Search Results

Search found 28900 results on 1156 pages for 'sql 2005'.

Page 693/1156 | < Previous Page | 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700  | Next Page >

  • sports league database design

    - by John
    Hello, I'm developing a database to store statistics for a sports league. I'd like to show several tables: - league table that indicates the position of the team in the current and previous fixture - table that shows the position of a team in every fixture in the championship I have a matches table: Matches (IdMatch, IdTeam1, IdTeam2, GoalsTeam1, GoalsTeam2) Whith this table I can calculate the total points of every team based on the matches the team played. But every time I want to show the league table I have to calculate the points. Also I have a problem to calculate in which position classified a team in the last 10 fixtures cause I have to make 10 queries. To store the league table for every fixture in a database table is another approach, but every time I change a match already played I have to recalculate every fixture from there... Is there a better approach for this problem? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Database table schema design - varchar(n). Suitable choice of N

    - by morpheous
    Coming from a C background, I may be getting too anal about this and worrying unnecessarily about bits and bytes here. Still, I cant help thinking how the data is actually stored and that if I choose an N which is easily factorizable into a power of 2, the database will be more effecient in how it packs data etc. Using this "logic", I have a string field in a table which is a variable length up to 21 chars. I am tempted to use 32 instead of 21, for the reason given above - however now I am thinking that I am wasting disk space because there will be space allocated for 11 extra chars that are guaranteed to be never used. Since I envisage storing several tens of thousands of rows a day, it all adds up. Question: Mindful of all of the above, Should I declare varchar(21) or varchar(32) and why?

    Read the article

  • How to generate a script for changing a column of varchar to xml type with data being converted?

    - by user1323981
    Initially I have a column (partner_email) of varchar.Now a recent change has come where it needs to be changed to be changed to the XML type but the previous records needs to be reserve into the new column. I have applied the below algorithm to accomplish the work /*********************************************************************** Purpose: To change the partner_email column from Varchar Type To Xml Type and convert the existing records from varchar to xml types. Programmers Notes: 1. Create a new Column by the name partner_email_temp of type XML into the Partner Table 2. Copy the Email contents from partner_email to partner_email_temp column after proper conversion N.B.~ The format will be <PartnerEmails> <Email>[email protected]</Email> <Email /> <Email /> </PartnerEmails> 3. Drop the exisitng partner_email 4. Rename partner_email_temp column to partner_email ***********************************************************************/ USE [Test] GO --===== Create a partner_email_temp column of type xml into the Partner table IF NOT EXISTS ( SELECT * FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.columns WHERE table_name = 'Partner' AND column_name = 'partner_email_temp' ) BEGIN ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Partner] ADD partner_email_temp XML NULL END GO --===== Copy the Email contents from partner_email to partner_email_temp column -- after proper conversion to xml type UPDATE [dbo].[Partner] SET partner_email_temp = CAST('<PartnerEmails><Email>' + REPLACE(partner_email, '&', '&amp;') + '</Email><Email></Email><Email></Email></PartnerEmails>' AS XML) GO --===== Drop the exisitng partner_email ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Partner] DROP COLUMN partner_email GO --===== Rename partner_email_temp column to partner_email Exec sp_RENAME 'Partner.partner_email_temp','partner_email','COLUMN' GO I works fine for the first time I ran. Now if I ran it for the next time, it am getting an error Msg 8116, Level 16, State 1, Line 4 Argument data type xml is invalid for argument 1 of replace function. Caution: Changing any part of an object name could break scripts and stored procedures. The intention is that, if the partner_email column is varchar, the script will change it to xml type and will convert all the data in xml format . If I ran it second time, it should ignore the statement. How to achieve this? I am trying in a different way DECLARE @columnDataType VARCHAR(50) SELECT @columnDataType = DATA_TYPE FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.columns WHERE table_name = 'Partner' AND column_name = 'partner_email' print @columnDataType IF (@columnDataType = 'varchar') BEGIN --===== Create a partner_email_temp column of type xml into the Partner table IF NOT EXISTS ( SELECT * FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.columns WHERE table_name = 'Partner' AND column_name = 'partner_email_temp' ) BEGIN ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Partner] ADD partner_email_temp XML NULL --===== Copy the Email contents from partner_email to partner_email_temp column -- after proper conversion to xml type UPDATE [dbo].[Partner] SET partner_email_temp = CAST('<PartnerEmails><Email>' + REPLACE(partner_email, '&', '&amp;') + '</Email><Email></Email><Email></Email></PartnerEmails>' AS XML) --===== Drop the exisitng partner_email ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Partner] DROP COLUMN partner_email --===== Rename partner_email_temp column to partner_email EXEC sp_RENAME 'Partner.partner_email_temp','partner_email','COLUMN' END END but getting error Msg 207, Level 16, State 1, Line 29 Invalid column name 'partner_email_temp'. Help needed

    Read the article

  • joining two tables and getting aggregate data

    - by alex
    how do i write a query that returns aggregate sales data for California in the past x months. ----------------------- ----------------------- | order | | customer | |-----------------------| |-----------------------| | orderId int | | customerId int | | customerId int | | state varchar | | deposit decimal | ----------------------- | orderDate date | ----------------------- ----------------------- | orderItem | |-----------------------| | orderId int | | itemId int | | qty int | | lineTotal decimal | | itemPrice decimal | -----------------------

    Read the article

  • How to structure data... Sequential or Hierarchical?

