Search Results

Search found 10101 results on 405 pages for 'temporary tables'.

Page 362/405 | < Previous Page | 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369  | Next Page >

  • Query returning related assets

    - by GMo
    I have 2 tables, one is an assets table which holds digital assets (e.g. article, images etc), the 2nd table is an asset_links table which maps 1-1 relationships between assets contained within the assets table. Here are the table definitions: Asset +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | source | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | title | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | date_created | datetime | YES | | NULL | | | date_embargo | datetime | YES | | NULL | | | date_expires | datetime | YES | | NULL | | | date_updated | datetime | YES | | NULL | | | keywords | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | status | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | priority | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | fk_site | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | | | resource_type | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | resource_id | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | fk_user | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | | +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ Asset_links +-----------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-----------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | asset_id1 | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | asset_id2 | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | +-----------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ In the asset_links table there are the following rows: 1 - 3, 1 - 4, 2 - 10, 2 - 56 I am looking to write one query which will return all assets which satisfy any asset search criteria and within the same query return all of the linked asset data for linked assets for that asset. e.g. The query returning assets 1 and 2 would return : Asset 1 attributes - Asset 3 attributes - Asset 4 attributes Asset 2 attributes - Asset 10 attributes - Asset 56 attributes What is the best way to write the query?

    Read the article

  • Guidance required: FIrst time gonna work with real high end database (size = 50GB).

    - by claws
    I got a project of designing a Database. This is going to be my first big scale project. Good thing about it is information is mostly organized & currently stored in text files. The size of this information is 50GB. There are going to be few millions of records in each Table. Its going to have around 50 tables. I need to provide a web interface for searching & browsing. I'm going to use MySQL DBMS. I've never worked with a database more than 200MB before. So, speed & performance was never a concern but I followed things like normalization & Indexes. I never used any kind of testing/benchmarking/queryOptimization/whatever because I never had to care about them. But here the purpose of creating a database is to make it quickly searchable. So, I need to consider all possible aspects in design. I was browsing archives & found: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1981526/what-should-every-developer-know-about-databases http://stackoverflow.com/questions/621884/database-development-mistakes-made-by-app-developers I'm gonna keep the points mentioned in above answers in mind. What else should I know? What else should I keep in mind?

    Read the article

  • .net printing multiple reports in one document (architecture question)

    - by LawsonM
    I understand how to print a single document via the PrintDocument class. However, I want to print multiple reports in one document. Each "report" will consist of charts, tables, etc. I want to have two reports per page. I've studied the few examples I can find on how to combine multiple documents into one; however, they always seem to work by creating a collection of objects (e.g. customer or order) that are then iterated over and drawn in the OnPrintPage method. My problem and hence the "architecture" question is that I don't want to cache the objects required to produce the report since they are very large and memory intensive. I'd simply like the resulting "report". One thought I had was to print the report to a metafile, cache that instead in a "MultiplePrintDocument" class and then position those images appropriately two to a page in the OnPrintPage method. I think this would be a lot more efficient and scalable in my case. But I'm not a professional programmer and can't figure out if I'm barking up the wrong tree here. I think the Graphics.BeginContainer and Graphics.Save methods might be relevant, but can't figure out how to implement or if there is a better way. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Large Product catalog with statistics - alternatives to Sql Server?

    - by Eric P
    I am building UI for a large product catalog (millions of products). I am using Sql Server, FreeText search and ASP.NET MVC. Tables are normalized and indexed. Most queries take less then a second to return. The issue is this. Let's say user does the search by keyword. On search results page I need to display/query for: First 20 matching products (paged, sorted) Total count of matching products for paging List of stores only of matching products List of brands only of matching products List of colors only of matching products Each query takes about .5 to 1 seconds. Altogether it is like 5 seconds. I would like to get the whole page to load under 1 second. There are several approaches: Optimize queries even more. I already spent a lot of time on this one, so not sure it can be pushed further. Load products first, then load the rest of the information using AJAX. More like a workaround. Will need to revise UI. Re-organize data to be more Report friendly. Already aggregated a lot of fields. I checked out several similar sites. For ex. zappos.com. Not only they display the same information as I would like in under 1 second, but they also include statistics (number of results in each category). The following is the search for keyword "white" http://www.zappos.com/white How do sites like zappos, amazon make their results, filters and stats appear almost instantly?

