Search Results

Search found 33316 results on 1333 pages for 'sql team'.

Page 704/1333 | < Previous Page | 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711  | Next Page >

  • Problem with sending "SetCookie" first in php code

    - by Camran
    According to this manual: http://us2.php.net/setcookie I have to set the cookie before anything else. Here is my cookie code: if (isset($_COOKIE['watched_ads'])){ $expir = time()+1728000; //20 days $ad_arr = unserialize($_COOKIE['watched_ads']); $arr_elem = count($ad_arr); if (in_array($ad_id, $ad_arr) == FALSE){ if ($arr_elem>10){ array_shift($ad_arr); } $ad_arr[]=$ad_id; setcookie('watched_ads', serialize($ad_arr), $expir, '/'); } } else { $expir = time()+1728000; //20 days $ad_arr[] = $ad_id; setcookie('watched_ads', serialize($ad_arr), $expir, '/'); } As you can see I am using variables in setting the cookie. The variables comes from a mysql_query and I have to do the query first. But then, if I do, I will get an error message: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by ... The error points to the line where I set the cookie above. What should I do?a

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to force Report Builder to use "WITH (NOLOCK)" in the queries it generates?

    - by Joe Pineda
    Hi. At work, users are very happy to generate their own reports using Reporting Services' Report Builder. But, alas, the queries it generates are very inefficient, and they don't use "WITH (NOLOCK)" - slowing down things for everyone. These are reports that really do need to be run using latest data - can't be offloaded to the reporting server. And since they query very specific, detailed data, hypercubes are of no use here. So the question is: Is there a way to configure Report Builder's Data Models so the queries it generates always use "WITH (NOLOCK)" when querying a table?

    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

  • How to count number of occurences for all different values in database column?

    - by drasto
    I have a Postgre database that has say 10 columns. The fifth column is called column5. There are 100 rows in the database and possible values of column5 are c5value1, c5value2, c5value3...c5value29, c5value30. I would like to print out a table that shows how many times each value occurs. So the table would look like this: Value(of column5) number of occurrences of the value c5value1 1 c5value2 5 c5value3 3 c5value4 9 c5value5 1 c5value6 1 . . . . . . What is the command that does that? Thanks for help

    Read the article

  • vb.net checkboxes. Need to populate from database and also help in designing

    - by redr
    i have this requirement and since im new to vb.net dont really have much of idea how to do this. I have 20 checkboxes with dropdowns and textbox with it. the example is - table tr td checkbox -- textbox -- dropdownlist /td /tr tr td chk1 txtbox1 ddl1 /td /tr tr td chk2 txtbox2 ddl2 /td /tr and so on. the above structure shall be in one row of a table. does anyone know how to design this in code recursive and also how to take the checkbox data from here and send it to db table for records insert, update and select. thanks

    Read the article

  • Transfer Data between databases with postgres

    - by user227932
    I need to transfer some data from another Database. The old database is called paw1.moviesDB and the new database is paw1. The schema of each table are the following Awards (name of the table)(new DB) Id [PK] Serial Award Nominations (name of the table) (old DB) Id [PK] Serial nominations I want to copy the data from old DB to the new DB.

    Read the article

  • Can I Use EF Across Multiple DBs in One SQLServer Instance?

    - by thomashubschman
    Hello, I have been searching the blogs and articles but I have not found much support for this scenario. I have been poking around EF and realized that I could create views that contained data from multiple databases and then build the EF object model off of those views. Although it works I am not sure about the usual issues of performance, scalability, maintainability. The way I am achieving the connection between databases is by creating associations in the EF model. Does anyone have any information about this type of implementation? Either another solution or commentary on this proposed solution? Thanks, Tom

    Read the article

  • MYSQL: COUNT with GROUP BY, LEFT JOIN and WHERE clause doesn't return zero values

    - by Paul Norman
    Hi guys, thanks in advance for any help on this topic! I'm sure this has a very simply answer, but I can't seem to find it (not sure what to search on!). A standard count / group by query may look like this: SELECT COUNT(`t2`.`name`) FROM `table_1` `t1` LEFT JOIN `table_2` `t2` ON `t1`.`key_id` = `t2`.`key_id` GROUP BY `t1`.`any_col` and this works as expected, returning 0 if no rows are found. So does: SELECT COUNT(`t2`.`name`) FROM `table_1` `t1` LEFT JOIN `table_2` `t2` ON `t1`.`key_id` = `t2`.`key_id` WHERE `t1`.`another_column` = 123 However: SELECT COUNT(`t2`.`name`) FROM `table_1` `t1` LEFT JOIN `table_2` `t2` ON `t1`.`key_id` = `t2`.`key_id` WHERE `t1`.`another_column` = 123 GROUP BY `t1`.`any_col` only works if there is at least one row in table_1 and fails miserably returning an empty result set if there are zero rows. I would really like this to return 0! Anyone enlighten me on this? Beer can be provided in exchange if you are in London ;-)

    Read the article

  • How to handle Foreign Keys with Entity Framework

    - by Jack Marchetti
    I have two entities. Groups. Pools. A Group can create many pools. So I setup my Pool table to have a GroupID foreign key. My code: using (entity _db = new entity()) { Pool p = new Pool(); p.Name = "test"; p.Group.ID = "5"; _db.AddToPool(p); } This doesn't work. I get a null reference exception on p.Group. How do I go about creating a new "Pool" and associating a GroupID?

