Search Results

Search found 37647 results on 1506 pages for 'sql performance'.

Page 489/1506 | < Previous Page | 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496  | Next Page >

  • What SQL query should I perform to get the result set expected?

    - by texai
    What SQL query should I perform to get the result set expected, giving the first element of the chain (2) as input data, or any of them ? table name: changes +----+---------------+---------------+ | id | new_record_id | old_record_id | +----+---------------+---------------+ | 1| 4| 2| | -- non relevant data -- | | 6| 7| 4| | -- non relevant data -- | | 11| 13| 7| | 12| 14| 13| | -- non relevant data -- | | 31| 20| 14| +----+---------------+---------------+ Result set expected: +--+ | 2| | 4| | 7| |13| |14| |20| +--+ I know I should consider change my data model, but: What if I couldn't? Thank you in advance!

    Read the article

  • How can I set default seed for all identities within a SQL Server database?

    - by Brandon DuRette
    Is there a way to tell SQL server to use specific default seed value for IDENTITY columns - assuming the (to be run) CREATE TABLE statements do not specify one? I don't really care about altering existing data or altering the seed values for specific IDENTITY columns. I want the same seed for all newly created identity columns. Assume I cannot modify the individual CREATE TABLE statements in any way.

    Read the article

  • How to check results of LINQ to SQL query?

    - by rem
    In a WPF app I'd like to check if a return of a LINQ to SQL query contains some records, but my approach doesn't work: TdbDataContext context = new TdbDataContext(); var sh = from p in context.Items where p.Selected == true select p; if (sh == null) { MessageBox.Show("There are no Selected Items"); } Where am I wrong?

    Read the article

  • In SQL Server 2005, how can I use database_b, do something, then use the old db database_a in TSQL?

    - by Yousui
    Hi guys, In SQL Server 2005, how can I use database_b, do something, then use the old db database_a in TSQL? The following is my code but there is some problem with it. Who can help me to identity the problem? Great thanks. DECLARE @old_database_name VARCHAR(200) SET @old_database_name = db_name() use mydatabase create table t1(id int identity(1,1)) use @old_database_name

    Read the article

  • More efficient SQL than using "A UNION (B in A)"?

    - by machinatus
    Edit 1 (clarification): Thank you for the answers so far! The response is gratifying. I want to clarify the question a little because based on the answers I think I did not describe one aspect of the problem correctly (and I'm sure that's my fault as I was having a difficult time defining it even for myself). Here's the rub: The result set should contain ONLY the records with tstamp BETWEEN '2010-01-03' AND '2010-01-09', AND the one record where the tstamp IS NULL for each order_num in the first set (there will always be one with null tstamp for each order_num). The answers given so far appear to include all records for a certain order_num if there are any with tstamp BETWEEN '2010-01-03' AND '2010-01-09'. For example, if there were another record with order_num = 2 and tstamp = 2010-01-12 00:00:00 it should not be included in the result. Original question: Consider an orders table containing id (unique), order_num, tstamp (a timestamp), and item_id (the single item included in an order). tstamp is null, unless the order has been modified, in which case there is another record with identical order_num and tstamp then contains the timestamp of when the change occurred. Example... id order_num tstamp item_id __ _________ ___________________ _______ 0 1 100 1 2 101 2 2 2010-01-05 12:34:56 102 3 3 113 4 4 124 5 5 135 6 5 2010-01-07 01:23:45 136 7 5 2010-01-07 02:46:00 137 8 6 100 9 6 2010-01-13 08:33:55 105 What is the most efficient SQL statement to retrieve all of the orders (based on order_num) which have been modified one or more times during a certain date range? In other words, for each order we need all of the records with the same order_num (including the one with NULL tstamp), for each order_num WHERE at least one of the order_num's has tstamp NOT NULL AND tstamp BETWEEN '2010-01-03' AND '2010-01-09'. It's the "WHERE at least one of the order_num's has tstamp NOT NULL" that I'm having difficulty with. The result set should look like this: id order_num tstamp item_id __ _________ ___________________ _______ 1 2 101 2 2 2010-01-05 12:34:56 102 5 5 135 6 5 2010-01-07 01:23:45 136 7 5 2010-01-07 02:46:00 137 The SQL that I came up with is this, which is essentially "A UNION (B in A)", but it executes slowly and I hope there is a more efficient solution: SELECT history_orders.order_id, history_orders.tstamp, history_orders.item_id FROM (SELECT orders.order_id, orders.tstamp, orders.item_id FROM orders WHERE orders.tstamp BETWEEN '2010-01-03' AND '2010-01-09') AS history_orders UNION SELECT current_orders.order_id, current_orders.tstamp, current_orders.item_id FROM (SELECT orders.order_id, orders.tstamp, orders.item_id FROM orders WHERE orders.tstamp IS NULL) AS current_orders WHERE current_orders.order_id IN (SELECT orders.order_id FROM orders WHERE orders.tstamp BETWEEN '2010-01-03' AND '2010-01-09');

