Search Results

Search found 32641 results on 1306 pages for 'sql constraint and keys'.

Page 353/1306 | < Previous Page | 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360  | Next Page >

  • how to remove repeated record's from results linq to sql

    - by Sadegh
    hi, i want to remove repeated record's from results but distinct don't do this for me! why??? var results = (from words in _Xplorium.Words join wordFiles in _Xplorium.WordFiles on words.WordId equals wordFiles.WordId join files in _Xplorium.Files on wordFiles.FileId equals files.FileId join urls in _Xplorium.Urls on files.UrlId equals urls.UrlId where files.Title.Contains(query) || files.Description.Contains(query) orderby wordFiles.Count descending select new SearchResultItem() { Title = files.Title, Url = urls.Address, Count = wordFiles.Count, CrawledOn = files.CrawledOn, Description = files.Description, Lenght = files.Lenght, UniqueKey = words.WordId + "-" + files.FileId + "-" + urls.UrlId }).Distinct();

    Read the article

  • getting sql records

    - by droidus
    when i run this code, it returns the topic fine... $query = mysql_query("SELECT topic FROM question WHERE id = '$id'"); if(mysql_num_rows($query) > 0) { $row = mysql_fetch_array($query) or die(mysql_error()); $topic = $row['topic']; } but when I change it to this, it doesn't run at all. why is this happening? $query = mysql_query("SELECT topic, lock FROM question WHERE id = '$id'"); if(mysql_num_rows($query) > 0) { $row = mysql_fetch_array($query) or die(mysql_error()); $topic = $row['topic']; $lockedThread = $row['lock']; echo "here: " . $lockedThread; }

    Read the article

  • SQL for sorting boolean column as true, null, false

    - by petehern
    My table has three boolean fields: f1, f2, f3. If I do SELECT * FROM table ORDER BY f1, f2, f3 the records will be sorted by these fields in the order false, true, null. I wish to order them with null in between true and false: the correct order should be true, null, false. I am using PostgreSQL.

    Read the article

  • SQL Update to the SUM of its joined values

    - by CL4NCY
    Hi, I'm trying to update a field in the database to the sum of its joined values: UPDATE P SET extrasPrice = SUM(E.price) FROM dbo.BookingPitchExtras AS E INNER JOIN dbo.BookingPitches AS P ON E.pitchID = P.ID AND P.bookingID = 1 WHERE E.[required] = 1 When I run this I get the following error: "An aggregate may not appear in the set list of an UPDATE statement." Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Invalid SQL Query

    - by svovaf
    I have the next query that in my opinion is a valid one, but I keep getting error telling me that there is a proble on "WHERE em.p4 = ue.p3" - Unknown column 'ue.p3' in 'where clause'. This is the query: SELECT DISTINCT ue.p3 FROM table1 AS ue INNER JOIN table2 AS e ON ue.p3 = e.p3 WHERE EXISTS( SELECT 1 FROM ( SELECT (COUNT(*) >= 1) AS MinMutual FROM table4 AS smm WHERE smm.p1 IN ( SELECT sem.p3 FROM table3 AS sem INNER JOIN table2 AS em ON sem.p3 = em.p3 WHERE em.p4 = ue.p3 AND sem.type = 'friends' AND em.p2 = 'normal' ) AND smm.p5 IN ( 15000,15151 ) ) AS Mutual WHERE Mutual.MinMutual = TRUE) LIMIT 11 If I execute the sub-query which is inside the EXISTS function, everything is O.K. PLEASE HELP!

    Read the article

  • Keeping DB Table sorted using multi-field formula (Microsoft SQL)

    - by user298167
    Hello Everybody. I have a Job Table which has two interesting columns: Creation Date and Importance (high - 3, medium 2, low - 1). Job's priority calculated like this: Priority = Importance * (time passed since creation). The problem is, Every time I would like to pick 200 jobs with highest priority, I dont want to resort the table. Is there a way to keep rows sorted? I was also thinking about having three tables one for High, Medium and Low and then sort those by Creation Date. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Best way to return result from business layer to presentation layer when using LINQ-to-SQL

