Search Results

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

Page 696/1156 | < Previous Page | 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703  | Next Page >

  • Query returning an ascending group number

    - by Dougman
    I have a query like below that has groups (COL1) and that group's values (COL2). select col1, col2 from (select 'A' col1, 1 col2 from dual union all select 'A' col1, 2 col2 from dual union all select 'B' col1, 1 col2 from dual union all select 'B' col1, 2 col2 from dual union all select 'C' col1, 1 col2 from dual union all select 'C' col1, 2 col2 from dual ) order by col1, col2; The output of this query looks like: COL1 COL2 ---- ---- A 1 A 2 B 1 B 2 C 1 C 2 What I need is a query that will return an ordered number increasing for each different group (COL1). It seems like there would be a simple way to accomplish this (maybe with analytics) but for some reason it is escaping me. GRPNUM COL1 COL2 ------ ---- ---- 1 A 1 1 A 2 2 B 1 2 B 2 3 C 1 3 C 2 I am running Oracle 10gR2.

    Read the article

  • Centralizing / Abstracting MSSQL Data from Multiple Tables / Databases

    - by davemackey
    If one has a number of databases (due to separate application front-ends) that provide a complete picture - for example a CRM, accounting, and product database - what methods are available to centralize/abstract this data for easy reporting? Essentially, I'm wondering if there is a way to automatically pull data from multiple databases into a central repository that is continuously updated from the three databases and which can be used for reporting? I'm also open to alternative best practice suggestions?

    Read the article

  • left join without duplicate values using MIN()

    - by Clipper87
    I have a table_1: id custno 1 1 2 2 3 3 and a table_2: id custno qty descr 1 1 10 a 2 1 7 b 3 2 4 c 4 3 7 d 5 1 5 e 6 1 5 f When I run this query to show the minimum order quantities from every customer: SELECT DISTINCT table_1.custno,table_2.qty,table_2.descr FROM table_1 LEFT OUTER JOIN table_2 ON table_1.custno = table_2.custno AND qty = (SELECT MIN(qty) FROM table_2 WHERE table_2.custno = table_1.custno ) Then I get this result: custno qty descr 1 5 e 1 5 f 2 4 c 3 7 d Customer 1 appears twice each time with the same minimum qty (& a different description) but I only want to see customer 1 appear once. I don't care if that is the record with 'e' as a description or 'f' as a description. How could I do this ? Thx!

    Read the article

  • How to make NOT IN statement via Restrictions

    - by slavig
    I used this trick: List statuses = new ArrayList(); Criteria criteria = session.createCriteria(MessageQueue.class); criteria.add(Restrictions.not(Restrictions.in("message_status", statuses))); and this code creates: ...from MESSAGE_QUEUE mq where not (mq.message_status in (?, ?, ?, ?))... but I need: ...from MESSAGE_QUEUE mq where mq.message_status NOT IN (?, ?, ?, ?) Du you think they are equal statements?

    Read the article

  • Does the order of the columns in a SELECT statement make a difference?

    - by Frank Computer
    This question was inspired by a previous question posted on SO, "Does the order of the WHERE clause make a differnece?". Would it improve a SELECT statement's performance if the the columns used in the WHERE section are placed at the begining of the SELECT statement? example: SELECT customer.id, transaction.id, transaction.efective_date, transaction.a, [...] FROM customer, transaction WHERE customer.id = transaction.id; I do know that limiting the list of columns to only the needed ones in a SELECT statement improves performance as opposed to using SELECT * because the current list is smaller.

    Read the article

  • Query to bring count from comma seperated Value

    - by Mugil
    I have Two Tables One for Storing Products and Other for Storing Orders List. CREATE TABLE ProductsList(ProductId INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, ProductName VARCHAR(50)) INSERT INTO ProductsList(ProductId, ProductName) VALUES(1,'Product A'), (2,'Product B'), (3,'Product C'), (4,'Product D'), (5,'Product E'), (6,'Product F'), (7,'Product G'), (8,'Product H'), (9,'Product I'), (10,'Product J'); CREATE TABLE OrderList(OrderId INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT, EmailId VARCHAR(50), CSVProductIds VARCHAR(50)) SELECT * FROM OrderList INSERT INTO OrderList(EmailId, CSVProductIds) VALUES('[email protected]', '2,4,1,5,7'), ('[email protected]', '5,7,4'), ('[email protected]', '2'), ('[email protected]', '8,9'), ('[email protected]', '4,5,9'), ('[email protected]', '1,2,3'), ('[email protected]', '9,10'), ('[email protected]', '1,5'); Output ItemName NoOfOrders Product A 4 Product B 3 Product C 1 Product D 3 Product E 4 Product F 0 Product G 2 Product H 1 Product I 2 Product J 1 The Order List Stores the ItemsId as Comma separated value for every customer who places order.Like this i am having more than 40k Records in my dB table Now I am assigned with a task of creating report in which I should display Items and No of People ordered Items as Shown Below I Used Query as below in my PHP to bring the Orders One By One and storing in array. SELECT COUNT(PL.EmailId) FROM OrderList PL WHERE CSVProductIds LIKE '2' OR CSVProductIds LIKE '%,2,%' OR CSVProductIds LIKE '%,2' OR CSVProductIds LIKE '2,%'; 1.Is it possible to get the same out put by using Single Query 2.Does using a like in mysql query slows down the dB when the table has more no of records i.e 40k rows

