Search Results

Search found 6017 results on 241 pages for 'universal records managem'.

Page 48/241 | < Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55  | Next Page >

  • WP plugin: How to split to multiple pages, automatically ?

    - by Tomer
    Hello there. I'm writing a WP plugin, that shows DB records in a table. Because the list is too long, I'd like to split it to multiple pages, based on the same display. I can do that manually with handling URL parameters, and using PHP, but I wanted to know if there's a structed method to to that. http://site.com/list --> records 1-20 http://site.com/list/2 --> records 20-40 Thanks, Tomer

    Read the article

  • Slow query with unexpected scan

    - by zerkms
    Hello I have this query: SELECT * FROM SAMPLE SAMPLE INNER JOIN TEST TEST ON SAMPLE.SAMPLE_NUMBER = TEST.SAMPLE_NUMBER INNER JOIN RESULT RESULT ON TEST.TEST_NUMBER = RESULT . TEST_NUMBER WHERE SAMPLED_DATE BETWEEN '2010-03-17 09:00' AND '2010-03-17 12:00' the biggest table here is RESULT, contains 11.1M records. The left 2 tables about 1M. this query works slowly (more than 10 minutes) and returns about 800 records. executing plan shows clustered index scan over all 11M records. RESULT.TEST_NUMBER is a clustered primary key. if I change 2010-03-17 09:00 to 2010-03-17 10:00 - i get about 40 records. it executes for 300ms. and plan shows clustered index seek if i replace * in SELECT clause to RESULT.TEST_NUMBER (covered with index) - then all become fast in first case too. this points to hdd io issues, but doesn't clarifies changing plan. so, any ideas?

    Read the article

  • help! Linq query

    - by menon
    I am getting error msg on the word Records - Type or namespace could not be found. Please help debugging it, what is missing? if (ProjDDL1.SelectedItem.Value != "--") results = CustomSearch<Records>(results, s => s.Business == ProjDDL1.SelectedItem.Value); Method CustomSearch: private DataTable CustomSearch<TKEY>(DataTable dt, Func<Records, bool> selector) { DataTable results = (dt.AsEnumerable().Where(selector).CopyToDataTable()); return results; }

    Read the article

  • merging two tables, while applying aggregates on the duplicates (max,min and sum)

    - by cloudraven
    I have a table (let's call it log) with a few millions of records. Among the fields I have Id, Count, FirstHit, LastHit. Id - The record id Count - number of times this Id has been reported FirstHit - earliest timestamp with which this Id was reported LastHit - latest timestamp with which this Id was reported This table only has one record for any given Id Everyday I get into another table (let's call it feed) with around half a million records with these fields among many others: Id Timestamp - Entry date and time. This table can have many records for the same id What I want to do is to update log in the following way. Count - log count value, plus the count() of records for that id found in feed FirstHit - the earliest of the current value in log or the minimum value in feed for that id LastHit - the latest of the current value in log or the maximum value in feed for that id. It should be noticed that many of the ids in feed are already in log. The simple thing that worked is to create a temporary table and insert into it the union of both as in Select Id, Min(Timestamp) As FirstHit, MAX(Timestamp) as LastHit, Count(*) as Count FROM feed GROUP BY Id UNION ALL Select Id, FirstHit,LastHit,Count FROM log; From that temporary table I do a select that aggregates Min(firsthit), max(lasthit) and sum(Count) Select Id, Min(FirstHit),Max(LastHit),Sum(Count) FROM @temp GROUP BY Id; and that gives me the end result. I could then delete everything from log and replace it with everything with temp, or craft an update for the common records and insert the new ones. However, I think both are highly inefficient. Is there a more efficient way of doing this. Perhaps doing the update in place in the log table?

