 500; however I'm getting this error from Mysql: ERROR 1064 (42000): You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'from s join sp on (sp.sno = s.sno) group by sno having sum(qty) > 500' at line 1 Does anyone have any ideas about what is wrong with this query? Here's my schema: create table s ( sno char(5) not null, sname char(20) not null, status smallint, city char(15), primary key (sno) ); create table p ( pno char(6) not null, pname char(20) not null, color char(6), weight smallint, city char(15), primary key (pno) ); create table sp ( sno char(5) not null, pno char(6) not null, qty integer not null, primary key (sno, pno) );

    Read the article

  • Speed up SQL Server Fulltext Index through Text Duplication of Non-Indexed Columns

    - by Alex
    1) I have the text fields FirstName, LastName, and City. They are fulltext indexed. 2) I also have the FK int fields AuthorId and EditorId, not fulltext indexed. A search on FirstName = 'abc' AND AuthorId = 1 will first search the entire fulltext index for 'abc', and then narrow the resultset for AuthorId = 1. This is bad because it is a huge waste of resources as the fulltext search will be performed on many records that won't be applicable. Unfortunately, to my knowledge, this can't be turned around (narrow by AuthorId first and then fulltext-search the subset that matches) because the FTS process is separate from SQL Server. Now my proposed solution that I seek feedback on: Does it make sense to create another computed column which will be included in the fulltext search which will identify the Author as text (e.g. AUTHORONE). That way I could get rid of the AuthorId restriction, and instead make it part of my fulltext search (a search for 'abc' would be 'abc' and 'AUTHORONE' - all executed as part of the fulltext search). Is this a good idea or not? Why?

    Read the article

  • LINQ to SQL and DataPager

    - by Jonathan S.
    I'm using LINQ to SQL to search a fairly large database and am unsure of the best approach to perform paging with a DataPager. I am aware of the Skip() and Take() methods and have those working properly. However, I'm unable to use the count of the results for the datapager, as they will always be the page size as determined in the Take() method. For example: var result = (from c in db.Customers where c.FirstName == "JimBob" select c).Skip(0).Take(10); This query will always return 10 or fewer results, even if there are 1000 JimBobs. As a result, the DataPager will always think there's a single page, and users aren't able to navigate across the entire result set. I've seen one online article where the author just wrote another query to get the total count and called that. Something like: int resultCount = (from c in db.Customers where c.FirstName == "JimBob" select c).Count(); and used that value for the DataPager. But I'd really rather not have to copy and paste every query into a separate call where I want to page the results for obvious reasons. Is there an easier way to do this that can be reused across multiple queries? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Remove undesired indexed keywords from Sql Server FTS Index

    - by Scott
    Could anyone tell me if SQL Server 2008 has a way to prevent keywords from being indexed that aren't really relevant to the types of searches that will be performed? For example, we have the IFilters for PDF and Word hooked in and our documents are being indexed properly as far as I can tell. These documents, however, have lots of numeric values in them that people won't really be searching for or bring back meaningful results. These are still being indexed and creating lots of entries in the full text catalog. Basically we are trying to optimize our search engine in any way we can and assumed all these unnecessary entries couldn't be helping performance. I want my catalog to consist of alphabetic keywords only. The current iFilters work better than I would be able to write in the time I have but it just has more than I need. This is an example of some of the terms from sys.dm_fts_index_keywords_by_document that I want out: $1,000, $100, $250, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 129, 13.1, 14, 14.12, 145, 15, 16.2, 16.4, 18, 18.1, 18.2, 18.3, 18.4, 18.5 These are some examples from the same management view that I think are desirable for keeping and searching on: above, accordingly, accounts, add, addition, additional, additive Any help would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • C# and SQL - sub select from a table parameter