    Read the article

  • Fix DB duplicate entries (MySQL bug)

    - by Silence
    I'm using MySQL 4.1. Some tables have duplicates entries that go against the constraints. When I try to group rows, MySQL doesn't recognise the rows as being similar. Example: Table A has a column "Name" with the Unique proprety. The table contains one row with the name 'Hach?' and one row with the same name but a square at the end instead of the '?' (which I can't reproduce in this textfield) A "Group by" on these 2 rows return 2 separate rows This cause several problems including the fact that I can't export and reimport the database. On reimporting an error mentions that a Insert has failed because it violates a constraint. In theory I could try to import, wait for the first error, fix the import script and the original DB, and repeat. In pratice, that would take forever. Is there a way to list all the anomalies or force the database to recheck constraints (and list all the values/rows that go against them) ? I can supply the .MYD file if it can be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Best way to limit results in MySQL with user subcategories

    - by JM4
    I am trying to essentially solve for the following: 1) Find all users in the system who ONLY have programID 1. 2) Find all users in the system who have programID 1 AND any other active program. My tables structures (in very simple terms are as follows): users userID | Name ================ 1 | John Smith 2 | Lewis Black 3 | Mickey Mantle 4 | Babe Ruth 5 | Tommy Bahama plans ID | userID | plan | status --------------------------- 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 5 | 2 | 3 | 1 6 | 3 | 1 | 0 7 | 3 | 2 | 1 8 | 3 | 3 | 1 9 | 3 | 4 | 1 10 | 4 | 2 | 1 11 | 4 | 4 | 1 12 | 5 | 1 | 1 I know I can easily find all members with a specific plan with something like the following: SELECT * FROM users a JOIN plans b ON (a.userID = b.userID) WHERE b.plan = 1 AND b.status = 1 but this will only tell me which users have an 'active' plan 1. How can I tell who ONLY has plan 1 (in this case only userID 5) and how to tell who has plan 1 AND any other active plan? Update: This is not to get a count, I will actually need the original member information, including all the plans they have so a COUNT(*) response may not be what I'm trying to achieve.

    Read the article

  • Django Many-to-Many Question

    - by DZ
    My questions seems like a common problem that when I have seen any questions on it is never really asked right or not answered. So Im going to try to get the question right, and maybe someone knows how to resolve the issue, or correct my understanding. The problem: When you have a many-to-many relation ship (related_name not through) and you are trying to use the admin interface you are required to input one of the rleationships even though it does not have to exsist for you to create the first entry. Meaning you have to assign a group to an event to create the group. Wow that sounds complicated. So I can see why the question is not getting answered. Lets try the non code explanation example... First and important versions: Django 1.1.1 Phython 2.6 So I have a model where I created a many-to-many realtionship and Im using the related_name Im creating an app that is an event organizer, for simplicty lets say events although they could be anytype). For this first post Im going to stay away from the code and just try to explain. A few keys: (explaining comment) ** - many-to-many So in the model we have 1) The Main Event (this is main model) 2) Groups (link to events and their can be many events for a group) a) Events** I have simplified this example a little becuase I recognize that what does it matter. Just create the event first... But there are specific varations where that will not work. What the many-to-many related_name does it created another table with the indecies of the two other tables. Nothing says that this extra table HAS to be populated. Becuase if I look in the database and work within myPHPadmin I can create a group with out registering an event, since the connection between the two is a seperate table the DB does not care. How do I make the admin interface this realize it? Ok I know thats a lot so I hope I have explained it clearly. Thank you anyone for your comments/thoughts/advice

    Read the article

  • ASP.net MVC Linq-To-SQL Extended Class Field Binding

    - by user336858
    Hi there, The short version of this question is "Is there a way to get automatic View Object binding for fields defined in a partial class for a Linq-To-SQL generated class?" Apologies if it's been asked before. Example Suppose I have a typical MVC setup with the tables: Posts {PostID, ...} Categories {CategoryID, ...} A post can have more than one category, and a category can identify more than one post. Thus suppose further that I need an extra table: PostCategories {PostID, CategoryID, ...} This handles the many-to-many relationship between posts and categories. As far as I know, there's no way to do this in Linq-to-SQL right now so I have to shoehorn it in by adding a partial Postclass to the project to add that functionality. Something like: public partial class Post { public IEnumerable<Category> Categories{ get { ... } set { ... } } } So here's my question: If a user is accessing my MVC application front-end and begins editing a Post object, they might enter an invalid category. When the server recognizes the invalid input, the usual practice is to return the faulty object to the original view for re-editing along with some error messages. The fields in the edit page are re-populated with the provided values. However I don't know how to get this mechanism to work with the properties I created with the partial class as shown above. Any terminology, links, or tips you can provide would be tremendously helpful!