    Read the article

  • mysql insert and buffers, is this possible

    - by Grumpy
    how is this possible first i do insert into table2 select * from table1 where table1.id=1 ( 50k records should be moved 6 indexes has to be updated ) second delete from table1 where id=1 ( 50k records are removed ) How is it possible that only 45k of records are moved? Im scratching my head over this and cant find a right answer Is it possible that the insert is still active and delete already started

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2000 - Filter by String Length

    - by user208662
    Hello, I have a database on a SQL Server 2000 server. This database has a table called "Person" that has a field call "FullName" that is a VARCHAR(100). I am trying to write a query that will allow me to get all records that have a name. Records that do not have a name have a FullName value of either null or an empty string. How do I get all of the Person records have a FullName? In other words, I want to ignore the records that do not have a FullName. Currently I am trying the following: SELECT * FROM Person p WHERE p.FullName IS NOT NULL AND LEN(p.FullName) > 0 Thank you

    Read the article

  • fetchBatchSize to be same as fetchLimit

    - by user1730622
    What does it mean to have fetchBatchSize to be the same as fetchLimit, say both are set to be 5. My understanding is that, with the fetchLimit, then only 5 records will be in the fetch result set; and additionally with the fetchBatchSize, only the ids/identities of the records will be read to the memory, and then the full records won't be retrieved until they are accessed. Is that a correct understanding?

    Read the article

  • Import Text Specification in Access Database

    - by MACS
    We are using C#.net & use access database code for import of text file specification into access table is there any access database limit for this action, as we may have records 5 lac (500,000) ,will this process work for huge records?? If No then how can we handle huge records insertion in access database for same ? Thanks

    Read the article

  • SQL Server - Percent based Full Text Search

    - by Sukhminder Singh
    Hi I want to conduct search on a particular column of a table in such a way that returning result set should satify following 2 conditions: Returning result set should have records whose 90% of the characters matches with the given search text. Returning result set should have records whose 70% of the consecutive characters matches with the given search text. It implies that when 10 character word Sukhminder is searched, then: it should return records like Sukhmindes, ukhminder, Sukhmindzr, because it fulfils both of the above mentioned conditions. But it should not return records like Sukhmixder because it does not fulfil the second condition. Likewise, It should not return record Sukhminzzz because it does not fulfil the first condition. I am trying to use Full Text Search feature of SQL Server. But, could not formulate the required query yet. Kindly reply ASAP.

    Read the article

  • SUM of column with Left Outer Join

    - by Matt
    I am trying to get the Count of all records that have at least on person who is authorized on the record. Basically, a Record can have more than one person associated with it. I want to return the count of Total Records, a count of total Authorized Records where at least 1 person is authorized, and a count of total NotAuthorized records where no person associated with record is authorized. It doesn't matter if one person is authorized per Record or if 3 people are authorized for that record, that should add 1 to the Authorized counter. The current query is incrementing Auth and Non auth for each person added per record rather, than one per record. If no people are assigned to the record that should also count towards Not Auth. SELECT Count(DISTINCT Record.RecordID) AS TotalRecords, SUM(CASE WHEN People.PersonLevel = 1 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) AS Authorized, SUM(CASE WHEN People.PersonLevel <> 1 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) AS NotAuthorized FROM Record LEFT OUTER JOIN RecordPeople ON Record.RecordID = RecordPeople.RecordID LEFT OUTER JOIN People ON RecordPeople.PersonID = People.PersonID

    Read the article

  • How Indices Cope with MVCC ?

    - by geeko
    Greetings Overflowers, To my understanding (and I hope I'm not right) changes to indices cannot be MVCCed. I'm wondering if this is also true with big records as copies can be costly. Since records are accessed via indices (usually), how MVCC can be effective ? Do, for e.g., indices keep track of different versions of MVCCed records ? Any recent good reading on this subject ? Really appreciated ! Regards

    Read the article

  • SQL Database Schema Design For Large 3 Billion Relationship Database.

    - by K-Bell
    Get your geek on. Can you solve this? I am designing a products database for SQL Server 2008 R2 Ed. (not Enterprise Ed.) that will be used to store custom product configurations for over 30,000 distinct products. The database will have up to 500 users at a time. Here is the design problem… Each Product has a collection of Parts (up to 50 parts per product). So if I have 30,000 Products and each of them can have up to 50 Parts, that’s 1.5 million distinct Product-to-Part relationships …or as an equation… 30,000 (Products) X 50 (Parts) = 1.5 million Product-to-Parts records. …and If… Each Part can have up to 2000 finish options (A finish is a paint color). NOTE: Only one finish will be selected by a user at run-time. The 2000 finish options I need to store are the allowed options for a specific part on a specific product. So if I have 1.5 million distinct product-to-part relationships/records and each of those parts can have up to 2,000 finishes that is 3 billion allowable product-to-part-to finish relationships/records …or as an equation… 1.5 million (Parts) x 2,000 (Finishes) = 3 Billion Product-to-Part-to-Finishes records. How can I design this database so that I can execute fast and efficient queries for a specific product and return its list of Parts and all the allowable Finishes for each part without 3 Billion Product-to-Part-to-Finish records? Read time is more important then write time. Please post your thoughts/suggestions if you have experience with large databases. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How do you detach an array of strings from shared memory? C

