Search Results

Search found 41135 results on 1646 pages for 'non relational database'.

Page 370/1646 | < Previous Page | 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377  | Next Page >

  • Sqlite and Python -- return a dictionary using fetchone()?

    - by AndrewO
    I'm using sqlite3 in python 2.5. I've created a table that looks like this: create table votes ( bill text, senator_id text, vote text) I'm accessing it with something like this: v_cur.execute("select * from votes") row = v_cur.fetchone() bill = row[0] senator_id = row[1] vote = row[2] What I'd like to be able to do is have fetchone (or some other method) return a dictionary, rather than a list, so that I can refer to the field by name rather than position. For example: bill = row['bill'] senator_id = row['senator_id'] vote = row['vote'] I know you can do this with MySQL, but does anyone know how to do it with SQLite? Thanks!!!

    Read the article

  • Dummies guide to locking in innodb

    - by ming yeow
    The typical documentation on locking in innodb is way too confusing. I think it will be of great value to have a "dummies guide to innodb locking" I will start, and I will gather all responses as a wiki: The column needs to be indexed before row level locking applies. EXAMPLE: delete row where column1=10; will lock up the table unless column1 is indexed

    Read the article

  • Performance of VIEW vs. SQL statement

    - by Matt W.
    I have a query that goes something like the following: select <field list> from <table list> where <join conditions> and <condition list> and PrimaryKey in (select PrimaryKey from <table list> where <join list> and <condition list>) and PrimaryKey not in (select PrimaryKey from <table list> where <join list> and <condition list>) The sub-select queries both have multiple sub-select queries of their own that I'm not showing so as not to clutter the statement. One of the developers on my team thinks a view would be better. I disagree in that the SQL statement uses variables passed in by the program (based on the user's login Id). Are there any hard and fast rules on when a view should be used vs. using a SQL statement? What kind of performance gain issues are there in running SQL statements on their own against regular tables vs. against views. (Note that all the joins / where conditions are against indexed columns, so that shouldn't be an issue.) EDIT for clarification... Here's the query I'm working with: select obj_id from object where obj_id in( (select distinct(sec_id) from security where sec_type_id = 494 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) and sec_obj_id in ( select obj_id from object where obj_ot_id in (select of_ot_id from obj_form left outer join obj_type on ot_id = of_ot_id where ot_app_id = 87 and of_id in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 493 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) ) and of_usage_type_id = 131 ) ) ) ) or (obj_ot_id in (select of_ot_id from obj_form left outer join obj_type on ot_id = of_ot_id where ot_app_id = 87 and of_id in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 493 and ( (sec_usergroup_id = 3278 and sec_usergroup_type_id = 230) or (sec_usergroup_id in (select ug_gi_id from user_group where ug_ui_id = 3278) and sec_usergroup_type_id = 231) ) ) and of_usage_type_id = 131 ) and obj_id not in (select sec_obj_id from security where sec_type_id = 494) )

    Read the article

  • Maximum Row in DBMS

    - by Am1rr3zA
    Is there any limit to maximum row of table in DBMS (specially MySQL)? I want create table for saving logfile and it's row increase so fast I want know what shoud I do to prevent any problem.

    Read the article

  • How to map combinations of things to a relational database?

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I have a table whose records represent certain objects. For the sake of simplicity I am going to assume that the table only has one row, and that is the unique ObjectId. Now I need a way to store combinations of objects from that table. The combinations have to be unique, but can be of arbitrary length. For example, if I have the ObjectIds 1,2,3,4 I want to store the following combinations: {1,2}, {1,3,4}, {2,4}, {1,2,3,4} The ordering is not necessary. My current implementation is to have a table Combinations that maps ObjectIds to CombinationIds. So every combination receives a unique Id: ObjectId | CombinationId ------------------------ 1 | 1 2 | 1 1 | 2 3 | 2 4 | 2 This is the mapping for the first two combinations of the example above. The problem is, that the query for finding the CombinationId of a specific Combination seems to be very complex. The two main usage scenarios for this table will be to iterate over all combinations, and the retrieve a specific combination. The table will be created once and never be updated. I am using SQLite through JDBC. Is there any simpler way or a best practice to implement such a mapping?

    Read the article

  • How can I check a type's dependents order to drop them and replace/modify the initial type?

    - by pctroll
    I tried to modify a type using the following code and it gave me the error code: 'ORA-02303'. I don't know much about Oracle or PL/SQL but I need to solve this; so I'd appreciate any further help with this. Thanks in advance. The code is just an example. But then again, I need to check its dependents first. create or replace type A as object ( x_ number, y_ varchar2(10), member procedure to_upper ); /

    Read the article

  • MySQL: automatic rollback on transaction failure

    - by praksant
    Is there any way to set MySQL to rollback any transaction on first error/warning automatically? Now if everything goes well, it commits, but on failure it leaves transaction open and on another start of transaction it commits incomplete changes from failed transaction. (I'm executing queries from php, but i don't want to check in php for failure, as it would make more calls between mysql server and webserver.) Thank you

