Search Results

Search found 28985 results on 1160 pages for 'sql training'.

Page 644/1160 | < Previous Page | 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651  | Next Page >

  • MySQL Delete from 1 table, using multiple tables

    - by nute
    I would like to delete all the rows found by that query: SELECT cart_abandon.* FROM cart_abandon, cart_product, txn_product, users WHERE cart_abandon.cartid = cart_product.cartid AND cart_product.productid = txn_product.productid AND txn_product.username = users.username AND users.id = cart_abandon.userid AND txn_product.txndate >= cart_abandon.abandondate The thing to keep in mind is that the query here uses 4 different tables, however I only want to delete rows from 1 table (cart_abandon). Is there an easy way to do that? Maybe this: ? DELETE cart_abandon FROM cart_abandon, cart_product, txn_product, users WHERE cart_abandon.cartid = cart_product.cartid AND cart_product.productid = txn_product.productid AND txn_product.username = users.username AND users.id = cart_abandon.userid AND txn_product.txndate >= cart_abandon.abandondate Is that valid? Correct?

    Read the article

  • postgres SQL - pg_class question

    - by Sachin Chourasiya
    PostgreSQL stores statistics about tables in the system table called pg_class. The query planner accesses this table for every query. These statistics may only be updated using the analyze command. If the analyze command is not run often, the statistics in this table may not be accurate and the query planner may make poor decisions which can degrade system performance. Another strategy is for the query planner to generate these statistics for each query (including selects, inserts, updates, and deletes). This approach would allow the query planner to have the most up-to-date statistics possible. Why postgres always rely on pg_class instead?

    Read the article

  • is there a tool to see the difference between two database tables in mssql?

    - by reinier
    What is a good tool to see the differences between 2 tables (or even better, the datasets returned by 2 queries). EDIT: I'm not interested in the schema changes. Just assume that the schemas are the same. background as to why: I'm porting some legacy code which can fill a database with some pre-calced data. The easiest way to see if I got everything right, is to check the output of the old program, with the new one. I was thinking that if there is some kind of 'diff' tool for databases, this might be great.

    Read the article

  • Oracle (Old?) Joins

    - by Grasper
    I have been porting oracle selects, and I have been running across a lot of queries like so: SELECT e.last_name, d.department_name FROM employees e, departments d WHERE e.department_id(+) = d.department_id; ...and: SELECT last_name, d.department_id FROM employees e, departments d WHERE e.department_id = d.department_id(+); Are there any guides/tutorials for converting all of the variants of the (+) syntax? What is that syntax even called (so I can scour google)? When was this standard phased out? Any info is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Oracle (Old?) Joins - A tool/script for conversion?

    - by Grasper
    I have been porting oracle selects, and I have been running across a lot of queries like so: SELECT e.last_name, d.department_name FROM employees e, departments d WHERE e.department_id(+) = d.department_id; ...and: SELECT last_name, d.department_id FROM employees e, departments d WHERE e.department_id = d.department_id(+); Are there any guides/tutorials for converting all of the variants of the (+) syntax? What is that syntax even called (so I can scour google)? Even better.. Is there a tool/script that will do this conversion for me (Preferred Free)? An optimizer of some sort? I have around 500 of these queries to port.. When was this standard phased out? Any info is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Getting a ReturnValue from cmd.Parameters in c#?

    - by mark smith
    Hi, I have just finished converted a vb.net app to c# and one of the lines is to get @ReturnValue from the parameter. I ended up having to CAST a lot of things.. Is there not a easier way here is what i have int rc = ((System.Data.SqlTypes.SqlInt32)(((System.Data.SqlClient.SqlParameter)(cmd.Parameters["@ReturnValue"])).SqlValue)).Value; In vb.net it was as simple as doing this Dim rc As Integer = Convert.ToInt32(cmd.Parameters("@ReturnValue").Value) Alot easier :-) But the problem with C# is the property Value isn't available unless I Cast to SqlParameter and i also need to cast to Sqltypes.SqlInt32 - i can't just do a standard Convert.ToInt32

