Search Results

Search found 27357 results on 1095 pages for 'transact sql'.

Page 672/1095 | < Previous Page | 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679  | Next Page >

  • wp+sql+image not goin in the folder

    - by happy
    this is my code for uploading image in database but image are going to the desird forlder...but when i m tryin to retrieve the images to diaplay,,they are not displayed..anyone help me...... $category=$_POST['category']; $uploadDir = 'D:/xampp/htdocs/js/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/img/imagess/ '; $fileName = $_FILES['Photo']['name']; $tmpName = $_FILES['Photo']['tmp_name']; $fileSize = $_FILES['Photo']['size']; $fileType = $_FILES['Photo']['type']; $filePath = $uploadDir . $fileName; $result = move_uploaded_file($tmpName,$filePath); if (!$result) { echo "Error uploading file"; exit; } if(!get_magic_quotes_gpc()) { $fileName = addslashes($fileName); $filePath = addslashes($filePath); } global $wpdb; //$insert=$wpdb->insert('images',array('image_name'=>$filePath,'cat_name'=>$category),array('%b','%s')); $insert=$wpdb->insert('images',array('image_name'=>$filePath,'cat_name'=>$category)); $wpdb->insert('categories',array('cat_name'=>$category)); echo "Successfully Submitted";

    Read the article

  • Centralizing / Abstracting MSSQL Data from Multiple Tables / Databases

    - by davemackey
    If one has a number of databases (due to separate application front-ends) that provide a complete picture - for example a CRM, accounting, and product database - what methods are available to centralize/abstract this data for easy reporting? Essentially, I'm wondering if there is a way to automatically pull data from multiple databases into a central repository that is continuously updated from the three databases and which can be used for reporting? I'm also open to alternative best practice suggestions?

    Read the article

  • left join without duplicate values using MIN()

    - by Clipper87
    I have a table_1: id custno 1 1 2 2 3 3 and a table_2: id custno qty descr 1 1 10 a 2 1 7 b 3 2 4 c 4 3 7 d 5 1 5 e 6 1 5 f When I run this query to show the minimum order quantities from every customer: SELECT DISTINCT table_1.custno,table_2.qty,table_2.descr FROM table_1 LEFT OUTER JOIN table_2 ON table_1.custno = table_2.custno AND qty = (SELECT MIN(qty) FROM table_2 WHERE table_2.custno = table_1.custno ) Then I get this result: custno qty descr 1 5 e 1 5 f 2 4 c 3 7 d Customer 1 appears twice each time with the same minimum qty (& a different description) but I only want to see customer 1 appear once. I don't care if that is the record with 'e' as a description or 'f' as a description. How could I do this ? Thx!

    Read the article

  • How to limit results by SUM

    - by superspace
    I have a table of events called event. For the purpose of this question it only has one field called date. The following query returns me a number of events that are happening on each date for the next 14 days: SELECT DATE_FORMAT( ev.date, '%Y-%m-%d' ) as short_date, count(*) as date_count FROM event ev WHERE ev.date >= NOW() GROUP BY short_date ORDER BY ev.start_date ASC LIMIT 14 The result could be as follows: +------------+------------+ | short_date | date_count | +------------+------------+ | 2010-03-14 | 1 | | 2010-03-15 | 2 | | 2010-03-16 | 9 | | 2010-03-17 | 8 | | 2010-03-18 | 11 | | 2010-03-19 | 14 | | 2010-03-20 | 13 | | 2010-03-21 | 7 | | 2010-03-22 | 2 | | 2010-03-23 | 3 | | 2010-03-24 | 3 | | 2010-03-25 | 6 | | 2010-03-26 | 23 | | 2010-03-27 | 14 | +------------+------------+ 14 rows in set (0.06 sec) Let's say I want to dislay these events by date. At the same time I only want to display a maximum of 10 at a time. How would I do this? Somehow I need to limit this result by the SUM of the date_count field but I do not know how. Anybody run into this problem before? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Improve SQL query performance

    - by Anax
    I have three tables where I store actual person data (person), teams (team) and entries (athlete). The schema of the three tables is: In each team there might be two or more athletes. I'm trying to create a query to produce the most frequent pairs, meaning people who play in teams of two. I came up with the following query: SELECT p1.surname, p1.name, p2.surname, p2.name, COUNT(*) AS freq FROM person p1, athlete a1, person p2, athlete a2 WHERE p1.id = a1.person_id AND p2.id = a2.person_id AND a1.team_id = a2.team_id AND a1.team_id IN ( SELECT id FROM team, athlete WHERE team.id = athlete.team_id GROUP BY team.id HAVING COUNT(*) = 2 ) GROUP BY p1.id ORDER BY freq DESC Obviously this is a resource consuming query. Is there a way to improve it?

    Read the article

  • How effecient is a details table?