    Read the article

  • data ownership and performance

    - by Ami
    We're designing a new application and we ran into some architectural question when thinking about data ownership. we broke down the system into components, for example Customer and Order. each of this component/module is responsible for a specific business domain, i.e. Customer deals with CRUD of customers and business process centered around customers (Register a n new customer, block customer account, etc.). each module is the owner of a set of database tables, and only that module may access them. if another module needs data that is owned by another module, it retrieves it by requesting it from that module. so far so good, the question is how to deal with scenarios such as a report that needs to show all the customers and for each customer all his orders? in such a case we need to get all the customers from the Customer module, iterate over them and for each one get all the data from the Order module. performance won't be good...obviously it would be much better to have a stored proc join customers table and orders table, but that would also mean direct access to the data that is owned by another module, creating coupling and dependencies that we wish to avoid. this is a simplified example, we're dealing with an enterprise application with a lot of business entities and relationships, and my goal is to keep it clean and as loosely coupled as possible. I foresee in the future many changes to the data scheme, and possibly splitting the system into several completely separate systems. I wish to have a design that would allow this to be done in a relatively easy way. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • EF 4.0 Guid or Int as A primary Key

    - by bigb
    I am Implementing custom ASPNetMembership using EF 4.0 Is there any reason why i should use Guid as a primary key in User tables? As far as i know Int as a PK on SQL Server more performanced than strings. And Int is easier to iterate. Also, for security purpose if i need to pass this it id somewhere in url i may encrypt it somehow and pass it like a strings with no probs. But if i want to use auto generated Guid on SQL Server side using EF 4.0 i need to do this trick http://leedumond.com/blog/using-a-guid-as-an-entitykey-in-entity-framework-4/ I can't see any cases why i should use Guid as PK, may be only one if system going to have millions ans millions users, but also, theoretically, Guid could be duplicated sometime isn't so? Anyway Int32 size is 2,147.483.647 it is pretty much even for very-very big system, but if this number is still not enough I may go with Int64, in that cases I may have 9,223.372.036.854.775.807 rows. Pretty much huh? From another hand, M$ using Guids as PK in their ASPNetMembership implementation. [aspnetdb].[aspnet_Users] - PK UserId Type uniqueidentifier, should be some reasons/explanation why the did it?! May be some one has any ideas/experience about that?

    Read the article

  • How can I improve this SQL to avoid several problems with its results?

    - by Josh Curren
    I am having some problems with trying to search. Currently this will only return results that have at least 1 row in the maintenance_parts table. I would like it to return results even if there are 0 parts rows. My second problem is that when you search for a vehicle and it should return multiple results (multiple maintenance rows) it will only return 1 result for that vehicle. Some Background Info: The user has 2 fields to fill out. The fields are vehicle and keywords. The vehicle field is meant to allow searching based on the make, model, VIN, truck number (often is 2 - 3 digits or a letter prefix followed by 2 digits), and a few other fields that belong to the truck table. The keywords are meant to search most fields in the maintenance and maintenance_parts tables (things like the description of the work, parts name, parts number). The maintenance_parts table can contain 0, 1, or more rows for each maintenance row. The truck table contains exactly 1 row for every maintenance row. A truck can have multiple maintenance records. "SELECT M.maintenance_id, M.some_id, M.type_code, M.service_date, M.mileage, M.mg_id, M.mg_type, M.comments, M.work_done, MATCH( M.comments, M.work_done) AGAINST( '$keywords' ) + MATCH( P.part_num, P.part_desc, P.part_ref) AGAINST( '$keywords' ) + MATCH( T.truck_number, T.make, T.model, T.engine, T.vin_number, T.transmission_number, T.comments) AGAINST( '$vehicle' ) AS score FROM maintenance M, maintenance_parts P, truck T WHERE M.maintenance_id = P.maintenance_id AND M.some_id = T.truck_id AND M.type_code = 'truck' AND ( (MATCH( T.truck_number, T.make, T.model, T.engine, T.vin_number, T.transmission_number, T.comments) AGAINST( '$vehicle' ) OR T.truck_number LIKE '%$vehicle%') OR MATCH( P.part_num, P.part_desc, P.part_ref) AGAINST( '$keywords' ) OR MATCH( M.comments, M.work_done) AGAINST( '$keywords' ) ) AND M.status = 'A' GROUP BY maintenance_id ORDER BY score DESC, maintenance_id DESC LIMIT 0, $limit"