    Read the article

  • c# WinForms ReportViewer Performance issue using RefreshReport() and ServerReport.SetParameters()

    - by mdk
    Hi All, Currently I am writing a c# client application that uses the WinForms ReportViewer Control to display reports from a remote server. I am having performance troubles with the ReportViewer Control, to be specific with the 2 methods reportViewer.ServerReport.SetParameters() and reportViewer.RefreshReport() – they both take a really long time to complete and not just on the very first call, but on each subsequent call as well. SetParameters() takes 20 to 40 seconds (they vary greatly in time, some execute event okay fast) and RefreshReport() is a bit faster but still takes ages. I don’t think the server is the culprit, as the same report viewed using the browser renders pretty fast, about a second tops. The report in question doesn't matter as well. When I break into the process and take a look at the call stack, I see a call to Socket.DoConnect. So I thought that’s a good reason to start using fiddler and I installed it, disabled caching and fired up the app again to see which call takes that long to connect, but the performance issue was gone. By using a proxy I am having the same performance as the webbrowser. FYI: I am using NTLM authentication in the following way: reportViewer.ServerReport.ReportServerCredentials.NetworkCredentials = new NetworkCredentials() { Username = ... } I don’t have a strong webbackground, so I guess my question is: What should this tell me / What should I be looking into? (Btw: Adding fiddler to my installation package is not the solution I am looking for :)) I am grateful for any pointers. Take care, -Martin

    Read the article

  • emacs tramp performance

    - by Oleg Pavliv
    Is there a way to improve emacs tramp performance? For me it's faster to open an external ftp client (filezilla), transfer files to the local disk and open them in an external editor (notepad) than open them with emacs. I use emacs23.1 under windows xp. I tried different tramp-default-method (telnet, pscp, ftp), all of them have the same performance. Profiling results with elp-instrument-package are the following (I opened 3 remote files of 1.5 MB each one) tramp-file-name-handler 1461 350.41599999 0.2398466803 tramp-sh-file-name-handler 1461 350.02699999 0.2395804243 tramp-send-command 227 179.63400000 0.7913392070 tramp-send-command-and-check 205 177.77600000 0.8672000000 tramp-wait-for-regexp 227 176.47800000 0.7774361233 tramp-wait-for-output 226 176.40000000 0.7805309734 tramp-barf-unless-okay 18 133.46699999 7.4148333333 tramp-handle-insert-file-contents 3 132.046 44.015333333 tramp-handle-file-local-copy 3 131.281 43.760333333 tramp-accept-process-output 2375 112.95100000 0.0475583157 So, actual file transfer takes 132 sec, about 1/3 of total time. Why does it spend so much time in tramp-sh-file-name-handler? I tried to advice a function tramp-sh-file-name-handler to store and return cached results but it does not work, probably this function has some side effects. Any ideas how to improve tramp performance? (I use emacs 23.1 under WindowsXP)

    Read the article

  • Difference in performance between Stax and DOM parsing

    - by Fazal
    I have been using DOM for a long time and as such DOM parsing performance wise has been pretty good. Even when dealing with XML of about 4-7 MB the parsing has been fast. The issue we face with DOM is the memory footprint which become huge as soon as we start dealing with large XMLs. Lately I tried moving to Stax (Streaming parsers for XML) which are supposed top be second generation parsers (reading about Stax it said its the fastest parser now). When I tried stax parser for large XML for about 4MB memory footprint definitely reduced drastically but time take to parse entire XML and create java object out of it increased almost by 5 times over DOM. I used sjsxp.jar implementation of Stax. I can deuce to some extent logically that performance may not be extremely good due to streaming nature of the parser but a reduction of 5 time (e.g. DOM takes about 8 seconds to build object for this XML, whereas Stax parsing took about 40 seconds on average) is definitely not going to be acceptable. Am I missing some point here completely as I am not able to come to terms with these performance numbers