    Read the article

  • Improving performance in this query

    - by Luiz Gustavo F. Gama
    I have 3 tables with user logins: sis_login = administrators tb_rb_estrutura = coordinators tb_usuario = clients I created a VIEW to unite all these users by separating them by levels, as follows: create view `login_names` as select `n1`.`cod_login` as `id`, '1' as `level`, `n1`.`nom_user` as `name` from `dados`.`sis_login` `n1` union all select `n2`.`id` as `id`, '2' as `level`, `n2`.`nom_funcionario` as `name` from `tb_rb_estrutura` `n2` union all select `n3`.`cod_usuario` as `id`, '3' as `level`, `n3`.`dsc_nome` as `name` from `tb_usuario` `n3`; So, can occur up to three ids repeated for different users, which is why I separated by levels. This VIEW is just to return me user name, according to his id and level. considering it has about 500,000 registered users, this view takes about 1 second to load. too much time, but is becomes very small when I need to return the latest posts on the forum of my website. The tables of the forums return the user id and level, then look for a name in this VIEW. I have registered 18 forums. When I run the query, it takes one second for each forum = 18 seconds. OMG. This page loads every time somebody enter my website. This is my query: select `x`.`forum_id`, `x`.`topic_id`, `l`.`nome` from ( select `t`.`forum_id`, `t`.`topic_id`, `t`.`data`, `t`.`user_id`, `t`.`user_level` from `tb_forum_topics` `t` union all select `a`.`forum_id`, `a`.`topic_id`, `a`.`data`, `a`.`user_id`, `a`.`user_level` from `tb_forum_answers` `a` ) `x` left outer join `login_names` `l` on `l`.`id` = `x`.`user_id` and `l`.`level` = `x`.`user_level` group by `x`.`forum_id` asc USING EXPLAIN: id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 PRIMARY <derived2> ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 6 Using temporary; Using filesort 1 PRIMARY <derived4> ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 530415 4 DERIVED n1 ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 114 5 UNION n2 ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 2 6 UNION n3 ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 530299 NULL UNION RESULT ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL 2 DERIVED t ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 3 3 UNION r ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL 3 NULL UNION RESULT ALL NULL NULL NULL NULL NULL Somebody can help me or give a suggestion?

    Read the article

  • How to update a table with a list of values at a time?

    - by VJ
    I have update NewLeaderBoards set MonthlyRank=(Select RowNumber() from LeaderBoards) I tried it this way - (Select RowNumber() from LeaderBoards) as NewRanks update NewLeaderBoards set MonthlyRank = NewRanks But it doesnt work for me..Can anyone suggest me how can i perform an update in such a way..

    Read the article

  • How to join nearly identical several queries into one?

    - by Devyn
    Hi, Assume I have an order_dummy table where order_dummy_id, order_id, user_id, book_id, author_id are stored. You may complain the logic of my table but I somehow need to do it that way. I want to execute following queries. SELECT * FROM order_dummy WHERE order_id = 1 AND user_id = 1 AND book_id = 1 ORDER BY `order_dummy_id` DESC LIMIT 1 SELECT * FROM order_dummy WHERE order_id = 1 AND user_id = 1 AND book_id = 2 ORDER BY `order_dummy_id` DESC LIMIT 1 SELECT * FROM order_dummy WHERE order_id = 1 AND user_id = 1 AND book_id = 3 ORDER BY `order_dummy_id` DESC LIMIT 1 Please keep in mind that several numbers of same book is included in one order. Therefore, I list order_dummy_id by descending and limit 1 so only LATEST ORDER of A BOOK is shown. But my goal is to show other books in that way in one table. I used group by like this ... SELECT * FROM order_dummy WHERE order_id = 1 AND user_id = 1 GROUP BY book_id but it only shows order_dummy_id with ascending result. I have no idea anymore. Looking forward your kindness help!

    Read the article

  • Combining 2 Linq queries into 1

    - by Mike Fielden
    Given the following information, how can I combine these 2 linq queries into 1. Having a bit of trouble with the join statement. 'projectDetails' is just a list of ProjectDetails ProjectDetails (1 to many) PCardAuthorizations ProjectDetails (1 to many) ExpenditureDetails Notice I am grouping by the same information and selecting the same type of information var pCardAccount = from c in PCardAuthorizations where projectDetails.Contains(c.ProjectDetail) && c.RequestStatusId == 2 group c by new { c.ProjectDetail, c.ProgramFund } into g select new { Key = g.Key, Sum = g.Sum(x => x.Amount) }; var expenditures = from d in ExpenditureDetails where projectDetails.Contains(d.ProjectDetails) && d.Expenditures.ExpenditureTypeEnum == 0 group d by new { d.ProjectDetails, d.ProgramFunds } into g select new { Key = g.Key, Sum = g.Sum(y => y.ExpenditureAmounts.FirstOrDefault(a => a.IsCurrent && !a.RequiresAudit).CommittedMonthlyRecords.ProjectedEac) };

    Read the article

  • CTE to build a list of departments and managers (hierarchical)