    Read the article

  • jQueryUI dialog width

    - by user35295
    Fiddle Full Screen Example I use jQuery dialog to open tables. Some of them have a large amount of text and they tend to be too long and go way off the screen. How can I make the dialog wider if the table is too long like the first one in the fiddle? I've tried width:'auto' but it seems to just occupy the entire screen. HTML: <button class='label'>Click</button><div class='dialog'><p><table>.....</table></div> <button class='label'>Click</button><div class='dialog'><p><table>.....</table></div> Javascript: $(document).ready(function(){ $('.label').each(function() { var dialogopen = $(this).next(".dialog"); dialogopen.dialog({width:'auto',autoOpen: false,modal: true, open: function(){ jQuery('.ui-widget-overlay').bind('click',function(){ dialogopen.dialog('close'); }) } }); $(this).click(function(){ dialogopen.dialog('open'); return false; } ); }); });

    Read the article

  • Suggestion on Database structure for relational data

    - by miccet
    Hi there. I've been wrestling with this problem for quite a while now and the automatic mails with 'Slow Query' warnings are still popping in. Basically, I have Blogs with a corresponding table as well as a table that keeps track of how many times each Blog has been viewed. This last table has a huge amount of records since this page is relatively high traffic and it logs every hit as an individual row. I have tried with indexes on the fields that are included in the WHERE clause, but it doesn't seem to help. I have also tried to clean the table each week by removing old ( 1.weeks) records. SO, I'm asking you guys, how would you solve this? The query that I know is causing the slowness is generated by Rails and looks like this: SELECT count(*) AS count_all FROM blog_views WHERE (created_at >= '2010-01-01 00:00:01' AND blog_id = 1); The tables have the following structures: CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS 'blogs' ( 'id' int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, 'name' varchar(255) default NULL, 'perma_name' varchar(255) default NULL, 'author_id' int(11) default NULL, 'created_at' datetime default NULL, 'updated_at' datetime default NULL, 'blog_picture_id' int(11) default NULL, 'blog_picture2_id' int(11) default NULL, 'page_id' int(11) default NULL, 'blog_picture3_id' int(11) default NULL, 'active' tinyint(1) default '1', PRIMARY KEY ('id'), KEY 'index_blogs_on_author_id' ('author_id') ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 AUTO_INCREMENT=1 ; And CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS 'blog_views' ( 'id' int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, 'blog_id' int(11) default NULL, 'ip' varchar(255) default NULL, 'created_at' datetime default NULL, 'updated_at' datetime default NULL, PRIMARY KEY ('id'), KEY 'index_blog_views_on_blog_id' ('blog_id'), KEY 'created_at' ('created_at') ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 AUTO_INCREMENT=1 ;

    Read the article

  • How can I make "month" columns in Sql?

    - by Beska
    I've got a set of data that looks something like this (VERY simplified): productId Qty dateOrdered --------- --- ----------- 1 2 10/10/2008 1 1 11/10/2008 1 2 10/10/2009 2 3 10/12/2009 1 1 10/15/2009 2 2 11/15/2009 Out of this, we're trying to create a query to get something like: productId Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec --------- ---- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 1 2008 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 The way I'm doing this now, I'm doing 12 selects, one for each month, and putting those in temp tables. I then do a giant join. Everything works, but this guy is dog slow. I know this isn't much to go on, but knowing that I barely qualify as a tyro in the db world, I'm wondering if there is a better high level approach to this that I might try. (I'm guessing there is.) (I'm using MS Sql Server, so answers that are specific to that DB are fine.) (I'm just starting to look at "PIVOT" as a possible help, but I don't know anything about it yet, so if someone wants to comment about that, that might be helpful as well.)

