Search Results

Search found 30398 results on 1216 pages for 'embedded sql'.

Page 684/1216 | < Previous Page | 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691  | Next Page >

  • Getting highest results in a JOIN

    - by Keithamus
    I've got three tables; Auctions, Auction Bids and Users. The table structure looks something like this: Auctions: id title -- ----- 1 Auction 1 2 Auction 2 Auction Bids: id user_id auction_id bid_amt -- ------- ---------- ------- 1 1 1 200.00 2 2 1 202.00 3 1 2 100.00 Users is just a standard table, with id and user name. My aim is to join these tables so I can get the highest values of these bids, as well as get the usernames related to those bids; so I have a result set like so: auction_id auction_title auctionbid_amt user_username ---------- ------------- -------------- ------------- 1 Auction 1 202.00 Bidder2 2 Auction 2 100.00 Bidder1 So far my query is as follows: SELECT a.id, a.title, ab.bid_points, u.display_name FROM auction a LEFT JOIN auctionbid ab ON a.id = ab.auction_id LEFT JOIN users u ON u.id = ab.user_id GROUP BY a.id This gets the single rows I am after, but it seems to display the lowest bid_amt, not the highest.

    Read the article

  • mySQL: Order by field size/length

    - by Sadi
    Here is a table structure (e.g. test): __________________________________________ | Field Name | Data Type | |________________|_________________________| | id | BIGINT (20) | |________________|_________________________| | title | varchar(25) | |________________|_________________________| | description | text | |________________|_________________________| A query like: SELECT * FROM TEST ORDER BY description; But I would like to order by the field size/length of the field description. The field type will be TEXT or BLOB.

    Read the article

  • Group and count in Rails

    - by alamodey
    I have this bit of code and I get an empty object. @results = PollRoles.find( :all, :select => 'option_id, count(*) count', :group => 'option_id', :conditions => ["poll_id = ?", @poll.id]) Is this the correct way of writing the query? I want a collection of records that have an option id and the number of times that option id is found in the PollRoles model. EDIT: This is how I''m iterating through the results: <% @results.each do |result| %> <% @option = Option.find_by_id(result.option_id) %> <%= @option.question %> <%= result.count %> <% end %>

    Read the article

  • Select where and where not

    - by Simon
    I have a table containing lessons that I called "cours" (french) and I have several cours inside and I have linked them to students with a table between them to see if they go to the lessons or not. I would like to return data with the SELECT and the data that are NOT select. So, If one student follow 3 courses of 5, I would like to return the 3 courses that he follow and the 2 courses that he doesn't follow. Is there a way to do it ?

    Read the article

  • SSRS 2005 Keep textbox and textfield together when page break occurs

    - by EKet
    Problem I don't have a details row or anything. I have simply a body and I dragged on textboxes for labeling textfields from my dataset. The problem is when one of the fields has too much data for the current page, it "page-breaks" at the start of the field leaving the textbox (label for the field) behind on the previous page. What I've tried Put the data field and the textbox label a) inside a rectangle - didn't work b) inside a list and the list inside a rectangle - didn't work c) inside a list with keep together property set to TRUE or FALSE - didn't work Question How would I group the textbox and the textfield so that regardless of where the pagebreak happens it includes its label?

    Read the article

  • LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO IN Oracle SQL

    - by Jasim
    updated_date = 08-Jun-2010; I have a query like this select * from asd whre updated_date <= todate('08-Jun-2010', 'dd-MM-yy'); but i am not getting any result. it is wotking only if todate is 09-Jun-2010... ie my equalto operator is not working properly. y is it like that ny help?

    Read the article

  • how to debug a query that has valid syntax, executes, but returns no results?

    - by Ty W
    So I'm writing a fairly involved query with a half dozen joins, a dependent subquery for [greatest-n-per-group] purposes, grouping, etc. It is syntactically valid, but I've clearly made at least one mistake because it returns nothing. In the past I've debugged valid queries that return nothing by removing joins, executing subqueries on their own, removing WHERE conditions, and removing grouping to see what I would get but so far this one has me stumped. Are there better tools or techniques to use for this sort of thing? This particular query is for MySQL if it matters for any platform-specific tools.

    Read the article

  • Why is SQLite3 using covering indices instead of the indices I created?

