Search Results

Search found 86974 results on 3479 pages for 'visualsvn server'.

Page 949/3479 | < Previous Page | 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956  | Next Page >

  • SQL - date variable isn't being parsed correctly?

    - by Bill Sambrone
    I am pulling a list of invoices filtered by a starting and ending date, and further filtered by type of invoice from a SQL table. When I specify a range of 2013-07-01 through 2013-09-30 I am receiving 2 invoices per company when I expect 3. When I use the built in select top 1000 query in SSMS and add my date filters, all the expected invoices appear. Here is my fancy query that I'm using that utilizing variables that are fed in: DECLARE @ReportStart datetime DECLARE @ReportStop datetime SET @ReportStart = '2013-07-01' SET @ReportStop = '2013-09-30' SELECT Entity_Company.CompanyName, Reporting_AgreementTypes.Description, Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceAmount, ISNULL(Reporting_ProductCost.ProductCost,0), (Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceAmount - ISNULL(Reporting_ProductCost.ProductCost,0)), (Reporting_AgreementTypes.Description + Entity_Company.CompanyName), Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate FROM Reporting_Invoices JOIN Entity_Company ON Entity_Company.ClientID = Reporting_Invoices.ClientID LEFT JOIN Reporting_ProductCost ON Reporting_ProductCost.InvoiceNumber =Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceNumber JOIN Reporting_AgreementTypes ON Reporting_AgreementTypes.AgreementTypeID = Reporting_Invoices.AgreementTypeID WHERE Reporting_Invoices.AgreementTypeID = (SELECT AgreementTypeID FROM Reporting_AgreementTypes WHERE Description = 'Resold Services') AND Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate >= @ReportStart AND Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate <= @ReportStop ORDER BY CompanyName,InvoiceDate The above only returns 2 invoices per company. When I run a much more basic query through SSMS I get 3 as expected, which looks like: SELECT TOP 1000 [InvoiceID] ,[AgreementID] ,[AgreementTypeID] ,[InvoiceDate] ,[Comment] ,[InvoiceAmount] ,[InvoiceNumber] ,[TicketID] ,Entity_Company.CompanyName FROM Reporting_Invoices JOIN Entity_Company ON Entity_Company.ClientID = Reporting_Invoices.ClientID WHERE Entity_Company.ClientID = '9' AND AgreementTypeID = (SELECT AgreementTypeID FROM Reporting_AgreementTypes WHERE Description = 'Resold Services') AND Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate >= '2013-07-01' AND Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate <= '2013-09-30' ORDER BY InvoiceDate DESC I've tried stripping down the 1st query to include only a client ID on the original invoice table, the invoice date, and nothing else. Still only get 2 invoices instead of the expected 3. I've also tried manually entering the dates instead of the @ variables, same result. I confirmed that InvoiceDate is defined as a datetime in the table. I've tried making all JOIN's a FULL JOIN to see if anything is hiding, but no change. Here is how I stripped down the original query to keep all other tables out of the mix and yet I'm still getting only 2 invoices per client ID instead of 3 (I manually entered the ID for the type filter): --DECLARE @ReportStart datetime --DECLARE @ReportStop datetime --SET @ReportStart = '2013-07-01' --SET @ReportStop = '2013-09-30' SELECT --Entity_Company.CompanyName, --Reporting_AgreementTypes.Description, Reporting_Invoices.ClientID, Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceAmount, --ISNULL(Reporting_ProductCost.ProductCost,0), --(Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceAmount - ISNULL(Reporting_ProductCost.ProductCost,0)), --(Reporting_AgreementTypes.Description + Entity_Company.CompanyName), Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate FROM Reporting_Invoices --JOIN Entity_Company ON Entity_Company.ClientID = Reporting_Invoices.ClientID --LEFT JOIN Reporting_ProductCost ON Reporting_ProductCost.InvoiceNumber = Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceNumber --JOIN Reporting_AgreementTypes ON Reporting_AgreementTypes.AgreementTypeID = Reporting_Invoices.AgreementTypeID WHERE Reporting_Invoices.AgreementTypeID = '22'-- (SELECT AgreementTypeID FROM Reporting_AgreementTypes WHERE Description = 'Resold Services') AND Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate >= '2013-07-01' AND Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate <= '2013-09-30' ORDER BY ClientID,InvoiceDate This strikes me as really weird as it is pretty much the same query as the SSMS generated one that returns correct results. What am I overlooking? UPDATE I've further refined my "test query" that is returning only 2 invoices per company to help troubleshoot this. Below is the query and a relevant subset of data for 1 company from the appropriate tables: SELECT Reporting_Invoices.ClientID, Reporting_AgreementTypes.Description, Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceAmount, Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate FROM Reporting_Invoices JOIN Reporting_AgreementTypes ON Reporting_AgreementTypes.AgreementTypeID = Reporting_Invoices.AgreementTypeID WHERE Reporting_Invoices.AgreementTypeID = (SELECT AgreementTypeID FROM Reporting_AgreementTypes WHERE Description = 'Resold Services') AND Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate >= '2013-07-01T00:00:00' AND Reporting_Invoices.InvoiceDate <= '2013-09-30T00:00:00' ORDER BY Reporting_Invoices.ClientID,InvoiceDate The above only returns 2 invoices. Here is the relevant table data: Relevant data from Reporting_AgreementTypes AgreementTypeID Description 22 Resold Services Relevant data from Reporting_Invoices InvoiceID ClientID AgreementID AgreementTypeID InvoiceDate 16111 9 757 22 2013-09-30 00:00:00.000 15790 9 757 22 2013-08-30 00:00:00.000 15517 9 757 22 2013-07-31 00:00:00.000 Actual results from my new modified query ClientID Description InvoiceAmount InvoiceDate 9 Resold Services 3513.79 7/31/13 00:00:00 9 Resold Services 3570.49 8/30/13 00:00:00