    - by Dr.HappyPants
    Below is a code snippet for passing a table as a parameter to a query that can be used in Sql Server 2008. I'm confused though about the "SELECT id.custid FROM @custids id". Why does it use id.custid and @custids id...? private static void datatable_example() { string [] custids = {"ALFKI", "BONAP", "CACTU", "FRANK"}; DataTable custid_list = new DataTable(); custid_list.Columns.Add("custid", typeof(String)); foreach (string custid in custids) { DataRow dr = custid_list.NewRow(); dr["custid"] = custid; custid_list.Rows.Add(dr); } using(SqlConnection cn = setup_connection()) { using(SqlCommand cmd = cn.CreateCommand()) { cmd.CommandText = @"SELECT C.CustomerID, C.CompanyName FROM Northwind.dbo.Customers C WHERE C.CustomerID IN (SELECT id.custid FROM @custids id)"; cmd.CommandType = CommandType.Text; cmd.Parameters.Add("@custids", SqlDbType.Structured); cmd.Parameters["@custids"].Direction = ParameterDirection.Input; cmd.Parameters["@custids"].TypeName = "custid_list_tbltype"; cmd.Parameters["@custids"].Value = custid_list; using (SqlDataAdapter da = new SqlDataAdapter(cmd)) using (DataSet ds = new DataSet()) { da.Fill(ds); PrintDataSet(ds); } } }

    Read the article

  • MySQL query to view vertical data

    - by wenkhairu
    I have MySQL data that looks like this: +----------------------------------------+ |Name | kode | jum | +----------------------------------------+ | aman |kode1 | 2 | | aman |kode2 | 1 | | jhon |kode1 | 4 | | amir |kode2 | 4 | +--------------------+-----------+-------+ How can I make the table look like this one, using a MySQL query? kode1 kode2 count aman 2 1 3 jhon 0 4 4 amir 0 4 4

    Read the article

  • Select highest rated, oldest track

    - by Blair McMillan
    I have several tables: CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Tracks]( [Id] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [Artist_Id] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [Album_Id] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [Title] [nvarchar](255) NOT NULL, [Length] [int] NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_Tracks_1] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [Id] ASC )WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] CREATE TABLE [dbo].[TrackHistory]( [Id] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [Track_Id] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [Datetime] [datetime] NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_TrackHistory] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [Id] ASC )WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] INSERT INTO [cooltunes].[dbo].[TrackHistory] ([Track_Id] ,[Datetime]) VALUES ("335294B0-735E-4E2C-8389-8326B17CE813" ,GETDATE()) CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Ratings]( [Id] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [Track_Id] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [User_Id] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [Rating] [tinyint] NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_Ratings] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [Id] ASC )WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] INSERT INTO [cooltunes].[dbo].[Ratings] ([Track_Id] ,[User_Id] ,[Rating]) VALUES ("335294B0-735E-4E2C-8389-8326B17CE813" ,"C7D62450-8BE6-40F6-80F1-A539DA301772" ,1) Users User_Id|Guid Other fields Links between the tables are pretty obvious. TrackHistory has each track added to it as a row whenever it is played ie. a track will appear in there many times. Ratings value will either be 1 or -1. What I'm trying to do is select the Track with the highest rating, that is more than 2 hours old, and if there is a duplicate rating for a track (ie a track receives 6 +1 ratings and 1 - rating, giving that track a total rating of 5, another track also has a total rating of 5), the track that was last played the longest ago should be returned. (If all tracks have been played within the last 2 hours, no rows should be returned) I'm getting somewhere doing each part individually using the link above, SUM(Value) and GROUP BY Track_Id, but I'm having trouble putting it all together. Hopefully someone with a bit more (MS)SQL knowledge will be able to help me. Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to create Query syntax for multiple DataTable for implementing IN operator of Sql Server