    - by Milky Joe
    I need to generate a list of users that are managers, or managers of managers, for company departments. I have two tables; one details the departments and one contains the manager hierarchy (simplified): CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Manager]( [ManagerId] [int], [ParentManagerId] [int]) CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Department]( [DepartmentId] [int], [ManagerId] [int]) Basically, I'm trying to build a CTE that will give me a list of DepartmentIds, together with all ManagerIds that are in the manager hierarchy for that department. So... Say Manager 1 is the Manager for Department 1, and Manager 2 is Manager 1's Manager, and Manager 3 is Manager 2's Manager, I'd like to see: DepartmentId, ManagerId 1, 1 1, 2 1, 3 Basically, managers are able to deal with all of their sub-manager's departments. Building the CTE to return the Manager hierarchy was fairly simple, but I'm struggling to inject the Departments in there: WITH DepartmentManagers AS ( SELECT ManagerId, ParentManagerId, 0 AS Depth From Manager UNION ALL SELECT Manager.ManagerId, Manager.ParentManagerId, DepartmentManagers.Depth + 1 AS Depth FROM Manager INNER JOIN DepartmentManagers ON DepartmentManagers.ManagerId = Manager.ParentManagerId ) Can anyone help?

    Read the article

  • How can I make a multi search SPROC/UDF by passing a tabled-value to it?

    - by Shimmy
    I actually want to achieve the following description This is the table argument I want to pass to the server <items> <item category="cats">1</item> <item category="dogs">2</item> </items> SELECT * FROM Item WHERE Item.Category = <one of the items in the XML list> AND Item.ReferenceId = <the corresponding value of that item xml element> --Or in other words: SELECT FROM Items WHERE Item IN XML according to the splecified columns. Am I clear enought? I don't mind to do it in a different way other than xml. What I need is selecting values that mach an array of two of its columns' values.

    Read the article

  • Efficiently retrieve objects with one to many references in Grails using GORM

    - by bebeastie
    I'm trying to determine how to find/retrieve/load objects efficiently in terms of a.) minimizing calls to database and b.) keeping the code as elegant/simple as possible (i.e. not writing hql etc.). Assume you have two objects: public class Foo { Bar bar String badge } public class Bar { String name } Each Foo has a bar and a badge. Also assume that all badges are unique within a bar. So if a Foo has a badge "4565" there are no other Foos that have the same badge # AND the same bar. If I have a bar ID, how can I efficiently retrive the Foo w/o first selecting Bar? I know I can do this: Foo.findByBadgeAndBar("4565", Bar.findById("1")) But that seems to cause a select on the Bar table followed by a select on the Foo table. In other words, I need to produce the Grails/Hibernate/GORM equivalent of the following: select * from foo where badge="4565" and bar_id="1"

    Read the article

  • How can I do more than one level of cascading deletes in Linq?

    - by Gary McGill
    If I have a Customers table linked to an Orders table, and I want to delete a customer and its corresponding orders, then I can do: dataContext.Orders.DeleteAllOnSubmit(customer.Orders); dataContext.Customers.DeleteOnSubmit(customer); ...which is great. However, what if I also have an OrderItems table, and I want to delete the order items for each of the orders deleted? I can see how I could use DeleteAllOnSubmit to cause the deletion of all the order items for a single order, but how can I do it for all the orders?

    Read the article

  • Select statement with multiple 'where' fields using same value without duplicating text

    - by kdbdallas
    I will start by saying that I don't think what I want can be done, but that said, I am hoping I am wrong and someone knows more than me. So here is your chance... Prove you are smarter than me :) I want to do a search against a SQLite table looking for any records that "are similar" without having to write out the query in long hand. To clarify this is how I know I can write the query: select * from Articles where title like '%Bla%' or category like '%Bla%' or post like '%Bla%' This works and is not a huge deal if you are only checking against a couple of columns, but if you need to check against a bunch then your query can get really long and nasty looking really fast, not to mention the chance for typos. (ie: 'Bla%' instead of '%Bla%') What I am wondering is if there is a short hand way to do this? *This next code does not work the way I want, but just shows kind of what I am looking for select * from Articles where title or category or post like '%Bla%' Anyone know if there is a way to specify that multiple 'where' columns should use the same search value without listing that same search value for every column? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Auto increment with a Unit Of Work