    Read the article

  • Is an index required for columns in ON clause?

    - by newbie
    Do I have to create an index on columns referenced in Joins? E.g. SELECT * FROM left_table INNER JOIN right_table ON left_table.foo = right_table.bar WHERE ... Should I create indexes on left_table(foo), right_table(bar), or both? I noticed different results when I used EXPLAIN (Postgresql) with and without indexes and switching around the order of the comparison (right_table.bar = left_table.foo) I know for sure that indexes are used for the left of the WHERE clause but I am wondering whether I need indexes for columns listed in ON clauses.

    Read the article

  • is Payment table needed when you have an invoice table like this?

    - by EBAGHAKI
    this is my invoice table: Invoice Table: invoice_id creation_date due_date payment_date status enum('not paid','paid','expired') user_id total_price I wonder if it's Useful to have a payment table in order to record user payments for invoices. payment table can be like this: payment_id payment_date invoice_id price_paid status enum('successful', 'not successful')

    Read the article

  • Select Query Joined on Two Fields?

    - by btollett
    I've got a few tables in an access database: ID | LocationName 1 | Location1 2 | Location2 ID | LocationID | Date | NumProductsDelivered 1 | 1 | 12/10 | 3 2 | 1 | 01/11 | 2 3 | 1 | 02/11 | 2 4 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 5 | 2 | 12/10 | 1 ID | LocationID | Date | NumEmployees | EmployeeType 1 | 1 | 12/10 | 10 | 1 (=Permanent) 2 | 1 | 12/10 | 3 | 2 (=Temporary) 3 | 1 | 12/10 | 1 | 3 (=Support) 4 | 2 | 10/10 | 1 | 1 5 | 2 | 11/10 | 2 | 1 6 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 | 2 7 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 | 3 8 | 2 | 12/10 | 2 | 1 9 | 2 | 12/10 | 1 | 3 What I want to do is pass in the LocationID as a parameter and get back something like the following table. So, if I pass in 2 as my LocationID, I should get: Date | NumProductsDelivered | NumPermanentEmployees | NumSupportEmployees 10/10 | | 1 | 11/10 | 1 | 2 | 1 12/10 | 1 | 2 | 1 It seems like this should be a pretty simple query. I really don't even need the first table except as a way to fill in the combo box on the form from which the user chooses which location they want a report for. Unfortunately, everything I've done has resulted in me getting a lot more data than I should be getting. My confusion is in how to set up the join (presumably that's what I'm looking for here) given that I want both the date and locationID to be the same for each row in the result set. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Combine First, Middle Initial, Last name and Suffix in T-SQL (No extra spaces)

    - by Paul
    I'm trying not to reinvent the wheel here...I have these four fields [tbl_Contacts].[FirstName], [tbl_Contacts].[MiddleInitial], [tbl_Contacts].[LastName], [tbl_Contacts].[Suffix] And I want to create a FullName field in a view, but I can't have extra spaces if fields are blank...So I can't do FirstName + ' ' + MiddleInitial + ' ' + LastName + ' ' + Suffix...Because if there is no middle initial or suffix I'd have 2 extra spaces in the field. I think I need a Case statement, but I thought someone would have a handy method for this...Also, the middleinitial and suffix may be null.

    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

  • One on One table relation - is it harmful to keep relation in both tables?

    - by EBAGHAKI
    I have 2 tables that their rows have one on one relation.. For you to understand the situation, suppose there is one table with user informations and there is another table that contains a very specific informations and each user can only link to one these specific kind of informations ( suppose second table as characters ) And that character can only assign to the user who grabs it, Is it against the rules of designing clean databases to hold the relation key in both tables? User Table: user_id, name, age, character_id Character Table: character_id, shape, user_id I have to do it for performance, how do you think about it?