    - by Shantanu Gupta
    I have fetched 3-4 tables by executing my stored procedure. Now they resides on my dataset. I have to maintain this dataset for multiple forms and I am not doing any DML operation on this dataset. Now this dataset contains 4 tables out of which i have to fetch some records to display data. Data stored in tables are in form of one to many relationship. i.e. In case of transactions. N records per record. Then these N records are further mapped to M records of 3rd table. Table 1 MAP_ID GUEST_ID DEPARTMENT_ID PARENT_ID PREFERENCE_ID -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- 19 61 1 1 5 14 61 1 5 15 15 61 2 4 10 18 61 2 13 23 17 61 2 20 26 16 61 40 40 41 20 62 1 5 14 21 62 1 5 15 22 62 1 6 16 24 62 2 3 4 23 62 2 4 9 27 62 2 13 23 25 62 2 20 24 26 62 2 20 25 28 63 1 1 5 29 63 1 1 8 34 63 1 5 15 30 63 2 4 10 33 63 2 4 11 31 63 2 13 23 32 63 40 40 41 35 65 1 NULL 1 36 65 1 NULL 1 38 68 2 13 22 37 68 2 20 25 39 68 2 23 27 40 92 1 NULL 1 Table 2 Department_ID Department_Name Parent_Id Parent_Name -------------------- ----------------------- --------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Food 1, 5, 6 Food, North Indian, South Indian 2 Lodging 3, 4, 13, 20, 23 Room, Floor, Non Air Conditioned, With Balcony, Without Balcony 40 New 40 SubNew TABLE 3 Parent_Id Parent_Name Preference_ID Preference_Name -------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------- ------------------- NULL NULL NULL NULL 1 Food 5, 8 North Indian, Italian 3 Room 4 Floor 4 Floor 9, 10, 11 First, Second, Third 5 North Indian 14, 15 X, Y 6 South Indian 16 Dosa 13 Non Air Conditioned 22, 23 With Balcony, Without Balcony 20 With Balcony 24, 25, 26 Mountain View, Ocean View, Garden View 23 Without Balcony 27 Mountain View 40 New 41 SubNew I have these 3 tables that are related in some fashion like this. Table 1 will be the master for these 2 tables i.e. table 2 and table 3. I need to query on them as SELECT Department_Id, Department_Name, Parent_Name FROM Table2 WHERE Department_Id in ( SELECT Department_Id FROM Table1 WHERE guest_id=65 ) SELECT Parent_Id, Parent_Name, Preference_Name FROM Table3 WHERE PARENT_ID in ( SELECT parent_id FROM Table1 WHERE guest_id=65 ) Now I need to use these queries on DataTables. So I am using Query Syntax for this and reached up to this point. var dept_list= from dept in DtMapGuestDepartment.AsEnumerable() where dept.Field<long>("PK_GUEST_ID")==long.Parse(63) select dept; This should give me the list of all departments that has guest id =63 Now I want to select all departments_name and parent_name from Table 2 where guest_id=63 i.e. departments that i fetched above. This same case will be followed for Table3. Please suggest how to do this. Thanks for keeping up patience for reading my question.

    Read the article

  • SQL with Regular Expressions vs Indexes with Logical Merging Functions

    - by geeko
    Hello Lads, I am trying to develop a complex textual search engine. I have thousands of textual pages from many books. I need to search pages that contain specified complex logical criterias. These criterias can contain virtually any compination of the following: A: Full words. B: Word roots (semilar to stems; i.e. all words with certain key letters). C: Word templates (in some languages are filled in certain templates to form various part of speech such as adjactives, past/present verbs...). D: Logical connectives: AND/OR/XOR/NOT/IF/IFF and parentheses to state priorities. Now, would it be faster to have the pages' full text in database (not indexed) and search though them all using SQL and Regular Expressions ? Or would it be better to construct indexes of word/root/template-page-location tuples. Hence, we can boost searching for individual words/roots/templates. However, it gets tricky as we interdouce logical connectives into our query. I thought of doing the following steps in such cases: 1: Seperately search for each individual words/roots/templates in the specified query. 2: On priority bases, we merge two result lists (from step 1) at a time depedning on the logical connective For example, if we are searching for "he AND (is OR was)": 1: We shall search for "he", "is" and "was" seperately and get result lists for each word. 2: Merge the result lists of "is" and "was" using the merging function OR-MERGE 3: Merge the merged result list from the OR-MERGE function with the one of "he" using the merging function AND-MERGE The result of step 3 is then returned as the result of the specified query. What do you think gurues ? Which is faster ? Any better ideas ? Thank you all in advance.

