Search Results

Search found 15633 results on 626 pages for 'mysql cluster'.

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 383/626 | < Previous Page | 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390  | Next Page >

  • Optimize innodb table

    - by ming yeow
    When i run optimize table on a innodb table, i get this message instead. does it mean that the table has already been optimized, but in a different manner? "table | optimize | note | Table does not support optimize, doing recreate + analyze instead |"

    Read the article

  • HOw Do I update from table-2 to table-1

    - by mathew
    HI what is the wrong in this code?? i have set it 24 hours to update the value in the table.but the problem is if $row is empty then it inserts value from table-2 but after 24 hours it wont update the value. what I want is it must delete the existing value and insert new one(random value) or it must update the same $row with new value what ever... if ($row == 0){ mysql_query("INSERT INTO table-1 (regtime,person,location,address,rank,ip,geocode) SELECT NOW(),person,location,address,rank,ip,geocode FROM table-2 ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1");}else{ mysql_query("UPDATE table-1 SELECT regtime=NOW(), person=person, location=location, address=address, rank=rank, ip=ip, geocode=geocode FROM table-2 ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1");}

    Read the article

  • How do I workaround this error ? You can't specify target table my table for update in FROM clause

    - by Jules
    I'm struggling to convert my select query into a update query, it has aliases.. Update pads set RemoveMeDate = '1999-01-01 00:00:00' where padid in ( SELECT old_table.padid FROM `jules-fix-reasons`.`pads` AS old_table JOIN `jules`.`pads` AS new_table ON old_table.padid = new_table.`PadID` WHERE new_table.RemoveMeDate <> '2001-01-01 00:00:00' AND old_table.RemoveMeDate = '2001-01-01 00:00:00') I've tried removing the aliases, but that doesn't help :(

    Read the article

  • Facebook style messaging system schema design

    - by Jamie
    Hi all, I'm looking to implement a facebook style messaging system (thread messages) into a site of mine. Do you think this schema markup looks okay? Doctrine schema.yml: UserMessage: tableName: user_message actAs: [Timestampable] columns: id: { type: integer(10), primary: true, autoincrement: true } sender_id : { type: integer(10), notnull: true } sender_read: { type: boolean, default: 1 } subject: { type: string(255), notnull: true } message: { type: string(1000), notnull: true } hash: { type: string(32), notnull: true } relations: UserMessageRecipient as Recipient: type: many local: id foreign: message_id UserMessageReply as Reply: type: many local: id foreign: message_id UserMessageReply: tableName: user_message_reply columns: id: { type: integer(10), primary: true, autoincrement: true } user_message_id as message_id: { type: integer(10), notnull: true } message: { type: string(1000), notnull: true } sender_id: { type: integer(10), notnull: true } relations: UserMessage as Message: local: message_id foreign: id type: one UserMessageRecipient: tableName: user_message_recipient actAs: [Timestampable] columns: id: { type: integer(10), primary: true, autoincrement: true } user_message_id as message_id: { type: integer(10), notnull: true } recipient_id: { type: integer(10), notnull: true } recipient_read: { type: boolean, default: 0 } When I a new reply is made,i'll make sure the boolean for "recipient_read" for each recipient is set to false and of course i'll make sure sender_read is set to false too. I'm using a hash for the URL: http://example.com/user/messages/aadeb18f8bdaea49882ec4d2a8a3c062 (As the id will be starting from 1, i don't wish to have http://example.com/user/messages/1. Yeah, I could start incrementing from a bigger number, but i'd prefer to start at 1.) Is this a good way to go about it? Your thoughts and suggestions would be hugely appreciated. Thanks guys!

    Read the article

  • SQL clone record with a unique index

    - by Milhous
    Is there a clean way of cloning a record in SQL that has an index(auto increment). I want to clone all the fields except the index. I currently have to enumerate every field, and use that in an insert select, and I would rather not explicitly list all of the fields, as they may change over time.

    Read the article

  • Turn database result into array

    - by Industrial
    Hi everyone, I have just made the update/add/delete part for the "Closure table" way of organizing query hierarchical data that are shown on page 70 in this slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/billkarwin/sql-antipatterns-strike-back My database looks like this: Table Categories: ID Name 1 Top value 2 Sub value1 Table CategoryTree: child parent 1 1 2 2 2 1 However, I have a bit of an issue getting the full tree back as an multidimensional array from a single query. Here's what I would like to get back: array ( 'topvalue' = array ( 'Subvalue', 'Subvalue2', 'Subvalue3' = array ('Subvalue 1', 'Subvalue 2', 'Subvalue 3' ) ); ); Update: Found this link, but I still have a hard time to convert it into an array: http://karwin.blogspot.com/2010/03/rendering-trees-with-closure-tables.html