    - by Ryan
    I'm going through the exercise of building a CMS that will organize a lot of the common documents that my employer generates each time we get a new sales order. Each new sales order gets a 5 digit number (12222,12223,122224, etc...) but internally we have applied a hierarchy to these numbers: + 121XX |--01 |--02 + 122XX |--22 |--23 |--24 In my table for sales orders, is it better to use the 5 digital number as an ID and populate up or would it be better to use the hierarchical structure that we use when referring to jobs in regular conversation? The only benefit to not populating sequentially seems to be formatting the data later on in my view, but that doesn't sound like a good enough reason to go through the extra work. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Do partitions allow multiple bulk loads?

    - by ck
    I have a database that contains data for many "clients". Currently, we insert tens of thousands of rows into multiple tables every so often using .Net SqlBulkCopy which causes the entire tables to be locked and inaccessible for the duration of the transaction. As most of our business processes rely upon accessing data for only one client at a time, we would like to be able to load data for one client, while updating data for another client. To make things more fun, all PKs, FKs and clustered indexes are on GUID columns (I am looking at changing this). I'm looking at adding the ClientID into all tables, then partitioning on this. Would this give me the functionality I require?

    Read the article

  • replicating master tables mapping in transaction tables

    - by NoDisplay
    I have three master tables for location information Country {ID, Name} State {ID, Name, CountryID} City {ID, Name, StateID} Now I have one transcation table called Person which hold the person name and his location information. My Question is shall I have only CityID in the Person table like this: Person {ID, Name, CityID}' And have view of join query which give me detail like "Person{ID,Name,City,State,Country}" or Shall I replicate the mapping Person {ID, Name, CityID, StateID, CountryID} Please suggest which do you feel is to be selected and why? if there is any other option available, please suggest. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • what is the 'extra' mean in this django code..

    - by zjm1126
    TOPIC_COUNT_SQL = """ SELECT COUNT(*) FROM topics_topic WHERE topics_topic.object_id = maps_map.id AND topics_topic.content_type_id = %s """ MEMBER_COUNT_SQL = """ SELECT COUNT(*) FROM maps_map_members WHERE maps_map_members.map_id = maps_map.id """ maps = maps.extra(select=SortedDict([ ('member_count', MEMBER_COUNT_SQL), ('topic_count', TOPIC_COUNT_SQL), ]), select_params=(content_type.id,)) i don't know this mean, thanks

    Read the article

  • Oracle - truncating a global temporary table

    - by superdario
    I am processing large amounts of data in iterations, each and iteration processes around 10-50 000 records. Because of such large number of records, I am inserting them into a global temporary table first, and then process it. Usually, each iteration takes 5-10 seconds. Would it be wise to truncate the global temporary table after each iteration so that each iteration can start off with an empty table? There are around 5000 iterations.

    Read the article

  • Joining tables, if percentage is above certain value

    - by CluelessGerman
    My question is similar to this one: Compare rows and get percentage However, little different. I adapted my question to the other post. I got 2 tables. First table: user_id | post_id 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 12 2 15 And second table: post_id | rating 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 2 5 3 null 3 1 3 4 12 4 15 1 So now I would like to count the rating for each post, in the second table. If the rating has more than, lets say, 50% positive ratings than I want to get the post_id and going it to the post_id from table one and add 1 to the user_id. At the end it would return the user_id with the number of positive posts. The result for above table would be: user_id | helpfulPosts 1 2 2 1 The post with post_id 1 and 3 have positive rating, because more than 50% have ratings of 1-3. The post with id = 2 is not positive, because the rating is exactly 50%. How would I achieve this? For clarification: It's a mysql rdbm and a positive post, is one where the number of rating_ids with 1, 2 and 3 are more than half of the overall rating. Basically the same thing, from the other thread I posted above.

    Read the article

  • MySQL: How to copy rows, but change a few fields?

    - by Andrew
    I have a large number of rows that I would like to copy, but I need to change one field. I can select the rows that I want to copy: select * from Table where Event_ID = "120" Now I want to copy all those rows and create new rows while setting the Event_ID to 155. How can I accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • Database design 1 to 1 relationship

    - by Khou
    I design my database incorrectly, should I fix this while its in development? "user" table is suppose to have a 1.1 relationship with "userprofile" table however the actual design the "user" table has a 1.* relationship with "userprofile" table. Everything works! but should it be fixed anyways?