    Read the article

  • Get percentiles of data-set with group by month

    - by Cylindric
    Hello, I have a SQL table with a whole load of records that look like this: | Date | Score | + -----------+-------+ | 01/01/2010 | 4 | | 02/01/2010 | 6 | | 03/01/2010 | 10 | ... | 16/03/2010 | 2 | I'm plotting this on a chart, so I get a nice line across the graph indicating score-over-time. Lovely. Now, what I need to do is include the average score on the chart, so we can see how that changes over time, so I can simply add this to the mix: SELECT YEAR(SCOREDATE) 'Year', MONTH(SCOREDATE) 'Month', MIN(SCORE) MinScore, AVG(SCORE) AverageScore, MAX(SCORE) MaxScore FROM SCORES GROUP BY YEAR(SCOREDATE), MONTH(SCOREDATE) ORDER BY YEAR(SCOREDATE), MONTH(SCOREDATE) That's no problem so far. The problem is, how can I easily calculate the percentiles at each time-period? I'm not sure that's the correct phrase. What I need in total is: A line on the chart for the score (easy) A line on the chart for the average (easy) A line on the chart showing the band that 95% of the scores occupy (stumped) It's the third one that I don't get. I need to calculate the 5% percentile figures, which I can do singly: SELECT MAX(SubQ.SCORE) FROM (SELECT TOP 45 PERCENT SCORE FROM SCORES WHERE YEAR(SCOREDATE) = 2010 AND MONTH(SCOREDATE) = 1 ORDER BY SCORE ASC) AS SubQ SELECT MIN(SubQ.SCORE) FROM (SELECT TOP 45 PERCENT SCORE FROM SCORES WHERE YEAR(SCOREDATE) = 2010 AND MONTH(SCOREDATE) = 1 ORDER BY SCORE DESC) AS SubQ But I can't work out how to get a table of all the months. | Date | Average | 45% | 55% | + -----------+---------+-----+-----+ | 01/01/2010 | 13 | 11 | 15 | | 02/01/2010 | 10 | 8 | 12 | | 03/01/2010 | 5 | 4 | 10 | ... | 16/03/2010 | 7 | 7 | 9 | At the moment I'm going to have to load this lot up into my app, and calculate the figures myself. Or run a larger number of individual queries and collate the results.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server insert performance

    - by Jose
    I have an insert query that gets generated like this INSERT INTO InvoiceDetail (LegacyId,InvoiceId,DetailTypeId,Fee,FeeTax,Investigatorid,SalespersonId,CreateDate,CreatedById,IsChargeBack,Expense,RepoAgentId,PayeeName,ExpensePaymentId,AdjustDetailId) VALUES(1,1,2,1500.0000,0.0000,163,1002,'11/30/2001 12:00:00 AM',1116,0,550.0000,850,NULL,@ExpensePay1,NULL); DECLARE @InvDetail1 INT; SET @InvDetail1 = (SELECT @@IDENTITY); This query is generated for only 110K rows. It takes 30 minutes for all of these query's to execute I checked the query plan and the largest % nodes are A Clustered Index Insert at 57% query cost which has a long xml that I don't want to post. A Table Spool which is 38% query cost <RelOp AvgRowSize="35" EstimateCPU="5.01038E-05" EstimateIO="0" EstimateRebinds="0" EstimateRewinds="0" EstimateRows="1" LogicalOp="Eager Spool" NodeId="80" Parallel="false" PhysicalOp="Table Spool" EstimatedTotalSubtreeCost="0.0466109"> <OutputList> <ColumnReference Database="[SkipPro]" Schema="[dbo]" Table="[InvoiceDetail]" Column="InvoiceId" /> <ColumnReference Database="[SkipPro]" Schema="[dbo]" Table="[InvoiceDetail]" Column="InvestigatorId" /> <ColumnReference Column="Expr1054" /> <ColumnReference Column="Expr1055" /> </OutputList> <Spool PrimaryNodeId="3" /> </RelOp> So my question is what is there that I can do to improve the speed of this thing? I already run ALTER TABLE TABLENAME NOCHECK CONSTRAINTS ALL Before the queries and then ALTER TABLE TABLENAME NOCHECK CONSTRAINTS ALL after the queries. And that didn't shave off hardly anything off of the time. Know I am running these queries in a .NET application that uses a SqlCommand object to send the query. I then tried to output the sql commands to a file and then execute it using sqlcmd, but I wasn't getting any updates on how it was doing, so I gave up on that. Any ideas or hints or help?