    - by Jeffrey Lott
    At my job, we have pseudo-standard of creating one table to hold the "standard" information for an entity, and a second table, named like 'TableNameDetails', which holds optional data elements. On average, for every row in the main table will have about 8-10 detail rows in it. My question is: What kind of performance impacts does this have over adding these details as additional nullable columns on the main table?

    Read the article

  • Transfer Data between databases with postgres

    - by user227932
    I need to transfer some data from another Database. The old database is called paw1.moviesDB and the new database is paw1. The schema of each table are the following Awards (name of the table)(new DB) Id [PK] Serial Award Nominations (name of the table) (old DB) Id [PK] Serial nominations I want to copy the data from old DB to the new DB.

    Read the article

  • Cakephp Autoconvert find() fields?

    - by Razor Storm
    In cake php I can grab a model's fields by using the find() method. What if I wish to apply a transformation function to the fields? Is there a way to directly accomplish this task? Suppose I have a model called RaceTime with the fields racerId and timeMillis RaceTime +------------+ | Field | +------------+ | id | | racerId | | timeMillis | +------------+ timeMillis is an int specifying how long the race took in milliseconds. Obviously saying a race took 15651 milliseconds isn't very useful to a human reader, and I would wish to convert this to a human readable format. Is there a way to accomplish this directly in find()? Or is the only option to loop through the results after find() finishes?

    Read the article

  • How to first get different related values from diferent SQL tables (PHP)

    - by Ole Jak
    I am triig to fill options list. I have 2 tables USERS and STREAMS I vant to get all streams and get names of users assigned to that streams. Users consists of username and id Streams consists of id, userID, streamID I try such code: <?php global $connection; $query = "SELECT * FROM streams "; $streams_set = mysql_query($query, $connection); confirm_query($streams_set); $streams_count = mysql_num_rows($streams_set); while ($row = mysql_fetch_array($streams_set)){ $userid = $row['userID']; global $connection; $query2 = "SELECT email, username "; $query2 .= "FROM users "; $query2 .= "WHERE id = '{$userid}' "; $qs = mysql_query($query2, $connection); confirm_query($qs); $found_user = mysql_fetch_array($qs); echo ' <option value="'.$row['streamID'].'">'.$row['userID'].$found_user.'</option> '; } ?> But it does not return USER names from DB=( So what shall I do to this code to see usernames as "options" text?

    Read the article

  • Search by nvarchar

    - by ziks
    Hi all. I have this problem. In table I have column which is nvarcar type. and row in this column is row1= 1;6 row2 = 12 row3 =6;5;67 etc... I try to search this column. for example when i send 1 i try to get only row1. I use LIKE but in result set I get row1 and row2. How can I achieved this, any help is appreciated. Tnx...

    Read the article

  • mysql: managing memory usage

    - by every_answer_gets_a_point
    i am doing a delete with a LIKE statement my keybuffer is 25m, the sort buffer size is 256k the delete has been taking over 2 hours should i increase memory usage? there are about 50 megs of data in the table from which i am deleting, thats about 500,000 rows is there anything else i can do on the adminsitration size to speed up this delete?

    Read the article

  • MySQL - Limit a left join to the first date-time that occurs?

    - by John M
    Simplified table structure (the tables can't be merged at this time): TableA: dts_received (datetime) dts_completed (datetime) task_a (varchar) TableB: dts_started (datetime) task_b (varchar) What I would like to do is determine how long a task took to complete. The join parameter would be something like ON task_a = task_b AND dts_completed < dts_started The issue is that there may be multiple date-times that occur after the dts_completed. How do I create a join that only returns the first tableB-datetime that occurs after the tableA-datetime?

    Read the article

  • Access database query locks ability to edit table?

    - by Sattvic
    I created a query in Microsoft Access like the one below: SELECT Deliverables.ID, Deliverables.Title, Deliverables.Summary, Deliverables.Header_Code, Deliverables.Header_Code.Value, Deliverables.Sort_order, Deliverables.Pillar, Deliverables.Pillar.Value, Deliverables.Misc_ID FROM Deliverables WHERE (((Deliverables.Pillar.Value)="Link Building")); But my problem is that this query locks my fields and I cannot make changes to the table using the query view. Any suggestions? I am using Microsoft Access 2007

    Read the article

  • Select Query Joined on Two Fields?