    Read the article

  • select records from table in the order in which i inserted

    - by echo
    consider a tale is as follows, EmployeeId | Name | Phone_Number Now, i insert 10 records... When i query them back, select * from myTable they are not selected in the order i inserted. I can obviously keep an autoincrement index and ORDER BY index. But i dont want to alter the table. How can i do this without altering the table?

    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

  • 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

  • mysql: managing memory usage

    - by every_answer_gets_a_point
    i am doing a delete with a LIKE statement my keybuffer is 25m, the sort buffer size is 256k the delete has been taking over 2 hours should i increase memory usage? there are about 50 megs of data in the table from which i am deleting, thats about 500,000 rows is there anything else i can do on the adminsitration size to speed up this delete?

    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

  • trigger execution against condition satisfaction

    - by maheshasoni
    I have created this trigger which should give a error, whenever the value of new rctmemenrolno of table-receipts1 is matched with the memenrolno of table- memmast, but it is giving error in both condition(it is matched or not matched). kindly help me. CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER HDD_CABLE.trg_rctenrolno before insert ON HDD_CABLE.RECEIPTS1 for each row declare v_enrolno varchar2(9); cursor c1 is select memenrolno from memmast; begin open c1; fetch c1 into v_enrolno; LOOP If :new.rctmemenrolno<>v_enrolno then raise_application_error(-20186,'PLEASE ENTER CORRECT ENROLLMENT NO'); close c1; end if; END LOOP; end;

    Read the article

  • IS NULL vs = NULL in where clause + MSSQL

    - by Nev_Rahd
    Hello How to check a value IS NULL [or] = @param (where @param is null) Ex: Select column1 from Table1 where column2 IS NULL = works fine If I want to replace comparing value (IS NULL) with @param. How can this be done Select column1 from Table1 where column2 = @param = this works fine until @param got some value in it and if is null never finds a record. How can this achieve?

    Read the article

  • what is the output of this code?

    - by user329820
    Hi,I have wriiten a part of code for you and I want to know the output ,I need your help because there is not any body for helping me also I think that the out put is A ,is this correct? thanks. declare @v1 varchar(20),@v2 varchar(20) select @v1 = 'NULL' if @v1 is null and @v2 is null select 'A' else select 'B'

    Read the article

  • SQL queries to determine all values that would satisfy an arbitrary query

    - by jasterm007
    I'm trying to figure out how to efficiently run a set of queries that will provide a new table of all values that would return results for an arbitrary query. Say my table has a schema like: id name age city What is an efficient way to list all values that would return results for an arbitrary query, say "NOT city=X AND age BETWEEN Y and Z"? My naive approach for this would be to use a script and recurse through all possible combinations of {city, age, age} and see which SELECTs return more than 0 results, but that seems incredibly inefficient. I've also tried building large joins on {city, age, age} as well and basically using that table as an argument list to the query, but that quickly becomes an impossibility for queries on many columns. For simple conjunctive equality queries, i.e. "name=X and age=Y", this is much simpler, as I can do something like SELECT name, age, count(*) AS count FROM main GROUP BY name, age HAVING count > 0 But I'm having difficulty coming up with a general approach for anything more complicated than that. Any pointers in the right direction would be most helpful, thanks.

    Read the article

  • Multisite Enabling a Table

    - by Joe Fitzgibbons
    I am creating a table (table A) that will have a number of columns(of course) and there will be another table (table B) that holds metadata associated to rows in table A. I am working with a multi site implementation that has one database for the whole shabang. Rows in table A could belong to any number of sites but must belong to at least one. The problem I have is I am not sure what the best practice is for defining what site each row in table A belongs to. I want performance and scalability. There is no finite number of sites going forward. Rows in table A could belong to any number of sites in the future. Right now there are only 3. My initial thoughts are to have a primary site ID in Table A and then metadata in table B will have rows defining additional sites as needed. Another thought is to have a column in Table A for each site and it is a boolean as to wether it belongs to that site. Lastly I have thought about having another table to map rows in Table A to each site. What is the best way to associate rows in a table with any number of sites with performance and scalability in mind?

    Read the article

  • In the context of an asp.net website, what's the most efficient way to check whether a User has acce

    - by scaramouch
    I have a webpage that you pass in an id parameter (via a querystring), which it then uses to fetch data from a database. Typically, a user would navigate to this page from another page that lists only those records that the user has access to. However, if they go directly to the page by typing in the URL in the Address Bar, they can effectively view any record they like. Eg. If they were to type something like http://localhost/TestSite/ClientAdmin/ManageLocation.aspx?LocationID=5 into their Address Bar, they can access the database record with the LocationID equal to five - even though they shouldn't have access to it. Now, I could solve this by doing a database check every time the page is loaded to see whether the current user has access to the record they're trying to view. However this doesn't seem very efficient given that in most cases a user won't be trying to access a record that isn't theirs. Does anyone have a better suggestion? Thanks.

    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

< Previous Page | 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711  | Next Page >