    Read the article

  • COUNT issue across multiple tables

    - by Kim
    I am trying to count across 2 tables and I dont see whats wrong with my query yet I get a wrong result. User 2 does not exist in table_two, so the zero is correct. SELECT t1.creator_user_id, COUNT(t1.creator_user_id), COUNT(t2.user_id) FROM table_one AS t1 LEFT JOIN table_two AS t2 ON t2.user_id = t1.creator_user_id GROUP BY t1.creator_user_id, t2.user_id Actual result 1 192 192 2 9 0 Expected result 1 16 12 2 9 0 The result indicate a missing group by condition, but I already got both fields used. Where am I wrong ? Also, can I sum up all users that doesnt exist in table_two for t1 ? Like user 3 exists 21 times in t1, then the results would be: 1 16 12 (users with > 0 in t2 will need their own row) 2 30 0 (user 2=9 + user 3=21 => 30) Its okay for the user Id to be wrong for sum of t1 for all users with 0 in t2. If not possible, then I'll just do two queries.

    Read the article

  • As3 & PHP URLEncoding problem!

    - by Jk_
    Hi everyone, I'm stuck with a stupid problem of encoding. My problem is that all my accentuated characters are displayed as weird iso characters. Example : é is displayed %E9 I send a string to my php file : XMLLoader.load(new URLRequest(online+"/query.php?Query=" + q)); XMLLoader.addEventListener(Event.COMPLETE,XMLLoaded); When I trace q, I get : "INSERT INTO hello_world (message) values('éàaà');" The GOOD query My php file look like this : <?php include("conection.php");//Conectiong to database $Q = $_GET['Query']; $query = $Q; $resultID = mysql_query($query) or die("Could not execute or probably SQL statement malformed (error): ". mysql_error()); $xml_output = "<?xml version=\"1.0\"?>\n"; // XML header $xml_output .= "<answers>\n"; $xml_output .= "<lastID id=".'"'.mysql_insert_id().'"'." />\n"; $xml_output .= "<query string=".'"'.$query.'"'." />\n"; $xml_output .= "</answers>"; echo $xml_output;//Output the XML ?> When I get back my XML into flash the $query looks like this : "INSERT INTO hello_world (message) values('%E9%E0a%E0');" And these values are then displayed into my DB which is annoying. Any help would be appreciated! Cheers. Jk_

    Read the article

  • make db connection persistent throught zend framework

    - by kamikaze_pilot
    I'm using zend framework. currently everytime I need to use the db I go ahead and connect to the DB: function connect(){ $connParams = array("host" => $host, "port" => $port, "username" => $username, "password" => $password, "dbname" => $dbname); $db = new Zend_Db_Adapter_Pdo_Mysql($connParams); return $db } so I would just call the connect() function everytime I need to use the db My question is...suppose I want to reuse $db everywhere in my site and only connect once in the very initial stage of the site load and then close the connection right before the site gets sent to the user, what would be the best practice to accomplish this? Which file in Zend should I save $db in, what method should I use to save it (global variable?), and which file should I do the connection closing in?

    Read the article

  • How to run a set of SQL queries from a file, in PHP?

    - by Harish Kurup
    I have some set of SQL queries which is in a file(i.e query.sql), and i want to run those queries in files using PHP, the code that i have wrote is not working, //database config's... $file_name="query.sql"; $query==file($file_name); $array_length=count($query); for($i=0;$i<$array_length;$i++) { $data .= $query[$i]; } echo $data; mysql_query($data); it echos the SQL Query from the file but throws an error at mysql_query() function...

    Read the article

  • Doctrine 1.2 Column Naming Conventions for Many To Many Relationships

    - by Alan Storm
    I'm working with an existing database schema, and trying to setup two Doctrine models with a Many to Many relationship, as described in this document When creating tables from scratch, I have no trouble getting this working. However, the existing join tables use a different naming convention that what's described in the Doctrine document. Specifically Table 1 -------------------------------------------------- table_1_id ....other columns.... Table 2 -------------------------------------------------- table_2_id ....other columns.... Join Table -------------------------------------------------- fktable1_id fktable_2_id Basically, the previous developers prefaced all forign keys with an fk. From the examples I've seen and some brief experimenting with code, it appears that Doctrine 1.2 requires that the join table use the same column names as the tables it's joining in Is my assumption correct? If so, has the situation changed in Doctrine 2? If the answers to either of the above are true, how do you configure the models so that all the columns "line up"

    Read the article

  • Query filter design for string field

    - by Midhat
    A field in my table can have arbitrary strings. On the UI, there is a drop down having options like All, Value1, Value2 And the results were filtered by the selected option value. So far this is easy and adding new filters to the UI is not a problem. Needs no changes in my stored procedure. Now I want to have an "Others" option here as well, which will return rows not having the column value as Value1 or Value2. Apparently this will require a "not in" operator in my query, and will make maintenance difficult, as the list of values is likely to change Any suggestions, design tips?