    - by Derick
    Context I'm building a persistence layer to abstract different types of databases that I'll be needing. On the relational part I have mySQL, Oracle and PostgreSQL. Let's take the following simplified MySQL tables: CREATE TABLE Contact ( ID varchar(15), NAME varchar(30) ); CREATE TABLE Address ( ID varchar(15), CONTACT_ID varchar(15), NAME varchar(50) ); I use code to generate system specific alpha numeric unique ID's fitting 15 chars in this case. Thus, if I insert a Contact record with it's Addresses I have my generated Contact.ID and Address.CONTACT_IDs before committing. I've created a Unit of Work (amongst others) as per Martin Fowler's patterns to add transaction support. I'm using a key based Identity Map in the UoW to track the changed records in memory. It works like a charm for the scenario above, all pretty standard stuff so far. The question scenario comes in when I have a database that is not under my control and the ID fields are auto-increment (or in Oracle sequences). In this case I do not have the db generated Contact.ID beforehand, so when I create my Address I do not have a value for Address.CONTACT_ID. The transaction has not been started on the DB session since all is kept in the Identity Map in memory. Question: What is a good approach to address this? (Avoiding unnecessary db round trips) Some ideas: Retrieve the last ID: I can do a call to the database to retrieve the last Id like: SELECT Auto_increment FROM information_schema.tables WHERE table_name='Contact'; But this is MySQL specific and probably something similar can be done for the other databases. If do this then would need to do the 1st insert, get the ID and then update the children (Address.CONTACT_IDs) – all in the current transaction context.

    Read the article

  • How can I combine result and subquery for IN comparison (mysql)

    - by user325804
    In order for a school project i need to create the following situation within one mysql query. The situation is as such, that a child's tags and a parent's tags need to be combined into one, and compared to a site's tags, depending on a few extra simple equals to lines. For this to happen I only see the option that the result of a subquery is combined with a sub query within that query, as such: SELECT tag.*, (SELECT group_concat(t1.id, ',', (SELECT group_concat(tag.id) FROM adcampaign INNER JOIN adcampaign_tag ON adcampaign.id = adcampaign_tag.adcampaign_id INNER JOIN tag ON adcampaign_tag.tag_id = tag.id WHERE adcampaign.id = 1)) FROM ad, ad_tag, tag AS t1 WHERE ad.id = ad_tag.ad_id AND ad_tag.tag_id = t1.id AND ad.adcampaign_id = 1 AND ad.agecategory_id = 1 AND ad.adsize_id = 1 AND ad.adtype_id = 1) as tags FROM tag WHERE tag.id IN tags But the IN comparison only returns the first result because now the tags aren't a list but a concanated string. Anyone got any suggestion on this? I really need a way to combine it into one array

    Read the article

  • Users Hierarchy Logic

    - by user342944
    Hi guys, I am writing a user security module using SQLServer 2008 so threfore need to design a database accordingly. Formally I had Userinfo table with UserID, Username and ParentID to build a recursion and populated tree to represent hierarchy but now I have following criteria which I need to develop. I have now USERS, ADMINISTRATORS and GROUPS. Each node in the user hierarchy is either a user, administrator or group. User Someone who has login access to my application Administrator A user who may also manage all their child user accounts (and their children etc) This may include creating new users and assigning permissions to those users. There is no limit to the number of administrators in user structure. The higher up in the hierarchy that I go administrators have more child accounts to manage which include other child administrators. Group A user account can be designated as a group. This will be an account which is used to group one or more users together so that they can be manage as a unit. But no one can login to my application using a group account. This is how I want to create structure Super Administrator administrator ------------------------------------------------------------- | | | Manager A Manager B Manager C (adminstrator) (administrator) (administrator) | ----------------------------------------- | | | Employee A Employee B Sales Employees (User) (User) (Group) | ------------------------ | | | Emp C Emp D Emp E (User) (User) (User) Now how to build the table structure to achieve this. Do I need to create Users table alongwith Group table or what? Please guide I would really appreciate.

