Search Results

Search found 38931 results on 1558 pages for 'database testing'.

Page 416/1558 | < Previous Page | 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423  | Next Page >

  • Is it possible to combine these 3 mySQL queries?

    - by Greenie
    I know the $downloadfile - and I want the $user_id. By trial and error I found that this does what I want. But it's 3 separate queries and 3 while loops. I have a feeling there is a better way. And yes, I only have a very little idea about what I'm doing :) $result = pod_query("SELECT ID FROM wp_posts WHERE guid LIKE '%/$downloadfile'"); while ($row = mysql_fetch_assoc($result)) { $attachment = $row['ID']; } $result = pod_query("SELECT pod_id FROM wp_pods_rel WHERE tbl_row_id = '$attachment'"); while ($row = mysql_fetch_assoc($result)) { $pod_id = $row['pod_id']; } $result = pod_query("SELECT tbl_row_id FROM wp_pods_rel WHERE tbl_row_id = '$pod_id' AND field_id = '28'"); while ($row = mysql_fetch_assoc($result)) { $user_id = $row['pod_id']; }

    Read the article

  • Grails multi column indexes

    - by Kimble
    Can someone explain how to define multi column indexes in Grails? The documentation is at best sparse. This for example does not seem to work at all: http://grails.org/GORM+Index+definitions I've had some luck with this, but the results seems random at best. Definitions that works in one domain class does not when applied to another (with different names of course). http://www.grails.org/doc/1.1/guide/single.html#5.5.2.6%20Database%20Indices Some working examples and explanations would be highly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • How do I add a one-to-one relationship in MYSQL?

    - by alex
    +-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+-------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+-------+ | pid | varchar(99) | YES | | NULL | | +-------+-------------+------+-----+---------+-------+ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) +-------+---------------+------+-----+---------+-------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-------+---------------+------+-----+---------+-------+ | pid | varchar(2000) | YES | | NULL | | | recid | varchar(2000) | YES | | NULL | | +-------+---------------+------+-----+---------+-------+ 2 rows in set (0.00 sec) This is my table. pid is just the id of the user. "recid" is a recommended song for that user. I hope to have a list of pid's, and then recommended songs for each person. Of course, in my 2nd table, (pid, recid) would be unique key. How do I do a one-to-one query for this ?

    Read the article

  • What's wrong with this SQL query?

    - by ThinkingInBits
    I have two tables: photographs, and photograph_tags. Photograph_tags contains a column called photograph_id (id in photographs). You can have many tags for one photograph. I have a photograph row related to three tags: boy, stream, and water. However, running the following query returns 0 rows SELECT p.* FROM photographs p, photograph_tags c WHERE c.photograph_id = p.id AND (c.value IN ('dog', 'water', 'stream')) GROUP BY p.id HAVING COUNT( p.id )=3 Is something wrong with this query?

    Read the article

  • Multi-variable indexes in postgres

    - by Jackson Davis
    Im looking at an application where I will be doing quite a few SELECTs where I am trying to find column_a = x AND column_b = y. Is the correct to create that index that something like the following? CREATE INDEX index_name ON table (column_a, column_b)

    Read the article

  • cached data base

    - by radi
    hi , in my project i need a tow tables each of it has about 2000 row , i want my application to be speed so my db should load into memory (cached) when the app start and before it close the db have to be saved on the disk . i am using java and i want to use sql

    Read the article

  • YAHOO QUERY LANGUAGE BUG!

    - by Damiano
    Hello everybody! Today, I've started with Yahoo Query Language. I would use it to retrive stocks details, so I'm talking about Yahoo Finance. I think there is a bug on this language. This is my query: select * from yahoo.finance.quoteslist where symbol='@^GSPC' I ALWAYS get 51 results! it's impossible, take a look at: http://it.finance.yahoo.com/q/cp?s=^GSPC There are 500 results! I also tried some paging parameters. select * from yahoo.finance.quoteslist(50,30) where symbol='@^GSPC' (to get from 50 to 80) select * from yahoo.finance.quoteslist(100) where symbol='@^GSPC' (to get the first 100 results) select * from yahoo.finance.quoteslist where symbol='@^GSPC' limit 30 offset 50 but ALWAYS the last stock is: <quote symbol="BBY"> <Symbol>BBY</Symbol> <LastTradePriceOnly>41.03</LastTradePriceOnly> <LastTradeDate>5/7/2010</LastTradeDate> <LastTradeTime>4:00pm</LastTradeTime> <Change>-0.48</Change> <Open>41.35</Open> <DaysHigh>42.35</DaysHigh> <DaysLow>39.60</DaysLow> <Volume>14129531</Volume> </quote> Why do I have this kind of problem? Thank you so much for your support! (P.S. I've tested it on Yahoo YQL console)