    Read the article

  • How can I pivot these key+values rows into a table of complete entries?

    - by CodexArcanum
    Maybe I demand too much from SQL but I feel like this should be possible. I start with a list of key-value pairs, like this: '0:First, 1:Second, 2:Third, 3:Fourth' etc. I can split this up pretty easily with a two-step parse that gets me a table like: EntryNumber PairNumber Item 0 0 0 1 0 First 2 1 1 3 1 Second etc. Now, in the simple case of splitting the pairs into a pair of columns, it's fairly easy. I'm interested in the more advanced case where I might have multiple values per entry, like: '0:First:Fishing, 1:Second:Camping, 2:Third:Hiking' and such. In that generic case, I'd like to find a way to take my 3-column result table and somehow pivot it to have one row per entry and one column per value-part. So I want to turn this: EntryNumber PairNumber Item 0 0 0 1 0 First 2 0 Fishing 3 1 1 4 1 Second 5 1 Camping Into this: Entry [1] [2] [3] 0 0 First Fishing 1 1 Second Camping Is that just too much for SQL to handle, or is there a way? Pivots (even tricky dynamic pivots) seem like an answer, but I can't figure how to get that to work.

    Read the article

  • Select rows in random order and then reverse it

    - by Faruz
    I need to select rows in random order and return a query which holds the rows in both regular order and in reverse order. This is done to simulate a fantasy draft for a basketball game I'm working on. For example, I need a result set as followed: team1 1 team2 2 team6 3 team9 4 team9 5 team6 6 team2 7 team1 8 As you can see, the first four teams are random then then following four are in reverse order. Hope I managed to explain the problem, if not - please comment and I'll explain further.

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Small Business Licensing Kick Start

    - by regex
    I seem to recall hearing at some point (I believe it was MIX09) that Microsoft has a licensing model of some sort where a business can consume licenses for up to two years, free of charge, until they reach a point where they are stable position and can pay their licensing at the end of two years. However, I can't find information regarding it online. I want to say that possibly stackoverflow used this licensing model to kick start their site. Is anyone familiar with this?

    Read the article

  • SQL 2000 - Returning from a Stored Procedure

    - by user70192
    Hello, I'm writing a stored procedure. This procedure has a case where if it is met, I want to stop executing the procedure and return -1. How do I do this? Currently, I'm trying the following: IF @result <> 1 BEGIN SELECT -1 END However, SELECT is not a typical "return". As you can imagine I spend most of my time in code which is why i'm looking for something like a "return". Thank you,

    Read the article

  • Is count(*) really expensive ?