    Read the article

  • Converting MySQL Resultset from Rows to Columns

    - by gms8994
    I have output from a select like this: 04:47:37> select * from attributes left outer join trailer_attributes on attributes.id = trailer_attributes.attribute_id; +----+--------------+----------+-----------+------------+--------------+-----------------+ | id | name | datatype | list_page | trailer_id | attribute_id | attribute_value | +----+--------------+----------+-----------+------------+--------------+-----------------+ | 1 | Make | text | 1 | 1 | 1 | Apple | | 1 | Make | text | 1 | 2 | 1 | sdfg | | 2 | Year | number | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2009 | | 2 | Year | number | 1 | 2 | 2 | sdfg | | 3 | Type | text | 0 | 1 | 3 | iPhone | | 3 | Type | text | 0 | 2 | 3 | sdfg | | 4 | Axles | text | 0 | 1 | 4 | asdf | | 4 | Axles | text | 0 | 2 | 4 | sdfg | | 7 | Size | text | 0 | 1 | 7 | asd1 | | 7 | Size | text | 0 | 2 | 7 | sdfg | | 8 | Frame | text | 0 | 1 | 8 | | | 8 | Frame | text | 0 | 2 | 8 | sdfg | | 9 | Height | text | 0 | 1 | 9 | | | 9 | Height | text | 0 | 2 | 9 | sdfg | | 10 | Dollies | text | 0 | 1 | 10 | | | 10 | Dollies | text | 0 | 2 | 10 | sdfg | | 11 | Tires/Wheels | text | 0 | 1 | 11 | | | 11 | Tires/Wheels | text | 0 | 2 | 11 | sdfg | | 12 | Condition | text | 1 | 1 | 12 | New | | 12 | Condition | text | 1 | 2 | 12 | sdfg | | 13 | Title | text | 0 | 1 | 13 | | | 13 | Title | text | 0 | 2 | 13 | sdfg | +----+--------------+----------+-----------+------------+--------------+-----------------+ I want to convert it to something more along the lines of: id, Make, Year, Type, Axles, Size, Frame (etc) 1, Apple, 2009, iPhone, ..... 2, sdfg, sdfg, sdfg, ..... Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Can't use where clause on correlated columns.

    - by Keyo
    I want to add a where clause to make sure video_count is greater than zero. Only categories which are referenced once or more in video_category.video_id should be returned. Because video_count is not a field in any table I cannot do this. Here is the query. SELECT category . * , ( SELECT COUNT( * ) FROM video_category WHERE video_category.category_id = category.category_id ) AS 'video_count' FROM category WHERE category.status = 1 AND video_count > '0' AND publish_date < NOW() ORDER BY updated DESC; Thanks for the help.

    Read the article

  • Error message on using LinqDataSource in webforms

    - by naveen
    Coding Platform: ASP.NET 4.0 I am binding a GridView with LinqDataSource with AutoDelete functionality enabled. GridView is bound to the Products Table. I have a Products Table and a Category Table with an association on CategoryID. If I try to delete a Category that is referred in the Products Table I cannot do that. Its is totally acceptable, but I want the end user to be notified with some error message. Where to catch this error message?

    Read the article

  • What is the corrrect way to increment a field making up part of a composit key

    - by Tr1stan
    I have a bunch of tables whose primary key is made up of the foreign keys of other tables (Composite key). Therefore for example the attributes (as a very cut down version) might look like this: A[aPK, SomeFields] 1:M B[bPK, aFK, SomeFields] 1:M C[cPK, bFK, aFK, SomeFields] as data this could look like: A[aPK, SomeFields]: 1, Foo 2, Bar B[bPK, aFK, SomeFields]: 1, 1, FooData1 2, 1, FooData2 1, 2, BarData1 2, 2, BarData2 C[cPK, bFK, aFK, SomeFields]: 1, 1, 1, FooData1More 2, 1, 1, FooData1More 1, 2, 1, FooData2More 2, 2, 1, FooData2More 1, 1, 2, BarData1More 2, 1, 2, BarData1More 1, 2, 2, BarData2More 2, 2, 2, BarData2More I've got this running in a MSSQL DBMS and I'm looking for the best way to increment the left most column, in each table when a new tuple is added to it. I can't use the Auto Increment Identity Specification option as that has no idea that it is part of a composite key. I also don't want to use any aggregate function such as: MAX(field)+1 as this will have adverse affects with multiple users inputting data, rolling back etc. There might however be a nice trigger based option here, but I'm not sure. This must be a common issue so I'm hoping that someone has a lovely solution. As a side which may or may not affect the answer, I'm using Entity Framework 1.0 as my ORM, within a c# MVC application.

    Read the article

  • Use where condition with unjoined table

    - by Dragos D
    I have the following problem: I am trying to retreive a sum value based on one condition. Problem is that I can't join the conditional value since my tables aren't joined. Here is my syntax: SELECT SUM(value) FROM value v join day d on v.day_id = d.day_id join budget b on d.budget_id = b.budget_id join unit u on v.unit_id = u.unit_id where #output.class = (SELECT distinct s.class FROM sale s where s.id = #output.sale_id) AND u.unit_name in ('electronics') With this sybtax I get no error but neither values. Can you please tell me where I do wrong?

    Read the article

  • Sample/Example needed for a table/field setup

    - by acctman
    Can someone explain the statement below to me with a working sample/example. thanks in advance. You can not create duplicate fields, but simply add a single extra field, "coupleId", which would have a unique id for each couple; and two rows (one for each person) per couple; then JOIN the table against itself with a constraint like a.coupleId = b.coupleId AND a.id < b.id so that you can condense the data into a single result row for a given couple.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651  | Next Page >