    Read the article

  • Subquery with multiple results combined into a single field?

    - by Todd
    Assume I have these tables, from which i need to display search results in a browser: Table: Containers id | name 1 Big Box 2 Grocery Bag 3 Envelope 4 Zip Lock Table: Sale id | date | containerid 1 20100101 1 2 20100102 2 3 20091201 3 4 20091115 4 Table: Items id | name | saleid 1 Barbie Doll 1 2 Coin 3 3 Pop-Top 4 4 Barbie Doll 2 5 Coin 4 I need output that looks like this: itemid itemname saleids saledates containerids containertypes 1 Barbie Doll 1,2 20100101,20100102 1,2 Big Box, Grocery Bag 2 Coin 3,4 20091201,20091115 3,4 Envelope, Zip Lock 3 Pop-Top 4 20091115 4 Zip Lock The important part is that each item type only gets one record/row in the return on the screen. I accomplished this in the past by returning multiple rows of the same item and using a scripting language to limit the output. However, this makes the ui overly complicated and loopy. So, I'm hoping I can get the database to spit out only as many records as there are rows to display. This example may be a bit extreme because of the 2 joins needed to get to the container from the item (through the sale table). I'd be happy for just an example query that outputs this: itemid itemname saleids saledates 1 Barbie Doll 1,2 20100101,20100102 2 Coin 3,4 20091201,20091115 3 Pop-Top 4 20091115 I can only return a single result in a subquery, so I'm not sure how to do this.

    Read the article

  • Multiple ID's in database

    - by eric
    I have a database that contains a few tables such as person, staff, member, and supporter. The person table contains information about every staff, member, and supporter. The information it contains is name,address,email, and telephone. I also created an id that is the primary key. My issue is that I also have an primary key ID for staff, member, and supporter. For instance, in the person table is John with id 1. He is a supporter so in the supporter table is pID(for person id)to reference back to John with all his information and ID(for supporter ID). pID references to the person table and every person has an ID incremented by 1 starting at 1. supporter ID is for every supporter and also starts at 1 and is incremented by 1. Is it possible to have in the supporter table pID = 1 and supporter ID = 1? Another person may have a pID = 26 and supporter ID = 5. Or will supporter ID have to be different than the pID and be something like "sup"? So you would have pID = 1 and supporter ID = sup1 or pID = 26 and supporter ID = sup5

    Read the article

  • SQL Duplicates Issue

    - by jeff
    I have two tables : Product and ProductRateDetail. The parent table is Product. I have duplicate records in the product table which need to be unique. There are entries in the ProductRateDetail table which correspond to duplicate records in the product table. Somehow I need to update the ProductRateDetail table to match the original (older) ID from the Product table and then remove the duplicates from the product table. I would do this manually but there are 100's of records. I.e. something like UPDATE tbl_productRateDetail SET productID = (originalID from tbl_product) then something like DELETE from tbl_product WHERE duplicate ID and only delete the recently added ID data example: (sorry can't work out this formatting thing) select * from dbo.Product where ProductCode = '10003' tbl_product ProductID ProductTypeID ProductDescription ProductCode ProductSize 365 1 BEND DOUBLE FLANGED 10003 80mmX90deg 1354 1 BEND DOUBLE FLANGED 10003 80mmX90deg SELECT * FROM [MSTS2].[dbo].[ProductRateDetail] WHERE ProductID in (365,1354) tbl_productratedetail ProductRateDetailID ProductRateID ProductID UnitRate 365 1 365 16.87 1032 5 365 16.87 2187 10 365 16.87 2689 11 365 16.87 3191 12 365 16.87 7354 21 1354 21.30 7917 22 1354 21.30 8480 23 1354 21.30 9328 25 1354 21.30 9890 26 1354 21.30 10452 27 1354 21.30 Please help!

    Read the article

  • Best way to update/insert into a table based on a remote table.