    Read the article

  • Redundancy in doing sum()

    - by Abhi
    table1 - id, time_stamp, value This table consists of 10 id's. Each id would be having a value for each hour in a day. So for 1 day, there would be 240 records in this table. table2 - id Table2 consists of a dynamically changing subset of id's present in table1. At a particular instance, the intention is to get sum(value) from table1, considering id's only in table2, grouping by each hour in that day, giving the summarized values a rank and repeating this each day. the query is at this stage: select time_stamp, sum(value), rank() over (partition by trunc(time_stamp) order by sum(value) desc) rn from table1 where exists (select t2.id from table2 t2 where id=t2.id) and time_stamp >= to_date('05/04/2010 00','dd/mm/yyyy hh24') and time_stamp <= to_date('25/04/2010 23','dd/mm/yyyy hh24') group by time_stamp order by time_stamp asc If the query is correct, can this be made more efficient, considering that, table1 will actually consist of thousand's of id's instead of 10 ? EDIT: I am using sum(value) 2 times in the query, which I am not able to get a workaround such that the sum() is done only once. Pls help on this

    Read the article

  • PHP is truncating MSSQL Blob data (4096b), even after setting INI values. Am I missing one?

    - by Dutchie432
    I am writing a PHP script that goes through a table and extracts the varbinary(max) blob data from each record into an external file. The code is working perfectly, except when a file is over 4096b - the data is truncated at exactly 4096. I've modified the values for mssql.textlimit, mssql.textsize, and odbc.defaultlrl without any success. Am I missing something here? <?php ini_set("mssql.textlimit" , "2147483647"); ini_set("mssql.textsize" , "2147483647"); ini_set("odbc.defaultlrl", "0"); include_once('common.php'); $id=$_REQUEST['i']; $q = odbc_exec($connect, "Select id,filename,documentBin from Projectdocuments where id = $id"); if (odbc_fetch_row($q)){ echo "Trying $filename ... "; $fileName="projectPhotos/docs/".odbc_result($q,"filename"); if (file_exists($fileName)){ unlink($fileName); } if($fh = fopen($fileName, "wb")) { $binData=odbc_result($q,"documentBin"); fwrite($fh, $binData) ; fclose($fh); $size = filesize($fileName); echo ("$fileName<br />Done ($size)<br><br>"); }else { echo ("$fileName Failed<br>"); } } ?> OUTPUT Trying ... projectPhotos/docs/file1.pdf Done (4096) Trying ... projectPhotos/docs/file2.zip Done (4096) Trying ... projectPhotos/docsv3.pdf Done (4096) etc..

    Read the article

  • Cakephp Autoconvert find() fields?

    - by Razor Storm
    In cake php I can grab a model's fields by using the find() method. What if I wish to apply a transformation function to the fields? Is there a way to directly accomplish this task? Suppose I have a model called RaceTime with the fields racerId and timeMillis RaceTime +------------+ | Field | +------------+ | id | | racerId | | timeMillis | +------------+ timeMillis is an int specifying how long the race took in milliseconds. Obviously saying a race took 15651 milliseconds isn't very useful to a human reader, and I would wish to convert this to a human readable format. Is there a way to accomplish this directly in find()? Or is the only option to loop through the results after find() finishes?

    Read the article

  • SQL query construction - separate data in a column into two columns

    - by Tommy
    I have a column that contains links. The problem is that the titles of the links are in the same column, so it looks like this: linktitle|-|linkurl I want link title and linkurl in separate columns. I've created a new column for the urls, so I'm looking for a way to extract them and update the linkurl column with them. Is there any clever way to construct a query that does this?

    Read the article

  • Performance optimization for mssql: decrease stored procedures execution time or unload the server?

    - by tim
    Hello everybody! We have a web service which provides search over hotels. There is a problem with performance: a single request to the service takes around 5000 ms. Almost all of the time is spent in database by executing storing procedures. During the request our server (mssql2008) consumes ~90% of the processor time. When 2 requests are made in parallel the average time grows and is around 7000 ms. When number of request is increasing, the average time of response is increasing as well. We have 20-30 requests per minute. Which kind of optimization is the best in this case having in mind that the goal is to provide stable response time for the service: 1) Try to decrease the stored procedures execution time 2) Try to find the way how to unload the server It is interesting to hear from people who deal with booking sites. Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703  | Next Page >