    - by Anil Namde
    I have a page where I have 4 tabs displaying 4 different reports based off different tables. I obtain the row count of each table using a select count(*) from <table> query and display number of rows available in each table on the tabs. As a result, each page postback causes 5 count(*) queries to be executed (4 to get counts and 1 for pagination) and 1 query for getting the report content. Now my question is: are count(*) queries really expensive -- should I keep the row counts (at least those that are displayed on the tab) in the view state of page instead of querying multiple times? How expensive are COUNT(*) queries ?

    Read the article

  • How to use multiple identity numbers in one table?

    - by vincer
    I have an web application that creates printable forms, these forms have a unique number on them, the problem is I have 2 forms that separate numbers need to be created for them. ie) Form1- Numbered 2000000-2999999 Form2- Numbered 3000000-3999999 dbo.test2 - is my form information table Tsel - is my autoinc table for the 3000000 series numbers Tadv - is my autoinc table for the 2000000 series numbers What I have done is create 2 tables with just autoinc row (one for 2000000 series numbers and one for 3000000 series numbers), I then created a trigger to add a record to the coresponding table, read back the autoinc number and add it to my table that stores the form information including the just created autoinc number for the right series of forms. Although it does work, I'm concerned that the numbers will get messed up under load. I'm not sure the @@IDENTITY will always return the right value when many people are using the system. (I cannot have duplicates and I need to use the numbering form show above. See code below. ** TRIGGER ** CREATE TRIGGER MAKEANID2 ON dbo.test2 AFTER INSERT AS SET NOCOUNT ON declare @someid int declare @someid2 int declare @startfrom int declare @test1 varchar(10) select @someid=@@IDENTITY select @test1 = (Select name1 from test2 where sysid = @someid ) if @test1 = 'select' begin insert into Tsel Default values select @someid2 = @@IDENTITY end if @test1 = 'adv' begin insert into Tadv Default values select @someid2 = @@IDENTITY end update test2 set name2=(@someid2) where sysid = @someid SET NOCOUNT OFF

    Read the article

  • SQL left join with multiple rows into one row

    - by beardedd
    Basically, I have two tables, Table A contains the actual items that I care to get out, and Table B is used for language translations. So, for example, Table A contains the actual content. Anytime text is used within the table, instead of storing actual varchar values, ids are stored that relate back to text stored in Table B. This allows me to by adding a languageID column to Table B, have multiple translations for the same row in the database. Example: Table A Title (int) Description (int) Other Data.... Table B TextID (int) - This is the column whose value is stored in other tables LanguageID (int) Text (varchar) My question is more a call for suggestions on how to best handle this. Ideally I want a query that I can use to select from the table, and get the text as opposed to the ids of the text out of the table. Currently when I have two text items in the table this is what I do: SELECT C.ID, C.Title, D.Text AS Description FROM (SELECT A.ID, A.Description, B.Text AS Title FROM TableA A, TranslationsTable B WHERE A.Title = B.TextID AND B.LanguaugeID = 1) C LEFT JOIN TranslationsTable D ON C.Description = D.TextID AND D.LanguaugeID = 1 This query gives me the row from Table A I am looking for (using where statements in the inner select statement) with the actual text based on the language ID used instead of the text ids. This works fine when I am only using one or two text items that need to be translated, but adding a third item or more, it starts to get really messy - essentially another left join on top of the example. Any suggestions on a better query, or at least a good way to handle 3 or more text items in a single row?

    Read the article

  • Naming of boolean column in database table

    - by Space Cracker
    I have 'Service' table and the following column description as below Is User Verification Required for service ? Is User's Email Activation Required for the service ? Is User's Mobile Activation required for the service ? I Hesitate in naming these columns as below IsVerificationRequired IsEmailActivationRequired IsMobileActivationRequired or RequireVerification RequireEmailActivation RequireMobileActivation I can't determined which way is the best .So, Is one of the above suggested name is the best or is there other better ones ?