    Read the article

  • MySQL foreign key constraint disappearing

    - by Bramjam
    This is my table: /* oefenreeks leerplan */ CREATE TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ( leerplan_oefenreeks_id INT PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT NOT NULL, leerplan_id INT NOT NULL, oefenreeks_id INT NOT NULL, plaats INT NOT NULL ); /* fk */ ALTER TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ADD CONSTRAINT fk_leerp_oefenr_leerplan FOREIGN KEY(leerplan_id) REFERENCES leerplan (leerplan_id) ON DELETE CASCADE; ALTER TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ADD CONSTRAINT fk_leerp_oefenr_oefenreeks FOREIGN KEY(oefenreeks_id) REFERENCES oefenreeks (oefenreeks_id) ON DELETE CASCADE; /* when I execute the nexline, my fk_leerp_oefenr_leerplan constraint vanishes/disappears*/ ALTER TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ADD CONSTRAINT un_leerp_oefenr UNIQUE(leerplan_id, oefenreeks_id); ALTER TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ADD CONSTRAINT un_leerp_oefenr_plaats UNIQUE(leerplan_id, plaats); When I go and check only 3 constraints exist. fk_leerp_oefenr_leerplan disappears. I don't understand why this happens.

    Read the article

  • Creating Two Cascading Foreign Keys Against Same Target Table/Col

    - by alram
    I have the following tables: user (userid int [pk], name varchar(50)) action (actionid int [pk], description nvarchar(50)) being referenced by another table that captures the relationship: <user1> <action>'s <user2>. I did this with the following table: userAction (userActionId int [pk], actionid int [fk: action.actionid], **userId1 int [fk ref's user.userid; on del/update cascade], userId2 int [fk ref's user.userid; on del/update cascade]**). However, when I try to save the userAction table i get an error because I have two cascading fk's against user.userid. Is there any way to remedy this or must I use a trigger?

    Read the article

  • Reading directly from the Doctrine Searchable index table

    - by phidah
    I've got a Doctrine table with the Searchable behavior enabled. Whenever a record is created, an index is made in another table. I have a model called Entry and the behavior automatically created the table entry_index. My question now is: How can I - without using the search(...) methods of my model use the data from this table? I want to create a tag cloud of the words most used, and the data in the index table is exactly what I need.

    Read the article

  • querying larg text file containing JSON objects.

    - by Maciek Sawicki
    Hi, I have few Gigabytes text file in format: {"user_ip":"x.x.x.x", "action_type":"xxx", "action_data":{"some_key":"some_value"...},...} each entry is one line. First I would like to easily find entries for given ip. This part is easy because I can use grep for example. However even for this I would like to find better solution because I would like to get response as fast as possible. Next part is more complicated because I would like to find entries from selected ip and of selected type and with particular value of some_key in action_data. Probably I would have to convert this file to SQL db (probably SQLite, because it will be desktop APP), but I would ask if there are exists better solutions?

    Read the article

  • Higher speed options for executing very large (20 GB) .sql file in MySQL

    - by Jonogan
    My firm was delivered a 20+ GB .sql file in reponse to a request for data from the gov't. I don't have many options for getting the data in a different format, so I need options for how to import it in a reasonable amount of time. I'm running it on a high end server (Win 2008 64bit, MySQL 5.1) using Navicat's batch execution tool. It's been running for 14 hours and shows no signs of being near completion. Does anyone know of any higher speed options for such a transaction? Or is this what I should expect given the large file size? Thanks

    Read the article

  • PostgreSQL - select only when specific multiple apperance in column

    - by Horse SMith
    I'm using PostgreSQL. I have a table with 3 fields person, recipe and ingredient person = creator of the recipe recipe = the recipe ingredient = one of the ingredients in the recipe I want to create a query which results in every person who whenever has added carrot to a recipe, the person must also have added salt to the same recipe. More than one person can have created the recipe, in which case the person who added the ingredient will be credited for adding the ingredient. Sometimes the ingredient is used more than once, even by the same person. If this the table: person1, rec1, carrot person1, rec1, salt person1, rec1, salt person1, rec2, salt person1, rec2, pepper person2, rec1, carrot person2, rec1, salt person2, rec2, carrot person2, rec2, pepper person3, rec1, sugar person3, rec1, carrot Then I want this result: person1 Because this person is the only one who whenever has added carrot also have added salt.

    Read the article

  • about null values!

    - by user329820
    Hi I have a question that if we declare a variable and then do not set it explicitly to null value then it would be null outomatically ,i mean that the below code will return true or false ? thanks DECLARE @val CHAR(4) If @val = NULL

    Read the article

  • How to secure phpMyAdmin

    - by Andrei
    Hi, I have noticed that there are strange requests to my website trying to find phpmyadmin, like /phpmyadmin/ /pma/ etc. Now I have installed PMA on Ubuntu via apt and would like to access it via webaddress different from /phpmyadmin/. What can I do to change it? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Hierarchical Hibernate, how many queries are executed?

    - by ghost1
    So I've been dealing with a home brew DB framework that has some seriously flaws, the justification for use being that not using an ORM will save on the number of queries executed. If I'm selecting all possibile records from the top level of a joinable object hierarchy, how many separate calls to the DB will be made when using an ORM (such as Hibernate)? I feel like calling bullshit on this, as joinable entities should be brought down in one query , right? Am I missing something here? note: lazy initialization doesn't matter in this scenario as all records will be used.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377  | Next Page >