Search Results

Search found 33585 results on 1344 pages for 'sql execution plan'.

Page 698/1344 | < Previous Page | 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705  | Next Page >

  • Database design

    - by Hadad
    Hello, I've a system, that have two types of users (Companies and individuals).all types have a shared set of properties but they differ in another. What is the best design merge all in one table that allows null for unmatched properties, or separate them in two tables related to a basic table with a one to one relationship. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Access database query locks ability to edit table?

    - by Sattvic
    I created a query in Microsoft Access like the one below: SELECT Deliverables.ID, Deliverables.Title, Deliverables.Summary, Deliverables.Header_Code, Deliverables.Header_Code.Value, Deliverables.Sort_order, Deliverables.Pillar, Deliverables.Pillar.Value, Deliverables.Misc_ID FROM Deliverables WHERE (((Deliverables.Pillar.Value)="Link Building")); But my problem is that this query locks my fields and I cannot make changes to the table using the query view. Any suggestions? I am using Microsoft Access 2007

    Read the article

  • How can I find days between different paired rows?

    - by Anthony
    I've been racking my brain about how to do this in one query without PHP code. In a nutshell, I have a table that records email activity. For the sake of this example, here is the data: recipient_id activity date 1 delivered 2011-08-30 1 open 2011-08-31 2 delivered 2011-08-30 3 delivered 2011-08-24 3 open 2011-08-30 3 open 2011-08-31 The goal: I want to display to users a single number that tells how many recipients open their email within 24 hours. E.G. "Users that open their email within 24 hours: 13 Readers" In the case of the sample data, above, the value would be "1". (Recipient one was delivered an email and opened it the next day. Recipient 2 never opened it and recipient 3 waited 5 days.) Can anyone think of a way to express the goal in a single query? Reminder: In order to count, the person must have a 'delivered' tag and at least one 'open' tag. Each 'open' tag only counts once per recipient.

    Read the article

  • How to differentiate two tables

    - by Nemat
    I have two tables and I want to get all records from one table that are different from the records in second table. Eg.: if we have four records in the first table like A,B,C,D and three records in the second table thats A,B,C then the answer of query should be D. I have tried "EXCEPT" operator but it doesn't work fine. Kindly help me in writing correct query for the given problem.

    Read the article

  • Adding Related Entities without using navigation properties

    - by Barisa Puter
    I have the following classes, set for testing: public class Company { [DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)] public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } } public class Employee { [DatabaseGenerated(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)] public int Id { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public int CompanyId { get; set; } public virtual Company Company { get; set; } } public class EFTestDbContext : DbContext { public DbSet<Employee> Employees { get; set; } public DbSet<Company> Companies { get; set; } } For the sake of testing, I wanted to insert one company and one employee for that company with single SaveChanges call, like this: Company company = new Company { Name = "Sample company" }; context.Companies.Add(company); // ** UNCOMMENTED FOR TEST 2 //Company company2 = new Company //{ // Name = "Some other company" //}; //context.Companies.Add(company2); Employee employee = new Employee { Name = "Hans", CompanyId = company.Id }; context.Employees.Add(employee); context.SaveChanges(); Even though I am not using navigational properties, but instead I've made relation over Id, this somehow mysteriously worked - employee was saved with proper foreign key to company which got updated from 0 to real value, which made me go ?!?! Some hidden C# feature? Then I've decided to add more code, which is commented in the snippet above, making it to be inserting of 2 x Company entity and 1 x Employee entity, and then I got exception: Unable to determine the principal end of the 'CodeLab.EFTest.Employee_Company' relationship. Multiple added entities may have the same primary key. Does this mean that in cases where foreign key is 0, and there is a single matching entity being inserted in same SaveChanges transaction, Entity Framework will assume that foreign key should be for that matching entity? In second test, when there are two entities matching the relation type, Entity Framework throws an exception as it is not able to figure out to which of the Companies Employee should be related to.

    Read the article

  • wp+sql+image not goin in the folder

    - by happy
    this is my code for uploading image in database but image are going to the desird forlder...but when i m tryin to retrieve the images to diaplay,,they are not displayed..anyone help me...... $category=$_POST['category']; $uploadDir = 'D:/xampp/htdocs/js/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/img/imagess/ '; $fileName = $_FILES['Photo']['name']; $tmpName = $_FILES['Photo']['tmp_name']; $fileSize = $_FILES['Photo']['size']; $fileType = $_FILES['Photo']['type']; $filePath = $uploadDir . $fileName; $result = move_uploaded_file($tmpName,$filePath); if (!$result) { echo "Error uploading file"; exit; } if(!get_magic_quotes_gpc()) { $fileName = addslashes($fileName); $filePath = addslashes($filePath); } global $wpdb; //$insert=$wpdb->insert('images',array('image_name'=>$filePath,'cat_name'=>$category),array('%b','%s')); $insert=$wpdb->insert('images',array('image_name'=>$filePath,'cat_name'=>$category)); $wpdb->insert('categories',array('cat_name'=>$category)); echo "Successfully Submitted";

    Read the article

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

< Previous Page | 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705  | Next Page >