    - by samsur
    I have a business layer that has DTOs that are used in the presentation layer. This application uses entity framework. Here is an example of a class called RoleDTO: public class RoleDTO { public Guid RoleId { get; set; } public string RoleName { get; set; } public string RoleDescription { get; set; } public int? OrganizationId { get; set; } } In the BLL I want to have a method that returns a list of DTO. I would like to know which is the better approach: returning IQueryable or list of DTOs. Although I feel that returning IQueryable is not a good idea because the connection needs to be open. Here are the 2 different methods using the different approaches: First approach public class RoleBLL { private servicedeskEntities sde; public RoleBLL() { sde = new servicedeskEntities(); } public IQueryable<RoleDTO> GetAllRoles() { IQueryable<RoleDTO> role = from r in sde.Roles select new RoleDTO() { RoleId = r.RoleID, RoleName = r.RoleName, RoleDescription = r.RoleDescription, OrganizationId = r.OrganizationId }; return role; } Note: in the above method the DataContext is a private attribute and set in the constructor, so that the connection stays opened. Second approach public static List<RoleDTO> GetAllRoles() { List<RoleDTO> roleDTO = new List<RoleDTO>(); using (servicedeskEntities sde = new servicedeskEntities()) { var roles = from pri in sde.Roles select new { pri.RoleID, pri.RoleName, pri.RoleDescription }; //Add the role entites to the DTO list and return. This is necessary as anonymous types can be returned acrosss methods foreach (var item in roles) { RoleDTO roleItem = new RoleDTO(); roleItem.RoleId = item.RoleID; roleItem.RoleDescription = item.RoleDescription; roleItem.RoleName = item.RoleName; roleDTO.Add(roleItem); } return roleDTO; } } Please let me know, if there is a better approach.

    Read the article

  • how to enter manual time stamp in get date ()

    - by Arunachalam
    how to enter manual time stamp in get date () ? select conver(varchar(10),getdate(),120) returns 2010-06-07 now i want to enter my own time stamp in this like 2010-06-07 10.00.00.000 i m using this in select * from sample table where time_stamp ='2010-06-07 10.00.00.000' since i m trying to automate this query i need the current date but i need different time stamp can it be done .

    Read the article

  • SQL Structure of DB table with different types of columns

    - by Dmitry Dvornikov
    I have a problem with the optimization of the structure of the database. I'll try to explain it exactly. I create a project, where we can add different values??, but this values must have different types of the columns in the database (eg, int, double , varchar). What is the best way to store the different types of values ??in the database. In the project I'm using Propel 1.6. The point is availability to add value with 'int', 'varchar' and other columns types, to search the table was efficient. In total, I have two ideas. The first is to create a table of "value", which will have columns: "id ", "value_int", "value_double", "value_varchar", etc - with the corresponding column types. Depending on the type of values??, records will be saved with the value in the appropriate column (the rest will be NULL). The second solution is to create separate tables such as "value_int", "value_varchar" etc. There would be columns: "id", "value", which correspond to the relevant types of "value" (ie, such as int, varchar, etc). I must admit that I do not believe any of the above solutions, originally I was thinking about one table "value", where the column would be a "text" type - but this solution would probably be even worse. I would like to know your opinion on this topic, maybe something else would be better. Thanks in advance. EDIT: For example : We have three tables: USER: [table of users] * id * name FIELD: [table of profile fields - where the column 'type' is the type of field, eg int or varchar) * id * type * name VALUE : * id * User_id - ( FK user.id ) * Field_id - ( FK field.id ) * value So we have in each row an user in USER table, and the profile is stored in the VALUE table. Bit each profile field may have a different type (column 'type' in the FIELD table), and based on that I would want this value to add to the appropriate column of the appropriate type.

    Read the article

  • SQL Querying for Threaded Messages

    - by Harper
    My site has a messaging feature where one user may message another. The messages support threading - a parent message may have any number of children but only one level deep. The messages table looks like this: Messages - Id (PK, Auto-increment int) - UserId (FK, Users.Id) - FromUserId (FK, Users.Id) - ParentMessageId (FK to Messages.Id) - MessageText (varchar 200) I'd like to show messages on a page with each 'parent' message followed by a collapsed view of the children messages. Can I use the GROUP BY clause or similar construct to retrieve parent messages and children messages all in one query? Right now I am retrieving parent messages only, then looping through them and performing another query for each to get all related children messages. I'd like to get messages like this: Parent1 Child1 Child2 Child3 Parent2 Child1 Parent3 Child1 Child2