    - by Tim
    I have: int array_id; char* records[10]; // get the shared segment if ((array_id = shmget(IPC_PRIVATE, 1, 0666)) == -1) { perror("Array Creating"); } // attach records[0] = (char*) shmat(array_id, (void*)0, 0); if ((int) *records == -1) { perror("Array Attachment"); } which works fine, but when i try and detach i get an "invalid argument" error. // detach int error; if( (error = shmdt((void*) records[0])) == -1) { perror(array detachment); } any ideas? thank you

    Read the article

  • how to use exceptions in this scenario?

    - by jess
    Hi, I have a method which handles a set of records.This method,return true\false after processing.So,if all the records are processed(doing some db updates),will return true.Now,suppose after processing 1 record,some exception is thrown,should I write result=false(at the end of method result is returned) in catch block? And,allow processing of other records to be done?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Composite Primary Keys

    - by Colin
    I am attempting to replace all records for a give day in a certain table. The table has a composite primary key comprised of 7 fields. One such field is date. I have deleted all records which have a date value of 2/8/2010. When I try to then insert records into the table for 2/8/2010, I get a primary key violation. The records I am attempting to insert are only for 2/8/2010. Since date is a component of the PK, shouldn't there be no way to violate the constraint as long as the date I'm inserting is not already in the table? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Why does this SELECT ... JOIN statement return no results?

    - by Stephen
    I have two tables: 1. tableA is a list of records with many columns. There is a timestamp column called "created" 2. tableB is used to track users in my application that have locked a record in tableA for review. It consists of four columns: id, user_id, record_id, and another timestamp collumn. I'm trying to select up to 10 records from tableA that have not been locked by for review by anyone in tableB (I'm also filtering in the WHERE clause by a few other columns from tableA like record status). Here's what I've come up with so far: SELECT tableA.* FROM tableA LEFT OUTER JOIN tableB ON tableA.id = tableB.record_id WHERE tableB.id = NULL AND tableA.status = 'new' AND tableA.project != 'someproject' AND tableA.created BETWEEN '1999-01-01 00:00:00' AND '2010-05-06 23:59:59' ORDER BY tableA.created ASC LIMIT 0, 10; There are currently a few thousand records in tableA and zero records in tableB. There are definitely records that fall between those timestamps, and I've verified this with a simple SELECT * FROM tableA WHERE created BETWEEN '1999-01-01 00:00:00' AND '2010-05-06 23:59:59' The first statement above returns zero rows, and the second one returns over 2,000 rows.

    Read the article

  • Concurrent usage of table causing issues

    - by Sven
    Hello In our current project we are interfacing with a third party data provider. They need to insert data in a table of ours. This inserting can be frequent every 1 min, every 5min, every 30, depends on the amount of new data they need to provide. The use the isolation level read committed. On our end we have an application, windows service, that calls a webservice every 2 minutes to see if there is new data in this table. Our isolation level is repeatable read. We retrieve the records and update a column on these rows. Now the problem is that sometimes this third party provider needs to insert a lot of data, let's say 5000 records. They do this per transaction (5rows per transaction), but they don't close the connection. They do one transaction and then the next untill all records are inserted. This caused issues for our process, we receive a timeout. If this goes on for a long time the database get's completely unstable. For instance, they maybe stopped, but the table somehow still stays unavailable. When I try to do a select on the table, I get several records but at a certain moment I don't get any response anymore. It just says retrieving data but nothing comes anymore until I get a timeout exception. Only solution is to restart the database and then I see the other records. How can we solve this. What is the ideal isolation level setting in this scenario?