    - by Geoff
    I have an extremely large database (contacts has ~3 billion entries, people has ~280 million entries, and the other tables have a negligible number of entries). Most other queries I've run are really fast. However, I've encountered a more complicated query that's really slow. I'm wondering if there's any way to speed this up. First of all, here is my schema: CREATE TABLE activities (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, name TEXT NOT NULL); CREATE TABLE contacts ( id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, person1_id INTEGER NOT NULL, person2_id INTEGER NOT NULL, duration REAL NOT NULL, -- hours activity_id INTEGER NOT NULL -- FOREIGN_KEY(person1_id) REFERENCES people(id), -- FOREIGN_KEY(person2_id) REFERENCES people(id) ); CREATE TABLE people ( id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, state_id INTEGER NOT NULL, county_id INTEGER NOT NULL, age INTEGER NOT NULL, gender TEXT NOT NULL, -- M or F income INTEGER NOT NULL -- FOREIGN_KEY(state_id) REFERENCES states(id) ); CREATE TABLE states ( id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, name TEXT NOT NULL, abbreviation TEXT NOT NULL ); CREATE INDEX activities_name_index on activities(name); CREATE INDEX contacts_activity_id_index on contacts(activity_id); CREATE INDEX contacts_duration_index on contacts(duration); CREATE INDEX contacts_person1_id_index on contacts(person1_id); CREATE INDEX contacts_person2_id_index on contacts(person2_id); CREATE INDEX people_age_index on people(age); CREATE INDEX people_county_id_index on people(county_id); CREATE INDEX people_gender_index on people(gender); CREATE INDEX people_income_index on people(income); CREATE INDEX people_state_id_index on people(state_id); CREATE INDEX states_abbreviation_index on states(abbreviation); CREATE INDEX states_name_index on states(name); Note that I've created an index on every column in the database. I don't care about the size of the database; speed is all I care about. Here's an example of a query that, as expected, runs almost instantly: SELECT count(*) FROM people, states WHERE people.state_id=states.id and states.abbreviation='IA'; Here's the troublesome query: SELECT * FROM contacts WHERE rowid IN (SELECT contacts.rowid FROM contacts, people, states WHERE contacts.person1_id=people.id AND people.state_id=states.id AND states.name='Kansas' INTERSECT SELECT contacts.rowid FROM contacts, people, states WHERE contacts.person2_id=people.id AND people.state_id=states.id AND states.name='Missouri'); Now, what I think would happen is that each subquery would use each relevant index I've created to speed this up. However, when I show the query plan, I see this: sqlite> EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN SELECT * FROM contacts WHERE rowid IN (SELECT contacts.rowid FROM contacts, people, states WHERE contacts.person1_id=people.id AND people.state_id=states.id AND states.name='Kansas' INTERSECT SELECT contacts.rowid FROM contacts, people, states WHERE contacts.person2_id=people.id AND people.state_id=states.id AND states.name='Missouri'); 0|0|0|SEARCH TABLE contacts USING INTEGER PRIMARY KEY (rowid=?) (~25 rows) 0|0|0|EXECUTE LIST SUBQUERY 1 2|0|2|SEARCH TABLE states USING COVERING INDEX states_name_index (name=?) (~1 rows) 2|1|1|SEARCH TABLE people USING COVERING INDEX people_state_id_index (state_id=?) (~5569556 rows) 2|2|0|SEARCH TABLE contacts USING COVERING INDEX contacts_person1_id_index (person1_id=?) (~12 rows) 3|0|2|SEARCH TABLE states USING COVERING INDEX states_name_index (name=?) (~1 rows) 3|1|1|SEARCH TABLE people USING COVERING INDEX people_state_id_index (state_id=?) (~5569556 rows) 3|2|0|SEARCH TABLE contacts USING COVERING INDEX contacts_person2_id_index (person2_id=?) (~12 rows) 1|0|0|COMPOUND SUBQUERIES 2 AND 3 USING TEMP B-TREE (INTERSECT) In fact, if I show the query plan for the first query I posted, I get this: sqlite> EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN SELECT count(*) FROM people, states WHERE people.state_id=states.id and states.abbreviation='IA'; 0|0|1|SEARCH TABLE states USING COVERING INDEX states_abbreviation_index (abbreviation=?) (~1 rows) 0|1|0|SEARCH TABLE people USING COVERING INDEX people_state_id_index (state_id=?) (~5569556 rows) Why is SQLite using covering indices instead of the indices I created? Shouldn't the search in the people table be able to happen in log(n) time given state_id which in turn is found in log(n) time?

    Read the article

  • How do I use on delete cascade in mysql?

    - by Marius
    I have a database of components. Each component is of a specific type. That means there is a many-to-one relationship between a component and a type. When I delete a type, I would like to delete all the components which has a foreign key of that type. But if I'm not mistaken, cascade delete will delete the type when the component is deleted. Is there any way to do what I described?

    Read the article

  • [C#] How to create a constructor of a class that return a collection of instances of that class?

    - by codemonkie
    My program has the following class definition: public sealed class Subscriber { private subscription; public Subscriber(int id) { using (DataContext dc = new DataContext()) { this.subscription = dc._GetSubscription(id).SingleOrDefault(); } } } ,where _GetSubscription() is a sproc which returns a value of type ISingleResult<_GetSubscriptionResult> Say, I have a list of type List<int> full of 1000 ids and I want to create a collection of subscribers of type List<Subscriber>. How can I do that without calling the constructor in a loop for 1000 times? Since I am trying to avoid switching the DataContext on/off so frequently that may stress the database. TIA.