    Read the article

  • How to exclude rows where matching join is in an SQL tree

    - by Greg K
    Sorry for the poor title, I couldn't think how to concisely describe this problem. I have a set of items that should have a 1-to-1 relationship with an attribute. I have a query to return those rows where the data is wrong and this relationship has been broken (1-to-many). I'm gathering these rows to fix them and restore this 1-to-1 relationship. This is a theoretical simplification of my actual problem but I'll post example table schema here as it was requested. item table: +------------+------------+-----------+ | item_id | name | attr_id | +------------+------------+-----------+ | 1 | BMW 320d | 20 | | 1 | BMW 320d | 21 | | 2 | BMW 335i | 23 | | 2 | BMW 335i | 34 | +------------+------------+-----------+ attribute table: +---------+-----------------+------------+ | attr_id | value | parent_id | +---------+-----------------+------------+ | 20 | SE | 21 | | 21 | M Sport | 0 | | 23 | AC | 24 | | 24 | Climate control | 0 | .... | 34 | Leather seats | 0 | +---------+-----------------+------------+ A simple query to return items with more than one attribute. SELECT item_id, COUNT(DISTINCT(attr_id)) AS attributes FROM item GROUP BY item_id HAVING attributes > 1 This gets me a result set like so: +-----------+------------+ | item_id | attributes | +-----------+------------+ | 1 | 2 | | 2 | 2 | | 3 | 2 | -- etc. -- However, there's an exception. The attribute table can hold a tree structure, via parent links in the table. For certain rows, parent_id can hold the ID of another attribute. There's only one level to this tree. Example: +---------+-----------------+------------+ | attr_id | value | parent_id | +---------+-----------------+------------+ | 20 | SE | 21 | | 21 | M Sport | 0 | .... I do not want to retrieve items in my original query where, for a pair of associated attributes, they related like attributes 20 & 21. I do want to retrieve items where: the attributes have no parent for two or more attributes they are not related (e.g. attributes 23 & 34) Example result desired, just the item ID: +------------+ | item_id | +------------+ | 2 | +------------+ How can I join against attributes from items and exclude these rows? Do I use a temporary table or can I achieve this from a single query? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Sql server 2008 query

    - by Prashant
    I am trying to implement versioning of data I have two tables Client and Address. I have to display in the UI, the various updates in the order in which they were made but with the correct client version so, Client Table Address Table ---------- ---------- Client Version Modified Date Address Version ModifiedDate CV1 T1 AV1 T2 CV2 T4 AV2 T3 CV3 T5 My result should be CV1 AV1 (first version) CV1 AV2 (as AV1 was updated at T3) CV2 AV2 (as Client got updated to CV2 at T4) CV3 AV2 (As client has got updated at T5)

    Read the article

  • Difficulty restoring a differential backup in SQL Server, 2 media families are expected or no files are ready for rollforward

    - by digiguru
    I have sql backups copied from server A to server B on a nightly basis. We want to move the sql server from server A to server B without much downtime, but the files are very large. I assumed that performing a differential backup and restore would solve the problem with the databases. Copy full backup from server A to copy to server B (10+gb) Open SQL Server Managment Studio on server B Right mouse on databases Restore Database Type in the new DB-name Choose "From Device" and browse to the backup file Click Okay. This is now resorting the original "full" backup. Test new db with dev application - everything works :) On original database rightmouse on DB Tasks Backup... Backup Type = Differential, Backup to disk, add a new file, and remove the old one (it needs to be a small file to transfer for the smallest amount of outage) Copy the diff backup onto the new db Right mouse on DB Tasks Restore Database This is where I get stuck. If I add both the new differential file, and the original backup to the restore process I get an error The media loaded on "M:\path\to\backup\full.bak" is formatted to support 1 media families, but 2 media families are expected according to the backup device specification. RESTORE HEADERONLY is terminating abnormally. But if I try to restore using just the differential file I get System.Data.SqlClient.SqlError: The log or differential backup cannot be restored because no files are ready to rollforward. (Microsoft.SqlServer.Smo) Any idea how to do it? Is there a better way of restoring backups with limited downtime?

    Read the article

  • Datatype Conversion

    - by user87
    I am trying to execute the following Query select distinct pincode as Pincode,CAST(Date_val as DATE) as Date, SUM(cast(megh_38 as int)) as 'Postage Realized in Cash', SUM(cast(megh_39 as int)) as 'MO Commission', from dbo.arrow_dtp_upg group by pincode,Date_Val but I am getting an error "Conversion failed when converting the nvarchar value '82.25' to data type int." Am I using a wrong data type?

    Read the article

  • Mysql SQL join question

    - by David
    I am trying to find all deals information along with how many comments they have received. My query select deals.*, count(comments.comments_id) as counts from deals left join comments on comments.deal_id=deals.deal_id where cancelled='N' But now it only shows the deals that have at least one comment. What is the problem?