    Read the article

  • Problem with joining to an empty table

    - by Imran Omar Bukhsh
    I use the following query: select * from A LEFT JOIN B on ( A.t_id != B.t_id) to get all the records in A that are not in B. The results are fine except when table B is completely empty, but then I do not get any records, even from table A. Later It wont work yet! CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS T1 ( id int(11) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, title varchar(50) CHARACTER SET utf8 COLLATE utf8_unicode_ci NOT NULL, t_id int(11) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=3 ; -- -- Dumping data for table T1 INSERT INTO T1 (id, title, t_id) VALUES (1, 'apple', 1), (2, 'orange', 2); -- -- Table structure for table T2 CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS T2 ( id int(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, title varchar(50) CHARACTER SET utf8 COLLATE utf8_unicode_ci NOT NULL, t_id int(11) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (id) ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT=2 ; -- -- Dumping data for table T2 INSERT INTO T2 (id, title, t_id) VALUES (1, 'dad', 2); Now I want to get all records in T1 that do not have a corresponding records in T2 I try SELECT * FROM T1 LEFT OUTER JOIN T2 ON T1.t_id != T2.t_id and it won't work

    Read the article

  • Message reason why Execute method failed

    - by waanders
    I use the DAO method Execute to delete some records. If this fails this is clear by checking RecordsAffected (it will be 0). But is it possible to get the error message (for instance, to log or to show to the user)? I've try to delete the records by hand in the Table grid I get a clear dialog message, e.g. "The record cannot be deleted or changed because tabel x includes related records".

    Read the article

  • form data posted using linq-to-sql not showing until I refresh the page

    - by PeteShack
    I have an asp.net mvc app with a form. When you submit the form, it adds records to the sql database with linq-to-sql. After adding the records, the controller displays the form again, and should show those new values on the form. But, when it displays the form, the values are blank, until you refresh the page. While tracing through the code, I can see the records being added to the database when they are submitted, but the view doesnt display them, unless I refresh. The view is not the problem, it just displays the view model, which is missing the new records immediately after the post. I know this is kind of vague, but wasnt sure what parts of code to include here. Could this have something to do with data context life cycle? Basically, there is a data context created when the form is posted, then a different data context is created in the method that displays the form. Any suggestions on what might be causing this?

    Read the article

  • JDBC Pagination

    - by Zeeshan
    Hi, I want to implement pagination using JDBC. The actual thing I want to know is "How can i get first 50 and then next 50 records from database for page 1 and 2 respectively" My Query is Select * from data [data table contains 20,000 rows] For page #1 I get 50 records and for page #2 I want to get next 50 records. How can I implement it efficiently in JDBC? I have searched and found that rs.absolute(row) is the way to skip first page records but it takes some amount of time on large result sets and I don't want to bear this amount of time. Also, I don't want to use rownum and limit + offset in query because these are not good to use in query, I dont know why, still I don't want to use it in query. Can anyone help me how to get limited ResultSet for pagination or is there any way JDBC is giving us?

    Read the article

  • NSMutableArray of Objects misbehaves ...

    - by iFloh
    I hope someone understands what happens to my NSMutableArray. I read records a, b, c, d from a database, load the fields into an object an add the object to an array. To do this I read the records into an instance of that object (tmpEvent) and add the Object to the target array (NSMutableArray myArray). the code looks like: for (condition) { tmpEvent.field1 = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:(char*)sqlite3_column_text(stmt, 0)]; tmpEvent.field2 = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:(char*)sqlite3_column_text(stmt, 1)]; tmpEvent.field3 = [NSString stringWithUTF8String:(char*)sqlite3_column_text(stmt, 2)]; NSLog(@"myArray: adding %@", tmpEvent.field1); [myArray addObject:tmpEvent]; } The NSLog shows myArray: adding a myArray: adding b myArray: adding c myArray: adding d Subsequent I enumerate the array (this can be in the same or a different method): for (myObject *records in myArray) { NSLog(@"iEvents value %@", records.field1); } The NSLog now shows: myArray value d myArray value d myArray value d myArray value d a mystery .... ??? any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Simple question on database query.

    - by GK
    I have been asked in an interview, To write a sql query which fetches the first three records with highest value on some column from a table. i had written a query which fetched all the records with highest value, but didnt get how exactly i can get only first three records of those. could you help me in this. thanks.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55  | Next Page >