    Read the article

  • Sql Get months Name between two dates in a table

    - by user2219210
    My Table column (ID , startDate , EndDate ) I need to use this way with every row of the table : not with a specific value like : declare @start DATE = '2011-05-30' declare @end DATE = '2011-06-10' ;with months (date) AS ( SELECT @start UNION ALL SELECT DATEADD(month,1,date) from months where DATEADD(month,1,date)<= DATEADD(s,-1,DATEADD(mm, DATEDIFF(m,0,@end)+1,0)) ) select Datename(month,date) from months it possible ??

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to split the results of a select query into two equal halfs?

    - by Matthias
    I'd like to have a query returning two ResultSets each of which holding exactly half of all records matching a certain criteria. I tried using TOP 50 PERCENT in conjunction with an Order By but if the number of records in the table is odd, one record will show up in both resultsets. Example: I've got a simple table with TheID (PK) and TheValue fields (varchar(10)) and 5 records. Skip the where clause for now. SELECT TOP 50 PERCENT * FROM TheTable ORDER BY TheID asc results in the selected id's 1,2,3 SELECT TOP 50 PERCENT * FROM TheTable ORDER BY TheID desc results in the selected id's 3,4,5 3 is a dup. In real life of course the queries are fairly complicated with a ton of where clauses and subqueries.

    Read the article

  • Index for wildcard match of end of string

    - by Anders Abel
    I have a table of phone numbers, storing the phone number as varchar(20). I have a requirement to implement searching of both entire numbers, but also on only the last part of the number, so a typical query will be: SELECT * FROM PhoneNumbers WHERE Number LIKE '%1234' How can I put an index on the Number column to make those searchs efficient? Is there a way to create an index that sorts the records on the reversed string? Another option might be to reverse the numbers before storing them, which will give queries like: SELECT * FROM PhoneNumbers WHERE ReverseNumber LIKE '4321%' However that will require all users of the database to always reverse the string. It might be solved by storing both the normal and reversed number and having the reversed number being updated by a trigger on insert/update. But that kind of solution is not very elegant. Any other suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How to convert SQL Statement with TOP, COUNT and GROUP BY to return an object list with LINQ

    - by Junior Mayhé
    Hello guys does anyone know how to convert this SQL statement to a LINQ to a List? SELECT TOP(5) COUNT(CategoryId), CategoryName FROM Tickets GROUP BY CategoryName The result would be something like public static List<Categories> List() { MyEntities db = new MyEntities(); /* here it should return a list o Category type */; return db.Category.GroupBy(...).OrderBy(...); }

    Read the article

  • Transaction within a Transaction in C#

    - by Rosco
    I'm importing a flat file of invoices into a database using C#. I'm using the TransactionScope to roll back the entire operation if a problem is encountered. It is a tricky input file, in that one row does not necessary equal one record. It also includes linked records. An invoice would have a header line, line items, and then a total line. Some of the invoices will need to be skipped, but I may not know it needs to be skipped until I reach the total line. One strategy is to store the header, line items, and total line in memory, and save everything once the total line is reached. I'm pursuing that now. However, I was wondering if it could be done a different way. Creating a "nested" transaction around the invoice, inserting the header row, and line items, then updating the invoice when the total line is reached. This "nested" transaction would roll back if it is determined the invoice needs to be skipped, but the overall transaction would continue. Is this possible, practical, and how would you set this up?

    Read the article

  • sqlserver how to set job priority

    - by Buzz
    Is there any way to set one job priority higher then other, In my case there are two jobs those are working on same set of tables,first JOB-A which is running every 12 hr and other JOB-B is every 10 minutes , i think at some time when they run simultaneously JOB-B is getting in to deadlock and get failed, i google the topic and found sqlgoverner is helpful in such cases does anyone know how to resolve?

    Read the article

  • FOSS version of SQLCompare or something similar?