    Read the article

  • How can I get columns name from select query in php?

    - by Farshad Mehrvarzan
    I want to execute a SELECT query but I don't how many columns to select. Like: select name, family from persons; How can I know which columns to select? "I am currently designing a site for the execute query by users. So when the user executes this query, I won't know which columns selected. But when I want to show the results and draw a table for the user I should know which columns selected."

    Read the article

  • Strange data swapping error occurs when I attempt to update rows in my table from another table in m

    - by Wesley
    So I have a table of data that is 10,000 lines long. Several of the columns in the table simply describe information about one of the columns, meaning, that only one column has the content, and the rest of the columns describe the location of the content (its for a book). Right now, only 6,000 of the 10,000 rows' content column is filled with its content. Rows 6-10,000's content column simply says null. I have another table in the db that has the content for rows 6,000-10,000, with the correct corresponding primary key which would (seemingly) make it easy to update the 10,000 row table. I have been trying an update query such as the following: UPDATE table(10,000) SET content_column = (SELECT content FROM table(6,000-10,000) WHERE table(10,000).id = table(6-10,000.id) Which kind of works, the only problem is that it pulls in the data from the second table just fine, but it replaces the existing content column with null. So rows 1-6,000's content column become null, and rows 6-10,000's content column have the correct values...Pretty strange I thought anyway. Does anybody have any thoughts about where I am going wrong? If you could show me a better sql query, I would appreciate it! Thanks

    Read the article

  • Help needed to construct a SQL query

    - by song202y
    Need your help to get the list of suggested friends (who aren't friends of the current user but are friends of 2 or more of the current user's friends). The primary ordering should put people at the same school at the top, and the secondary ordering should put people with more common friends (that is, the number of people who are friends of that person and the current user) near the top. Users: user_id PK, user_name Profiles: user_id PK, school_name, ... Friendships: id PK, user_id FK, friend_id FK Thank you in advance. Joe

    Read the article

  • Selecting records with specific month and year in SQL Server 2005

    - by John
    I want to list records with a particular month and year. The table name is 'Arrival' and 'date' is the field that stores the date that the record was added. This is to be done from a C# application. For example, if the user selects month as 'April' and year as '2009' in the application, it will list all the records that were added on April,2009. (I only need the query, hope I can figure out the rest :) )

    Read the article

  • Query returning related assets

    - by GMo
    I have 2 tables, one is an assets table which holds digital assets (e.g. article, images etc), the 2nd table is an asset_links table which maps 1-1 relationships between assets contained within the assets table. Here are the table definitions: Asset +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | source | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | title | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | date_created | datetime | YES | | NULL | | | date_embargo | datetime | YES | | NULL | | | date_expires | datetime | YES | | NULL | | | date_updated | datetime | YES | | NULL | | | keywords | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | status | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | priority | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | fk_site | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | | | resource_type | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | resource_id | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | fk_user | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | | +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ Asset_links +-----------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-----------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | asset_id1 | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | asset_id2 | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | +-----------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ In the asset_links table there are the following rows: 1 - 3, 1 - 4, 2 - 10, 2 - 56 I am looking to write one query which will return all assets which satisfy any asset search criteria and within the same query return all of the linked asset data for linked assets for that asset. e.g. The query returning assets 1 and 2 would return : Asset 1 attributes - Asset 3 attributes - Asset 4 attributes Asset 2 attributes - Asset 10 attributes - Asset 56 attributes What is the best way to write the query?

    Read the article

  • Best datastructure for this relationship...

    - by Travis
    I have a question about database 'style'. I need a method of storing user accounts. Some users "own" other user accounts (sub-accounts). However not all user accounts are owned, just some. Is it best to represent this using a table structure like so... TABLE accounts ( ID ownerID -> ID name ) ...even though there will be some NULL values in the ownerID column for accounts that do not have an owner. Or would it be stylistically preferable to have two tables, like so. TABLE accounts ( ID name ) TABLE ownedAccounts ( accountID -> accounts(ID) ownerID -> accounts(ID) ) Thanks for the advice.

    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 | 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390  | Next Page >