    - by btollett
    I've got a few tables in an access database: ID | LocationName 1 | Location1 2 | Location2 ID | LocationID | Date | NumProductsDelivered 1 | 1 | 12/10 | 3 2 | 1 | 01/11 | 2 3 | 1 | 02/11 | 2 4 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 5 | 2 | 12/10 | 1 ID | LocationID | Date | NumEmployees | EmployeeType 1 | 1 | 12/10 | 10 | 1 (=Permanent) 2 | 1 | 12/10 | 3 | 2 (=Temporary) 3 | 1 | 12/10 | 1 | 3 (=Support) 4 | 2 | 10/10 | 1 | 1 5 | 2 | 11/10 | 2 | 1 6 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 | 2 7 | 2 | 11/10 | 1 | 3 8 | 2 | 12/10 | 2 | 1 9 | 2 | 12/10 | 1 | 3 What I want to do is pass in the LocationID as a parameter and get back something like the following table. So, if I pass in 2 as my LocationID, I should get: Date | NumProductsDelivered | NumPermanentEmployees | NumSupportEmployees 10/10 | | 1 | 11/10 | 1 | 2 | 1 12/10 | 1 | 2 | 1 It seems like this should be a pretty simple query. I really don't even need the first table except as a way to fill in the combo box on the form from which the user chooses which location they want a report for. Unfortunately, everything I've done has resulted in me getting a lot more data than I should be getting. My confusion is in how to set up the join (presumably that's what I'm looking for here) given that I want both the date and locationID to be the same for each row in the result set. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MySQL -- How to do this better?

    - by Andrew
    $activeQuery = mysql_query("SELECT count(`status`) AS `active` FROM `assignments` WHERE `user` = $user_id AND `status` = 0"); $active = mysql_fetch_assoc($activeQuery); $failedQuery = mysql_query("SELECT count(`status`) AS `failed` FROM `assignments` WHERE `user` = $user_id AND `status` = 1"); $failed = mysql_fetch_assoc($failedQuery); $completedQuery = mysql_query("SELECT count(`status`) AS `completed` FROM `assignments` WHERE `user` = $user_id AND `status` = 2"); $completed = mysql_fetch_assoc($completedQuery); There has to be a better way to do that, right? I don't know how much I need to elaborate as you can see what I'm trying to do, but is there any way to do all of that in one query? I need to be able to output the active, failed, and completed assignments, preferably in one query.

    Read the article

  • Performance optimization for mssql: decrease stored procedures execution time or unload the server?

    - by tim
    Hello everybody! We have a web service which provides search over hotels. There is a problem with performance: a single request to the service takes around 5000 ms. Almost all of the time is spent in database by executing storing procedures. During the request our server (mssql2008) consumes ~90% of the processor time. When 2 requests are made in parallel the average time grows and is around 7000 ms. When number of request is increasing, the average time of response is increasing as well. We have 20-30 requests per minute. Which kind of optimization is the best in this case having in mind that the goal is to provide stable response time for the service: 1) Try to decrease the stored procedures execution time 2) Try to find the way how to unload the server It is interesting to hear from people who deal with booking sites. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Does the order of the columns in a SELECT statement make a difference?

    - by Frank Computer
    This question was inspired by a previous question posted on SO, "Does the order of the WHERE clause make a differnece?". Would it improve a SELECT statement's performance if the the columns used in the WHERE section are placed at the begining of the SELECT statement? example: SELECT customer.id, transaction.id, transaction.efective_date, transaction.a, [...] FROM customer, transaction WHERE customer.id = transaction.id; I do know that limiting the list of columns to only the needed ones in a SELECT statement improves performance as opposed to using SELECT * because the current list is smaller.

    Read the article

  • Same Salt, Different Encrypted Password is not working? Using Linq to update password.

    - by Xaisoft
    Hello, I am running into a wall regarding changing the password and was wondering if anyone had any ideas. Here are the database values prior to changing the password: Clear Text password = abc1980 Encrypted Password = Yn1N5l+4AUqkOM3WYO7ww/sCN+o= Salt = 82qVIhUIoblBRIRvFSZ1fw== After I change my password to abc1973, salt remains the same, but the Encrypted Password changes which is supposed to happen: Encrypted Password = rHtjLq3qxAl/7T1GfkxrsHzPsNk= However, when I try to login with abc1973 as the password, it does not login. If I try abc1980, it logs me in. It is updating the database, is it caching the values somewhere? Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Redundancy in doing sum()

    - by Abhi
    table1 - id, time_stamp, value This table consists of 10 id's. Each id would be having a value for each hour in a day. So for 1 day, there would be 240 records in this table. table2 - id Table2 consists of a dynamically changing subset of id's present in table1. At a particular instance, the intention is to get sum(value) from table1, considering id's only in table2, grouping by each hour in that day, giving the summarized values a rank and repeating this each day. the query is at this stage: select time_stamp, sum(value), rank() over (partition by trunc(time_stamp) order by sum(value) desc) rn from table1 where exists (select t2.id from table2 t2 where id=t2.id) and time_stamp >= to_date('05/04/2010 00','dd/mm/yyyy hh24') and time_stamp <= to_date('25/04/2010 23','dd/mm/yyyy hh24') group by time_stamp order by time_stamp asc If the query is correct, can this be made more efficient, considering that, table1 will actually consist of thousand's of id's instead of 10 ? EDIT: I am using sum(value) 2 times in the query, which I am not able to get a workaround such that the sum() is done only once. Pls help on this

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679  | Next Page >