    - by Scott
    Actually, free is good enough, it doesn't have to be open source :) I'm currently using the Schema Compare utility of VS2008, but it doesn't have a command line interface and has some other weaknesses as well. I'm wondering what free tools others are using to provide command line schema comparisons/synchronizations? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Will creating index help in this case

    - by The King
    I'm still a learning user of SQL-SERVER2005. Here is my table structure CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Trn_PostingGroups]( [ControlGroup] [char](5) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL, [PracticeCode] [char](5) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NOT NULL, [ScanDate] [smalldatetime] NULL, [DepositDate] [smalldatetime] NULL, [NameOfFile] [varchar](50) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, [DepositValue] [decimal](11, 2) NULL, [RecordStatus] [char](1) COLLATE SQL_Latin1_General_CP1_CI_AS NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_Trn_PostingGroups_1] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [ControlGroup] ASC, [PracticeCode] ASC )WITH (IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] Scenario 1 : Suppose I have a query like this... Select * from Trn_PostingGroups where PracticeCode = 'ABC' Will indexing on Practice Code seperately help me in making my query faster?? Scenario 2 : Select * from Trn_PostingGroups where ControlGroup = 12701 and PracticeCode = 'ABC' and NameOfFile = 'FileName1' Will indexing on NameOfFile seperately help me in making my query faster ??

    Read the article

  • Linq To Sql Entity Updated from Trigger

    - by James Helms
    I have a Table called Address. I have a Trigger for insert on that table that does some spacial calculations on the address that determines what neighborhood boundaries it is in. address = new Address { Street = this.Street, City = this.City, State = this.State, ZipCode = this.ZipCode, latitude = this.Latitude, longitude = this.Longitude, YearBuilt = this.YearBuilt, LotSize = this.LotSize, FinishedSize = this.FinishedSize, Bedrooms = this.Bedrooms, Bathrooms = this.Bathrooms, UseCode = this.UseCode, HOA = this.HOA, UpdateDate = DateTime.Now }; db.AddToAddresses(address); db.SaveChanges(); In the database i can clearly see that the Trigger ran and updated the neighborhoodID in the address table for the row. I tried to just reload that record to get the assigned id like this: address = (from a in db.Addresses where a.AddressID == address.AddressID select a).First(); In the debugger i can clearly see that the address.AddressID is correct, entity doesn't update in memory. Is there any work around for this?

    Read the article

  • how can i substitute a NULL value for a 0 in an SQL Query result

    - by Name.IsNullOrEmpty
    SELECT EmployeeMaster.EmpNo, Sum(LeaveApplications.LeaveDaysTaken) AS LeaveDays FROM EmployeeMaster FULL OUTER JOIN LeaveApplications ON EmployeeMaster.id = LeaveApplications.EmployeeRecordID INNER JOIN LeaveMaster ON EmployeeMaster.id = LeaveMaster.EmpRecordID GRoup BY EmployeeMaster.EmpNo order by LeaveDays Desc with the above query, if an employee has no leave application record in table LeaveApplications, then their Sum(LeaveApplications.LeaveDaysTaken) AS LeaveDays column returns NULL. What i would like to do is place a value of 0 (Zero) instead of NULL. I want to do this because i have a calculated column in the same query whose formular depends on the LeaveDays returned and when LeaveDays is NULL, the formular some how fails. Is there away i can put 0 for NULL such that that i can get my desired result.

    Read the article

  • Detemining a database's OS with a SQL query?

    - by KaizenSoze
    I'm writing a tool to gather customer configuration information. One of the questions I want to answer, what OS is the customer database running on. I haven't found a generic way to find the OS with SQL and I can't create stored procedures on the customer's database. If there is a way, it's probably vendor specific. Suggestions? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Database normalization and duplicate values

    - by bretddog
    Consider a Parent / Child / GrandChild structure in a database table schema, or even a deeper hierarchy. These being in the same aggregate. One table DAYS keeps a single row per day, and has a "Date" field. This is the root table, or maybe a child of the root. No row can ever be deleted in this table. In this case, however complex my table schema looks like, however far away in the hierarchy any other table is, is there any reason why any other table would hold a Date value? Can't it instead just have a FK to the DAYS table. I obviously assume that the creation of these date fields happen not before such datefield exist in the DAYS table. I'm now thinking just about the date part to be relevant, not the time part. Not sure if all databases can store these individually. That's maybe relevant, but not really the focus of the question.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956  | Next Page >