    Read the article

  • Writing to a log4net FileAppender with multiple threads performance problems

    - by Wayne
    TickZoom is a very high performance app which uses it's own parallelization library and multiple O/S threads for smooth utilization of multi-core computers. The app hits a bottleneck where users need to write information to a LogAppender from separate O/S threads. The FileAppender uses the MinimalLock feature so that each thread can lock and write to the file and then release it for the next thread to write. If MinimalLock gets disabled, log4net reports errors about the file being already locked by another process (thread). A better way for log4net to do this would be to have a single thread that takes care of writing to the FileAppender and any other threads simply add their messages to a queue. In that way, MinimalLock could be disabled to greatly improve performance of logging. Additionally, the application does a lot of CPU intensive work so it will also improve performance to use a separate thread for writing to the file so the CPU never waits on the I/O to complete. So the question is, does log4net already offer this feature? If so, how do you do enable threaded writing to a file? Is there another, more advanced appender, perhaps? If not, then since log4net is already wrapped in the platform, that makes it possible to implement a separate thread and queue for this purpose in the TickZoom code. Sincerely, Wayne

    Read the article

  • Performance degrades for more than 2 threads on Xeon X5355

    - by zoolii
    Hi All, I am writing an application using boost threads and using boost barriers to synchronize the threads. I have two machines to test the application. Machine 1 is a core2 duo (T8300) cpu machine (windows XP professional - 4GB RAM) where I am getting following performance figures : Number of threads :1 , TPS :21 Number of threads :2 , TPS :35 (66 % improvement) further increase in number of threads decreases the TPS but that is understandable as the machine has only two cores. Machine 2 is a 2 quad core ( Xeon X5355) cpu machine (windows 2003 server with 4GB RAM) and has 8 effective cores. Number of threads :1 , TPS :21 Number of threads :2 , TPS :27 (28 % improvement) Number of threads :4 , TPS :25 Number of threads :8 , TPS :24 As you can see, performance is degrading after 2 threads (though it has 8 cores). If the program has some bottle neck , then for 2 thread also it should have degraded. Any idea? , Explanations ? , Does the OS has some role in performance ? - It seems like the Core2duo (2.4GHz) scales better than Xeon X5355 (2.66GHz) though it has better clock speed. Thank you -Zoolii

    Read the article

  • Hibernate 3.5.0 causes extreme performance problems

    - by user303396
    I've recently updated from hibernate 3.3.1.GA to hibernate 3.5.0 and I'm having a lot of performance issues. As a test, I added around 8000 entities to my DB (which in turn cause other entities to be saved). These entities are saved in batches of 20 so that the transactions aren't too large for performance reasons. When using hibernate 3.3.1.GA all 8000 entities get saved in about 3 minutes. When using hibernate 3.5.0 it starts out slower than with hibernate 3.3.1. But it gets slower and slower. At around 4,000 entities, it sometimes takes 5 minutes just to save a batch of 20. If I then go to a mysql console and manually type in an insert statement from the mysql general query log, half of them run perfect in 0.00 seconds. And half of them take a long time (maybe 40 seconds) or timeout with "ERROR 1205 (HY000): Lock wait timeout exceeded; try restarting transaction" from MySQL. Has something changed in hibernate's transaction management in version 3.5.0 that I should be aware of? The ONLY thing I changed to experience these unusable performance issues is replace the following hibernate 3.3.1.GA jar files: com.springsource.org.hibernate-3.3.1.GA.jar, com.springsource.org.hibernate.annotations-3.4.0.GA.jar, com.springsource.org.hibernate.annotations.common-3.3.0.ga.jar, com.springsource.javassist-3.3.0.ga.jar with the new hibernate 3.5.0 release hibernate3.jar and javassist-3.9.0.GA.jar. Thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496  | Next Page >