    - by martilyo
    I have two very large enterprise tables in an Oracle 10g database. One table keeps the historical information of the other table. The problem is, I'm getting to the point where the records are just too many that my insert update is taking too long and my session is getting killed by the governor. Here's a pseudocode of my update process: sqlsel := 'SELECT col1, col2, col3, sysdate FROM table2@remote_location dpi WHERE (col1, col2, col3) IN ( SELECT col1, col2, col3 FROM table2@remote_location MINUS SELECT DISTINCT col1, col2, col3 FROM table1 mpc WHERE facility = '''||load_facility||''' )'; EXECUTE IMMEDIATE sqlsel BULK COLLECT INTO table1; I've tried the MERGE statement: MERGE INTO table1 t1 USING ( SELECT col1, col2, col3 FROM table2@remote_location ) t2 ON ( t1.col1 = t2.col1 AND t1.col2 = t2.col2 AND t1.col3 = t2.col3 ) WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN INSERT (t1.col1, t1.col2, t1.col3, t1.update_dttm ) VALUES (t2.col1, t2.col2, t2.col3, sysdate ) But there seems to be a confirmed bug on versions prior to Oracle 10.2.0.4 on the merge statement when doing a merge using a remote database. The chance of getting an enterprise upgrade is slim so is there a way to further optimize my first query or write it in another way to have it run best performance wise? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • DB optimization to use it as a queue

    - by anony
    We have a table called worktable which has some columns(key(primary key), ptime, aname, status, content) we have something called producer which puts in rows in this table and we have consumer which does an order-by on the key column and fetches the first row which has status as 'pending'. The consumer does some processing on this row: 1. updates status to "processing" 2. does some processing using content 3. deletes the row we are facing contention issues when we try to run multiple consumers(probably due to the order-by which does a full table scan)... using Advanced queues would be our next step but before we go there we want to check what is the max throughput we can achieve with multiple consumers and producer on the table. What are the optimizations we can do to get the best numbers possible? Can we do an in-memory processing where a consumer fetches 1000 rows at a time processes and deletes? will that improve? What are other possibilities? partitioning of table? parallelization? Index organized tables?...

    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

  • Is it possible to load an entire SQL Server CE database into RAM?

    - by DanM
    I'm using LinqToSql to query a small SQL Server CE database. I've noticed that any operations involving sub-properties are disappointingly slow. For example, if I have a Customer table that is referenced by an Order table via a foreign key, LinqToSql will automatically create an EntitySet<Order> property. This is a nice convenience, allowing me to do things like Customer.Order.Where(o => o.ProductName = "Stopwatch"), but for some reason, SQL Server CE hangs up pretty bad when I try to do stuff like this. One of my queries, which isn't really that complicated takes 3-4 seconds to complete. I can get the speed up to acceptable, even fast, if I just grab the two tables individually and convert them to List<Customer> and List<Order>, then join then manually with my own query, but this is throwing out a lot of the appeal of LinqToSql. So, I'm wondering if I can somehow get the whole database into RAM and just query that way, then occasionally save it. Is this possible? How? If not, is there anything else I can do to boost the performance? Note: My database in its initial state is about 250K and I don't expect it to grow to more than 1-2Mb. So, loading the data into RAM certainly wouldn't be a problem from a memory point of view.

    Read the article

  • mailing system DB structure, need help

    - by Anna
    i have a system there user(sender) can write a note to friends(receivers), number of receivers=0. Text of the message is saved in DB and visible to sender and all receivers then they login to system. Sender can add more receivers at any time. More over any of receivers can edit the message and even remove it from DB. For this system i created 3 tables, shortly: users(userID, username, password) messages(messageID, text) list(id, senderID, receiverID, messageID) in table "list" each row corresponds to pair sender-receiver, like sender_x_ID -- receiver_1_ID -- message_1_ID sender_x_ID -- receiver_2_ID -- message_1_ID sender_x_ID -- receiver_3_ID -- message_1_ID Now the problem is: 1. if user deletes the message from table "messages" how to automatically delete all rows from table "list" which correspond to deleted message. Do i have to include some foreign keys? More important: 2. if sender has let say 3 receivers for his message1 (username1, username2 and username3) and at certain moment decides to add username4 and username5 and at the same time exclude username1 from the list of receivers. PHP code will get the new list of receivers (username2, username3, username4, username5) That means insert to table "list" sender_x_ID -- receiver_4_ID -- message_1_ID sender_x_ID -- receiver_5_ID -- message_1_ID and also delete from table "list" the row corresponding to user1 (which is not in the list or receivers any more) sender_x_ID -- receiver_1_ID -- message_1_ID which sql query to send from PHP to make it in an easy and intelligent way? Please help! Examples of sql queries would be perfect!