    Read the article

  • jpa join query on a subclass

    - by Brian
    I have the following relationships in JPA (hibernate). Object X has two subclasses, Y and Z. Object A has a manyToOne relationship to object X. (Note, this is a one-sided relationship so object X cannot see object A). Now, I want to get the max value of a column in object A, but only where the relationship is of a specific subtype, ie...Y. So, that equates to...get the max value of column1 in object A, across all instances of A where they have a relationship with Y. Is this possible? I'm a bit lost as how to query it. I was thinking of something like: String query = "SELECT MAX(a.columnName) FROM A a join a.x; Query query = super.entityManager.createQuery(query); query.execute(); However that doesn't take account of the subclass of X...so I'm a bit lost. Any help would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Access is re-writing - and breaking - my query!

    - by FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
    I have a query in MS Access (2003) that makes use of a subquery. The subquery part looks like this: ...FROM (SELECT id, dt, details FROM all_recs WHERE def_cd="ABC-00123") AS q1,... And when I switch to Table View to verify the results, all is OK. Then, I wanted the result of this query to be printed on the page header for a report (the query returns a single row that is page-header stuff). I get an error because the query is suddenly re-written as: ...FROM [SELECT id, dt, details FROM all_recs WHERE def_cd="ABC-00123"; ] AS q1,... So it's Ok that the round brackets are automatically replaced by square brackets, Access feels it needs to do that, fine! But why is it adding the ; into the subquery, which causes it to fail? I suppose I could just create new query objects for these subqueries, but it seems a little silly that I should have to do that.

    Read the article

  • How to verify if two tables have exactly the same data?

    - by SiLent SoNG
    Basically we have one table (original table) and it is backed up into another table (backup table); thus the two tables have exactly the same schema. At the beginning both tables (original table and backup table) contains exactly the same set of data. After sometime for some reason I need to verify whether dataset in the original table has changed or not. In order to do this I have to compare the dataset in the original table against the backup table. Let's say the original table has the following schema: `create table LemmasMapping ( lemma1 int, lemma2 int, index ix_lemma1 using btree (lemma1), index ix_lemma2 using btree (lemma2) )` How could I achieve the dataset comparision? Update: the table does not have a primary key. It simply stores mappings between two ids.

    Read the article

  • Violation of primary key constraint, multiple users

    - by MC.
    Lets say UserA and UserB both have an application open and are working with the same type of data. UserA inserts a record into the table with value 10 (PrimaryKey='A'), UserB does not currently see the value UserA entered and attempts to insert a new value of 20 (PrimaryKey='A'). What I wanted in this situation was a DBConcurrencyException, but instead what I have is a primary key violation. I understand why, but I have no idea how to resolve this. What is a good practice to deal with such a circumstance? I do not want to merge before updating the database because I want an error to inform the user that multiple users updated this data.

    Read the article

  • Need to use query column value in nested subquery

    - by Dustin
    It seems I cannot use a column from the parent query in a sub query. How can I refactor this query to get what I need? dbo.func_getRelatedAcnts returns a table of related accounts (all children from a given account). Events and Profiles are related to accounts. SELECT COUNT(r.reg_id) FROM registrations r JOIN profiles p ON (r.reg_frn_pro_id = p.pro_id) JOIN events e ON (r.reg_frn_evt_id = e.evt_id) WHERE evt_frn_acnt_id NOT IN (SELECT * FROM dbo.func_getRelatedAcnts(p.pro_frn_acnt_id))

    Read the article

  • What is the reason not to use select * ?

    - by Chris Lively
    I've seen a number of people claim that you should specifically name each column you want in your select query. Assuming I'm going to use all of the columns anyway, why would I not use SELECT *? Even considering the question from 9/24, I don't think this is an exact duplicate as I'm approaching the issue from a slightly different perspective. One of our principles is to not optimize before it's time. With that in mind, it seems like using SELECT * should be the preferred method until it is proven to be a resource issue or the schema is pretty much set in stone. Which, as we know, won't occur until development is completely done. That said, is there an overriding issue to not use SELECT *?

    Read the article

  • How to check with PHP does a SQL database already have

    - by Dan Horvat
    I've tried to find the answer to this question but none of the answers fit. I have two databases, one has 15.000.000 entries and I want to extract the necessary data and store it in a much smaller database with around 33.000 entries. Both databases are open at the same time. Or at least they should be. While having the big database open and extracting the entries from it, is it possible to check whether the value already exists in the smaller database? I just need some generic way which checks that.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691  | Next Page >