    Read the article

  • SQL Outer Join on a bunch of Inner Joined results

    - by Matthew Frederick
    I received some great help on joining a table to itself and am trying to take it to the next level. The SQL below is from the help but with my addition of the select line beginning with COUNT, the inner join to the Recipient table, and the Group By. SELECT Event.EventID AS EventID, Event.EventDate AS EventDateUTC, Participant2.ParticipantID AS AwayID, Participant1.ParticipantID AS HostID, COUNT(Recipient.ChallengeID) AS AllChallenges FROM Event INNER JOIN Matchup Matchup1 ON (Event.EventID = Matchup1.EventID) INNER JOIN Matchup Matchup2 ON (Event.EventID = Matchup2.EventID) INNER JOIN Participant Participant1 ON (Matchup1.Host = 1 AND Matchup1.ParticipantID = Participant1.ParticipantID) INNER JOIN Participant Participant2 ON (Matchup2.Host != 1 AND Matchup2.ParticipantID = Participant2.ParticipantID) INNER JOIN Recipient ON (Event.EventID = Recipient.EventID) WHERE Event.CategoryID = 1 AND Event.Resolved = 0 AND Event.Type = 1 GROUP BY Recipient.ChallengeID ORDER BY EventDateUTC ASC My goal is to get a count of how many rows in the Recipient table match the EventID in Event. This code works fine except that I also want to get results where there are 0 matching rows in Recipient. I want 15 rows (= the number of events) but I get 2 rows, one with a count of 1 and one with a count of 2 (which is appropriate for an inner join as there are 3 rows in the sample Recipient table, one for one EventID and two for another EventID). I thought that either a LEFT join or an OUTER join was what I was looking for, but I know that I'm not quite getting how the tables are actually joined. A LEFT join there gives me one more row with 0, which happens to be EventID 1 (first thing in the table), but that's all. Errors advise me that I can't just change that INNER join to an OUTER. I tried some parenthesizing and some subselects and such but can't seem to make it work.

    Read the article

  • sql foreign keys

    - by Paul Est
    I was create tables with the syntax in phpmyadmin: DROP TABLE IF EXISTS users; DROP TABLE IF EXISTS info; CREATE TABLE users ( user_id int unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment, email varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', pwd varchar(32) NOT NULL default '', isAdmin int(1) unsigned NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (user_id) ) TYPE=INNODB; CREATE TABLE info ( info_id int unsigned NOT NULL auto_increment, first_name varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', last_name varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', address varchar(300) NOT NULL default '', zipcode varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', personal_phone varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', mobilephone varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', faxe varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', email2 varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', country varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', sex varchar(1) NOT NULL default '', birth varchar(1) NOT NULL default '', email varchar(100) NOT NULL default '', PRIMARY KEY (info_id), FOREIGN KEY (email) REFERENCES users(email) ON UPDATE CASCADE ON DELETE CASCADE ) TYPE=INNODB; But shows the error "#1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near 'TYPE=INNODB' at line 11 " If i remove the TYPE=INNODB in the end of create the tables, it will show the error "#1005 - Can't create table 'curriculo.info' (errno: 150) ".