    Read the article

  • MySQL - Limit a left join to the first date-time that occurs?

    - by John M
    Simplified table structure (the tables can't be merged at this time): TableA: dts_received (datetime) dts_completed (datetime) task_a (varchar) TableB: dts_started (datetime) task_b (varchar) What I would like to do is determine how long a task took to complete. The join parameter would be something like ON task_a = task_b AND dts_completed < dts_started The issue is that there may be multiple date-times that occur after the dts_completed. How do I create a join that only returns the first tableB-datetime that occurs after the tableA-datetime?

    Read the article

  • SQLite: Simple DELETE statement did not work

    - by user186446
    I have a table MRU, that has 3 columns. (VALUE varchar(255); TYPE varchar(20); DT_ADD datetime) This is a table simply storing an entry and recording the date time it was recorded. What I wanted to do is: delete the oldest entry whenever I add a new entry that exceeds a certain number. here is my query: delete from MRU where type = 'FILENAME' ORDER BY DT_ADD limit 1; The query returns an error. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Greatest not null column

    - by Álvaro G. Vicario
    I need to update a row with a formula based on the largest value of two DATETIME columns. I would normally do this: GREATEST(date_one, date_two) However, both columns are allowed to be NULL. I need the greatest date even when the other is NULL (of course, I expect NULL when both are NULL) and GREATEST() returns NULL when one of the columns is NULL. This seems to work: GREATEST(COALESCE(date_one, date_two), COALESCE(date_two, date_one)) But I wonder... am I missing a more straightforward method?

    Read the article

  • Insert into select and update in single query

    - by Ossi
    I have 4 tables: tempTBL, linksTBL and categoryTBL, extra on my tempTBL I have: ID, name, url, cat, isinserted columns on my linksTBL I have: ID, name, alias columns on my categoryTBL I have: cl_id, link_id,cat_id on my extraTBL I have: id, link_id, value How do I do a single query to select from tempTBL all items where isinsrted = 0 then insert them to linksTBL and for each record inserted, pickup ID (which is primary) and then insert that ID to categoryTBL with cat_id = 88. after that insert extraTBL ID for link_id and url for value. I know this is so confusing, put I'll post this anyhow... This is what I have so far: INSERT IGNORE INTO linksTBL (link_id,link_name,alias) VALUES(NULL,'tex2','hello'); # generate ID by inserting NULL INSERT INTO categoryTBL (link_id,cat_id) VALUES(LAST_INSERT_ID(),'88'); # use ID in second table I would like to add here somewhere that it only selects items where isinserted = 0 and iserts those records, and onse inserted, will change isinserted to 1, so when next time it runs, it will not add them again.

    Read the article

  • SQL with codition on calculated value

    - by user619893
    I have a table with products, their amount and their price. I need to select all entries where the average price per article is between a range. My query so far: SELECT productid,AVG(SUM(price)/SUM(amount)) AS avg FROM stock WHERE avg=$from AND avg<=$to GROUP BY productid If do this, it tells me avg doesnt exist. Also i obviously need to group by because the sum and average need to be per wine

    Read the article

  • Client to server data upload

    - by RickBowden
    I'm trying to design a system similar to the traditional server monitoring systems like MOM, Tivoli, Open View, where an agent will record data and then upload it to a central database once a day, but them also be able to send immediate alerts back to the server. I'm not sure what the best methodology might be for this. I've started looking at Microsoft sync services but I'm not sure if it will fit my needs. I'm using VS2008 and C#. Does anyone have any experience or ideas about how I should go about this task?

    Read the article

  • how to select distinct rows for a column

    - by Satoru.Logic
    Hi, all. I have a table x that's like the one bellow: id | name | observed_value | 1 | a | 100 | 2 | b | 200 | 3 | b | 300 | 4 | a | 150 | 5 | c | 300 | I want to make a query so that in the result set I have exactly one record for one name: (1, a, 100) (2, b, 200) (5, c, 300) If there are multiple records corresponding to a name, say 'a' in the table above, I just pick up one of them. In my current implementation, I make a query like this: select x.* from x , (select distinct name, min(observed_value) as minimum_val from x group by name) x1 where x.name = x1.name and x.observed_value = x1.observed_value; But I think there may be some better way around, please tell me if you know, thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • How effecient is a details table?

    - by Jeffrey Lott
    At my job, we have pseudo-standard of creating one table to hold the "standard" information for an entity, and a second table, named like 'TableNameDetails', which holds optional data elements. On average, for every row in the main table will have about 8-10 detail rows in it. My question is: What kind of performance impacts does this have over adding these details as additional nullable columns on the main table?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700  | Next Page >