    Read the article

  • return only the last select results from stored procedure

    - by Madalina Dragomir
    The requirement says: stored procedure meant to search data, based on 5 identifiers. If there is an exact match return ONLY the exact match, if not but there is an exact match on the not null parameters return ONLY these results, otherwise return any match on any 4 not null parameters... and so on My (simplified) code looks like: create procedure xxxSearch @a nvarchar(80), @b nvarchar(80)... as begin select whatever from MyTable t where ((@a is null and t.a is null) or (@a = t.a)) and ((@b is null and t.b is null) or (@b = t.b))... if @@ROWCOUNT = 0 begin select whatever from MyTable t where ((@a is null) or (@a = t.a)) and ((@b is null) or (@b = t.b))... if @@ROWCOUNT = 0 begin ... end end end As a result there can be more sets of results selected, the first ones empty and I only need the last one. I know that it is easy to get the only the last result set on the application side, but all our stored procedure calls go through a framework that expects the significant results in the first table and I'm not eager to change it and test all the existing SPs. Is there a way to return only the last select results from a stored procedure? Is there a better way to do this task ?

    Read the article

  • SQL statement HAVING MAX(some+thing)=some+thing

    - by Andreas
    I'm having trouble with Microsoft Access 2003, it's complaining about this statement: select cardnr from change where year(date)<2009 group by cardnr having max(time+date) = (time+date) and cardto='VIP' What I want to do is, for every distinct cardnr in the table change, to find the row with the latest (time+date) that is before year 2009, and then just select the rows with cardto='VIP'. This validator says it's OK, Access says it's not OK. This is the message I get: "you tried to execute a query that does not include the specified expression 'max(time+date)=time+date and cardto='VIP' and cardnr=' as part of an aggregate function." Could someone please explain what I'm doing wrong and the right way to do it? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Need help tuning a SQL statement

    - by jeffself
    I've got a table that has two fields (custno and custno2) that need to be searched from a query. I didn't design this table, so don't scream at me. :-) I need to find all records where either the custno or custno2 matches the value returned from a query on the same table based on a titleno. In other words, the user types in 1234 for the titleno. My query searches the table to find the custno associated with the titleno. It also looks for the custno2 for that titleno. Then it needs to do a search on the same table for all other records that have either the custno or custno2 returned in the previous search in the custno or custno2 fields for those other records. Here is what I've come up with: SELECT BILLYR, BILLNO, TITLENO, VINID, TAXPAID, DUEDATE, DATEPIF, PROPDESC FROM TRCDBA.BILLSPAID WHERE CUSTNO IN (select custno from trcdba.billspaid where titleno = '1234' union select custno2 from trcdba.billspaid where titleno = '1234' and custno2 != '') OR CUSTNO2 IN (select custno from trcdba.billspaid where titleno = '1234' union select custno2 from trcdba.billspaid where titleno = '1234' and custno2 != '') The query takes about 5-10 seconds to return data. Can it be rewritten to work faster?

    Read the article

  • sql insert query needed

    - by masfenix
    Hey guys, so I have two tables. They are pictured below. I have a master table "all_reports". And a user table "user list". The master table may have users that do not exist in the user list. I need to add them to the user list. The master table may have duplicates in them (check picture). The master list does not contain all the information that the user list requires (no manager, no HR status, no department.. again check picture).

    Read the article

  • sql query not executing

    - by sarah
    Hi, Not able to execute a query ,i need to check if end date is greater than today in the following query Getting an error invalid query select * from table1 where user in ('a') and END_DATE >'2010-05-22' getting an error liter string does not match

    Read the article

  • Constraint to array dimension in C language

    - by Summer_More_More_Tea
    int KMP( const char *original, int o_len, const char *substring, int s_len ){ if( o_len < s_len ) return -1; int k = 0; int cur = 1; int fail[ s_len ]; fail[ k ] = -1; while( cur < s_len ){ k = cur - 1; do{ if( substring[ cur ] == substring[ k ] ){ fail[ cur ] = k; break; }else{ k = fail[ k ] + 1; } }while( k ); if( !k && ( substring[ cur ] != substring[ 0 ] ) ){ fail[ cur ] = -1; }else if( !k ){ fail[ cur ] = 0; } cur++; } k = 0; cur = 0; while( ( k < s_len ) && ( cur < o_len ) ){ if( original[ cur ] == substring[ k ] ){ cur++; k++; }else{ if( k == 0 ){ cur++; }else{ k = fail[ k - 1 ] + 1; } } } if( k == s_len ) return cur - k; else return -1; } This is a KMP algorithm I once coded. When I reviewed it this morning, I find it strange that an integer array is defined as int fail[ s_len ]. Does the specification requires dimesion of arrays compile-time constant? How can this code pass the compilation? By the way, my gcc version is 4.4.1. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360  | Next Page >