Search Results

Search found 5 results on 1 pages for 'user318573'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • Help replace this SQL cursor with better code

    - by user318573
    Can anyone give me a hand improving the performance of this cursor logic from SQL 2000. It runs great in SQl2005 and SQL2008, but takes at least 20 minutes to run in SQL 2000. BTW, I would never choose to use a cursor, and I didn't write this code, just trying to get it to run faster. Upgrading this client to 2005/2008 is not an option in the immediate future. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Rollup totals in the chart of accounts hierarchy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DECLARE @B_SubTotalAccountID int, @B_Debits money, @B_Credits money, @B_YTDDebits money, @B_YTDCredits money DECLARE Bal CURSOR FAST_FORWARD FOR SELECT SubTotalAccountID, Debits, Credits, YTDDebits, YTDCredits FROM xxx WHERE AccountType = 0 AND SubTotalAccountID Is Not Null and (abs(credits)+abs(debits)+abs(ytdcredits)+abs(ytddebits)<>0) OPEN Bal FETCH NEXT FROM Bal INTO @B_SubTotalAccountID, @B_Debits, @B_Credits, @B_YTDDebits, @B_YTDCredits --For Each Active Account WHILE @@FETCH_STATUS = 0 BEGIN --Loop Until end of subtotal chain is reached WHILE @B_SubTotalAccountID Is Not Null BEGIN UPDATE xxx2 SET Debits = Debits + @B_Debits, Credits = Credits + @B_Credits, YTDDebits = YTDDebits + @B_YTDDebits, YTDCredits = YTDCredits + @B_YTDCredits WHERE GLAccountID = @B_SubTotalAccountID SET @B_SubTotalAccountID = (SELECT SubTotalAccountID FROM xxx2 WHERE GLAccountID = @B_SubTotalAccountID) END FETCH NEXT FROM Bal INTO @B_SubTotalAccountID, @B_Debits, @B_Credits, @B_YTDDebits, @B_YTDCredits END CLOSE Bal DEALLOCATE Bal

    Read the article

  • Basic SQL query question

    - by user318573
    Hello, I have the following query: SELECT Base.ReportDate, Base.PropertyCode, Base.FirstName, Base.MiddleName, Base.LastName, Person.FirstName, Person.MiddleName, Person.LastName FROM LeaseT INNER JOIN Base ON LeaseT.LeaseID = Base.LeaseID INNER JOIN Person ON LeaseT.TenantID = Person.ID works fine, except there could be 0 to 'N' people in the 'Person' table for each record in the Base table, but I only want to return exactly 1 for each 'Base' record (doesn't matter which, but the one with the lowest Person.ID) would be a reasonable choice. If there is 0 rows in the person table, I still need to return the row, but with null values for the 'person' fields. How would I structure the SQL to do that? Thanks. Edit: Yes, the tables are probably not structured properly, but restructuring at this time is not possible - got to work with what is there.

    Read the article

  • Why is this consider bad practice? or is it? (ASP.Net)

    - by user318573
    Would this code be considered bad practice: <div id="sidebar"> <% =DisplayMeetings(12) %> </div> This is a snippet of code from the default.aspx of a small web app I have worked on. It works perfectly well, runs very fast, but as always, I am aware of the fact that just because it works, doesn't mean it is OK. Basically, the DisplayMeetings subroutine outputs a bunch of formatted HTML (an unordered list actually), with no formatting, just the requisite html, and then my CSS performs all the necessary formatting. The data for generating the list comes from an SQL server database (the parameter controls how many rows to return) and I am using stored procedures and datareader for fast access. This keeps my front-end extraordinary simple and clean, imho, and lets me do all the work in VB or C# in a separate module. I could of course use a databound repeater (and probably 6 or more other methods) of accomplishing the same thing, but are they any better? Other than loosing the design-time features of VS2010?

    Read the article

  • Help with 'simple' jQuery question

    - by user318573
    I am trying to get a simple effect working in jQuery, and only have a few hours of experience with it, so have a lot to learn. I managed to get this code working: <script type="text/javascript" > $(document).ready(function() { lastBlock = $("#a1"); maxWidth = 415; minWidth = 75; $("ul li a").hover(function() { $(lastBlock).animate({ width: minWidth + "px" }, { queue: false, duration: 600 }); $(this).animate({ width: maxWidth + "px" }, { queue: false, duration: 600 }); lastBlock = this; }); }); </script> Which gives me exactly what I want, a 6 pane horizontal accordion effect. Each pane however has a 75x75 image on the upper left, which is always visible no matter which pane is active (and it is this image that when hovered over caused the pane to open) - what I want to do is for the image on the selected 'pane', I want to drop the top margin down 10px, and then put it back to 0px when a new one is selected, i.e. so the selected panes image is always 10px lower than the other 5 images. I suspect this should be easy, but not quite grasping the syntax yet. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between these two statements (asp.net/c#/entity framework)

    - by user318573
    IEnumerable<Department> myQuery = (from D in myContext.Departments orderby D.DeptName select D); var myQuery = (from D in myContext.Departments orderby D.DeptName select D); What is the difference between these two statements above? In my little asp.net/C#/ EF4.0 app I can write them either way, and as far as how I want to use them, they both work, but there has to be a reason why I would choose one over the other?

    Read the article

1