    Read the article

  • How to model a mutually exclusive relationship in sql server

    - by littlechris
    Hi, I have to add functionality to an existing application and I've run into a data situation that I'm not sure how to model. I am being restricted to the creation of new tables and code. If I need to alter the existing structure I think my client may reject the proposal..although if its the only way to get it right this is what I will have to do. I have an Item table that can me link to any number of tables, and these tables may increase over time. The Item can only me linked to one other table, but the record in the other table may have many items linked to it. Examples of the tables/entities being linked to are "Person", "Vehicle", "Building", "Office". These are all separate tables. Example of Items are "Pen", "Stapler", "Cushion", "Tyre", "A4 Paper", "Plastic Bag", "Poster", "Decoration" For instance a "Poster" may be allocated to a "Person" or "Office" or "Building". In the future if they add a "Conference Room" table it may also be added to that. My intital thoughts are: Item { ID, Name } LinkedItem { ItemID, LinkedToTableName, LinkedToID } The LinkedToTableName field will then allow me to identify the correct table to link to in my code. I'm not overly happy with this solution, but I can't quite think of anything else. Please help! :) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • using dummy row with NOT NULL to solve DEFAULT NULL

    - by Tony38
    I know having DEFAULT NULLS is not a good practice but I have many optional lookup values which are FK in the system so to solve this issue here is what i am doing: I use NOT NULL for every FK / lookup colunms. I have the first row in every lookup table which is PK id = 1 as a dummy row with just "none" in all the columns. This way I can use NOT NULL in my schema and if needed reference to the none row values PK =1 for FKs which do not have any lookup value. Is this a good design or any other work arounds? EDIT: I have: Neighborhood table Postal table. Every neighborhood has a city, so the FK can be NOT NULL. But not every postal code belongs to a neighborhood. Some do, some don't depending on the country. So if i use NOT NULL for the FK between postal and neighborhood then I will be screwed as there has to be some value entered. So what i am doing in essence is: have a row in every table to be a dummy row just to link the FKs. This way row one in neighborhood table will be: n_id = 1 name =none etc... In postal table I can have: postal_code = 3456A3 FK (city) = Moscow FK (neighborhood_id)=1 as a NOT NULL. If I don't have a dummy row in the neighborhood lookup table then I have to declare FK (neighborhood_id) as a Default null column and store blanks in the table. This is an example but there is a huge number of values which will have blanks then in many tables.

    Read the article

  • How do I perform 'WHERE' on groups of rows?

    - by Drew
    I have a table, which looks like: +-----------+----------+ + person_id + group_id + +-----------+----------+ + 1 + 10 + + 1 + 20 + + 1 + 30 + + 2 + 10 + + 2 + 20 + + 3 + 10 + +-----------+----------+ I need a query such that only person_ids with groups 10 AND 20 AND 30 are returned (only person_id: 1). I am not sure how to do this, as from what I can see it would require me to group the rows by person_id and then select the rows which contain all group_ids. I'm looking for something which will preserve the use of keys without resorting to string operations on group_concat() or such.

    Read the article

  • Tool Compare the tables in two different databeses

    - by user191124
    I am using Toad. Frequently i need to compare tables in two different test environments. the tables present in them are same but the data differs. i just need to know what are the differences in the same tables which are in two different data bases.Are there any tools which can be installed on windows and use it to compare. Much appreciate your help:)

    Read the article

  • In SQL server, to convert a varchar which have this format (nnn:nn:nn)

    - by user1688917
    I have this varchar format as time accumulation and i want to convert it to an integer to do a SUM and get the total time for a group. The fist part which may be 1, 2, 3, 4 or even five digits represent the accumulation of Hours and then seperated by a colon. then come the second part which is accumulation of minutes and last accumulation of seconds (2 digits each). How to convert this to integer in one query if possile.