    Read the article

  • Does this query fetch unnecessary information? Should I change the query?

    - by Camran
    I have this classifieds website, and I have about 7 tables in MySql where all data is stored. I have one main table, called "classifieds". In the classifieds table, there is a column called classified_id. This is not the PK, or a key whatsoever. It is just a number which is used for me to JOIN table records together. Ex: classifieds table: fordon table: id => 33 id => 12 classified_id => 10 classified_id => 10 ad_id => 'bmw_m3_92923' This above is linked together by the classified_id column. Now to the Q, I use this method to fetch all records WHERE the column ad_id matches any of the values inside an array, called in this case $ad_arr: SELECT mt.*, fordon.*, boende.*, elektronik.*, business.*, hem_inredning.*, hobby.* FROM classified mt LEFT JOIN fordon ON fordon.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN boende ON boende.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN elektronik ON elektronik.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN business ON business.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN hem_inredning ON hem_inredning.classified_id = mt.classified_id LEFT JOIN hobby ON hobby.classified_id = mt.classified_id WHERE mt.ad_id IN ('$ad_arr')"; Is this good or would this actually fetch unnecessary information? Check out this Q I posted couple of days ago. In the comments HLGEM is commenting that it is wrong etc etc. What do you think? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2782275/another-rookie-question-how-to-implement-count-here Thanks

    Read the article

  • cakephp - form for belongsTo Model

    - by user1511579
    I createt the following model to link 2 relational tables: class Ficha extends AppModel { //public $useTable = 'ficha_seg'; var $primaryKey = 'id_ficha'; var $name = 'Ficha'; var $belongsTo = array( 'Perigo' => array( 'className' => 'Perigo', 'foreignKey' => false, 'conditions' => 'Perigo.id_fichas = Ficha.id_ficha' ) ); } Now, i have a form that requires data from the class Ficha, and then is redirected to another ctp page where i will input the data for the table "Perigos". However, since i'm still a newbie in cakephp i'm having difficult building that second form to insert the data on the table "Perigos". Here goes the code i built at the moment related to the second form: FichasController.php (the method where is it supposed to save the data on the table "Perigos": public function preencher_ficha(){ if ($this->request->is('ficha')) { $this->Ficha->create(); if ($this->Ficha->Perigo->save($this->request->data)) { $last_id=$this->Ficha->getLastInsertID(); $this->Session->setFlash('Your post has been updated '.$last_id.'.'); //$this->redirect(array('action' => 'preencher_ficha')); } else { $this->Session->setFlash('Unable to qualquer coisa your post.'); } } } The preencher_ficha.ctp file with the form: echo $this->Form->create('Ficha->Perigo', array('action' => 'index')); echo $this->Form->input('class_subst', array('label' => 'Classificação:')); echo $this->Form->input('simbolos_perigo', array('label' => 'Símbolos:')); echo $this->Form->input('frases_r', array('label' => 'Frases:')); echo $this->Form->end('Finalizar Ficha'); Here i guess the create part is wrong, but i think i have errors too in the controller part.

    Read the article

  • SELECT product from subclass: How many queries do I need?

    - by Stefano
    I am building a database similar to the one described here where I have products of different type, each type with its own attributes. I report a short version for convenience product_type ============ product_type_id INT product_type_name VARCHAR product ======= product_id INT product_name VARCHAR product_type_id INT -> Foreign key to product_type.product_type_id ... (common attributes to all product) magazine ======== magazine_id INT title VARCHAR product_id INT -> Foreign key to product.product_id ... (magazine-specific attributes) web_site ======== web_site_id INT name VARCHAR product_id INT -> Foreign key to product.product_id ... (web-site specific attributes) This way I do not need to make a huge table with a column for each attribute of different product types (most of which will then be NULL) How do I SELECT a product by product.product_id and see all its attributes? Do I have to make a query first to know what type of product I am dealing with and then, through some logic, make another query to JOIN the right tables? Or is there a way to join everything together? (if, when I retrieve the information about a product_id there are a lot of NULL, it would be fine at this point). Thank you

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369  | Next Page >