    Read the article

  • SQL Server: Are temp tables or unions better?

    - by Jonathan Allen
    Generally speaking, for combining a lot of data is it better to use a temp table/temp variable as a staging area or should I just stick to "UNION ALL"? Assumptions: No further processing is needed, the results are sent directly to the client. The client waits for the complete recordset, so streaming results isn't necessary.

    Read the article

  • Using variables inside macros in SQL

    - by Tim
    Hello I'm wanting to use variables inside my macro SQL on Teradata. I thought I could do something like the following: REPLACE MACRO DbName.MyMacro ( MacroNm VARCHAR(50) ) AS ( /* Variable to store last time the macro was run */ DECLARE V_LAST_RUN_DATE TIMESTAMP; /* Get last run date and store in V_LAST_RUN_DATE */ SELECT LastDate INTO V_LAST_RUN_DATE FROM DbName.RunLog WHERE MacroNm = :MacroNm; /* Update the last run date to now and save the old date in history */ EXECUTE MACRO DbName.RunLogUpdater( :MacroNm ,V_LAST_RUN_DATE ,CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ); ); However, that didn't work, so I thought of this instead: REPLACE MACRO DbName.MyMacro ( MacroNm VARCHAR(50) ) AS ( /* Variable to store last time the macro was run */ CREATE VOLATILE TABLE MacroVars AS ( SELECT LastDate AS V_LAST_RUN_DATE FROM DbName.RunLog WHERE MacroNm = :MacroNm; ) WITH DATA ON COMMIT PRESERVE ROWS; /* Update the last run date to now and save the old date in history */ EXECUTE MACRO DbName.RunLogUpdater( :MacroNm ,SELECT V_LAST_RUN_DATE FROM MacroVars ,CURRENT_TIMESTAMP ); ); I can do what I'm looking for with a Stored Procedure, however I want to avoid for performance. Do you have any ideas about this? Is there anything else I can try? Cheers Tim

    Read the article

  • Sql Serve - Cascade delete has multiple paths

    - by Anders Juul
    Hi all, I have two tables, Results and ComparedResults. ComparedResults has two columns which reference the primary key of the Results table. My problem is that if a record in Results is deleted, I wish to delete all records in ComparedResults which reference the deleted record, regardless of whether it's one column or the other (and the columns may reference the same Results row). A row in Results may deleted directly or through cascade delete caused by deleting in a third table. Googling this could indicate that I need to disable cascade delete and rewrite all cascade deletes to use triggers instead. Is that REALLY nessesary? I'd be prepared to do much restructuring of the database to avoid this, as my main area is OO programming, and databases should 'just work'. It is hard to see, however, how a restructuring could help as I would just move the problem around... Or am I missing something? I am also a bit at a loss as to why my initial construct should even be a problem for the Sql Server?! Any comments welcome and much appreciated! Anders, Denmark

    Read the article

  • SQL Server: Clustering by timestamp; pros/cons

    - by Ian Boyd
    I have a table in SQL Server, where i want inserts to be added to the end of the table (as opposed to a clustering key that would cause them to be inserted in the middle). This means I want the table clustered by some column that will constantly increase. This could be achieved by clustering on a datetime column: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... CreatedDate datetime DEFAULT getdate(), [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (CreatedDate) ) But I can't guaranteed that two Things won't have the same time. So my requirements can't really be achieved by a datetime column. I could add a dummy identity int column, and cluster on that: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... RowID int IDENTITY(1,1), [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (RowID) ) But you'll notice that my table already constains a timestamp column; a column which is guaranteed to be a monotonically increasing. This is exactly the characteristic I want for a candidate cluster key. So I cluster the table on the rowversion (aka timestamp) column: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (timestamp) ) Rather than adding a dummy identity int column (RowID) to ensure an order, I use what I already have. What I'm looking for are thoughts of why this is a bad idea; and what other ideas are better. Note: Community wiki, since the answers are subjective.