    Read the article

  • mysql subquery strangely slow

    - by aviv
    I have a query to select from another sub-query select. While the two queries look almost the same the second query (in this sample) runs much slower: SELECT user.id ,user.first_name -- user.* FROM user WHERE user.id IN (SELECT ref_id FROM education WHERE ref_type='user' AND education.institute_id='58' AND education.institute_type='1' ); This query takes 1.2s Explain on this query results: id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 PRIMARY user index first_name 152 141192 Using where; Using index 2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY education index_subquery ref_type,ref_id,institute_id,institute_type,ref_type_2 ref_id 4 func 1 Using where The second query: SELECT -- user.id -- user.first_name user.* FROM user WHERE user.id IN (SELECT ref_id FROM education WHERE ref_type='user' AND education.institute_id='58' AND education.institute_type='1' ); Takes 45sec to run, with explain: id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 PRIMARY user ALL 141192 Using where 2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY education index_subquery ref_type,ref_id,institute_id,institute_type,ref_type_2 ref_id 4 func 1 Using where Why is it slower if i query only by index fields? Why both queries scans the full length of the user table? Any ideas how to improve? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • More efficient method for grabbing all child units

    - by Hazior
    I have a table in SQL that links to itself through parentID. I want to find the children and their children and so forth until I find all the child objects. I have a recursive function that does this but it seems very ineffective. Is there a way to get sql to find all child objects? If so how?

    Read the article

  • Syntax for "RETURNING" clause in Mysql PDO

    - by dmontain
    I'm trying to add a record, and at the same time return the id of that record added. I read it's possible to do it with a RETURNING clause. $stmt->prepare("INSERT INTO tablename (field1, field2) VALUES (:value1, :value2) RETURNING id"); but the insertion fails when I add RETURNING. There is an auto-incremented field called id in the table being added to. Can someone see anything wrong with my syntax? or maybe PDO does not support RETURNING?

    Read the article

  • Performance of VIEW vs. SQL statement

    - by Matt W.
    I have a query that goes something like the following: select <field list> from <table list> where <join conditions> and <condition list> and PrimaryKey in (select PrimaryKey from <table list> where <join list> and <condition list>) and PrimaryKey not in (select PrimaryKey from <table list> where <join list> and <condition list>) The sub-select queries both have multiple sub-select queries of their own that I'm not showing so as not to clutter the statement. One of the developers on my team thinks a view would be better. I disagree in that the SQL statement uses variables passed in by the program (based on the user's login Id). Are there any hard and fast rules on when a view should be used vs. using a SQL statement? What kind of performance gain issues are there in running SQL statements on their own against regular tables vs. against views. (Note that all the joins / where conditions are against indexed columns, so that shouldn't be an issue.) EDIT for clarification... Here's the query I'm working with: select obj_id from object where obj_id in( (select distinct(sec_id) from security where sec_type_id = 494 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) and sec_obj_id in ( select obj_id from object where obj_ot_id in (select of_ot_id from obj_form left outer join obj_type on ot_id = of_ot_id where ot_app_id = 87 and of_id in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 493 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) ) and of_usage_type_id = 131 ) ) ) ) or (obj_ot_id in (select of_ot_id from obj_form left outer join obj_type on ot_id = of_ot_id where ot_app_id = 87 and of_id in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 493 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) ) and of_usage_type_id = 131 ) and obj_id not in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 494) )

    Read the article

  • How to display SUM fields from a detailed table in a master table

    - by max
    What is the best approach to display the summery of DETAILED.Fields in its master table? E.g. I have a master table called 'BILL' with all the bill related data and a detailed table ('BILL_DETAIL') with the bill detailed related data, like NAME, PRICE, TAX, ... Now I want to list all BILLS, without the details, but with the sum of the PRICE and TAX stored in the detail table. Here is a simplified schema of that tables: TABLE BILL ---------- - ID - NAME - ADDRESS - ... TABLE BILL_DETAIL ----------------- - ID - BILLID - PORDUCT_NAME - PRICE - TAX - ... The retrieved table row should look like this: BILL.CUSTOMER_NAME, BILL.CUSTOMER_ADDRESS, sum(BILL_DETAIL.PRICE), sum(BILL.DETAIL.TAX), ... Any sugguestions?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423  | Next Page >