    Read the article

  • Data mining textbook

    - by lmsasu
    If you followed a DM course, which textbook was used? I know about Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques (Second Edition) and this poll. What did you effectively use?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server: Clutering by timestamp; pros/cons

    - by Ian Boyd
    i have a table in SQL Server, where i want inserts to be added to the end of the table (as opposed to a clustering key that would cause them to be inserted in the middle). This means i want the table clustered by some column that will constantly increase. This could be achieved by clustering on a datetime column: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... CreatedDate datetime DEFAULT getdate(), [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (CreatedDate) ) But i can't guaranteed that two Things won't have the same time. So my requirements can't really be achieved by a datetime column. i could add a dummy identity int column, and cluster on that: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... RowID int IDENTITY(1,1), [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (RowID) ) But you'll notice that my table already constains a timestamp column; a column which is guaranteed to be a monotonically increasing. This is exactly the characteristic i want for a candidate cluster key. So i cluster the table on the rowversion (aka timestamp) column: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (timestamp) ) Rather than adding a dummy identity int column (RowID) to ensure an order, i use what i already have. What i'm looking for are thoughts of why this is a bad idea; and what other ideas are better. Note: Community wiki, since the answers are subjective.

    Read the article

  • how to join tables sql server

    - by Rick
    Im having some trouble with joining two tables. This is what my two tables look like: Table 1 Customer_ID CustomerName Add. 1000 John Smith 1001 Mike Coles 1002 Sam Carter Table 2 Sensor_ID Location Temp CustIDFK 1000 NY 70 1002 NY 70 1000 ... ... 1001 1001 1002 Desired: Sensor_ID Location Temp CustIDFK 1000 NY 70 John Smith 1002 NY 70 Sam Carter 1000 ... ... John Smith 1001 Mike Coles 1001 1002 I have made Customer_ID from table 1 my primary key, created custIDFK in table 2 and set that as my foreign key. I am really new to sql server so I am still having trouble with the whole relationship piece of it. My goal is to match one customer_ID with one Sensor_ID. The problem is that the table 2 does not have "unique IDs" since they repeat so I cant set that to my foreign key. I know I will have to do either an inner join or outer join, I just dont know how to link the sensor id with customer one. I was thinking of giving my sensor_ID a unique ID but the data that is being inserted into table 2 is coming from another program. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • SQL group results as a column array

    - by Radek
    Hi guys, this is an SQL question and don't know which type of JOIN, GROUP BY etc. to use, it is for a chat program where messages are related to rooms and each day in a room is linked to a transcript etc. Basically, when outputting my transcripts, I need to show which users have chatted on that transcript. At the moment I link them through the messages like so: SELECT rooms.id, rooms.name, niceDate, room_transcripts.date, long FROM room_transcripts JOIN rooms ON room_transcripts.room=rooms.id JOIN transcript_users ON transcript_users.room=rooms.id AND transcript_users.date=room_transcripts.date JOIN users ON transcript_users.user=users.id WHERE room_transcripts.deleted=0 AND rooms.id IN (1,2) ORDER BY room_transcripts.id DESC, long ASC The result set looks like this: Array ( [0] => Array ( [id] => 2 [name] => Room 2 [niceDate] => Wednesday, April 14 [date] => 2010-04-14 [long] => Jerry Seinfeld ) [1] => Array ( [id] => 1 [name] => Room 1 [niceDate] => Wednesday, April 14 [date] => 2010-04-14 [long] => Jerry Seinfeld ) [2] => Array ( [id] => 1 [name] => Room 1 [niceDate] => Wednesday, April 14 [date] => 2010-04-14 [long] => Test Users ) ) I would like though for each element in the array to represent one transcript entry and for the users to be grouped in an array as the entry's element. So 'long' will be an array listing all the names. Can this be done? At the moment I just append the names and when the transcript date and room changes I echo them retrospectively, but I will do the same for files and highlighted messages and it's messy. Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384  | Next Page >