SELECT * FROM Questions WHERE Type = 'Stupid'

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > SELECT * FROM Questions WHERE Type = 'Stupid'

«‹›303 »

Triple Tech: Jul 28, 2006; So what, are you quitting to join Homo Explosion?

Two ways:

A) Modify the data before insert in one transaction. Start a transaction, clear out all old rows (should be just one with this algorithm) in the same day, insert a new row, close transaction.

B) In an external join table, enumerate the days you want to view. Then join those days to an aggregate table of days and their maximum time. This will pull out just the ones you want without deleting the data.

# ? Feb 14, 2009 16:40

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 14, 2024 09:37

NMan: Oct 28, 2004; The Police Makes Us Safe

Anyone know how I can make this line ANSI '99 compliant?

code:

SELECT site_phone
INTO   cur_emp.phone
FROM   site
WHERE  site_id = cur_emp.site_id;

# ? Feb 19, 2009 15:45

cannibustacap: Jul 7, 2003; Brrrruuuuuiinnssss

Hey how would you do this SQL:

code:

SELECT 			node.title AS title,
			term_node.tid AS tid
FROM 			node 
LEFT JOIN 		term_node 
ON 			node.nid = term_node.nid 
WHERE			term_node.tid IN	{SELECT tid
						FROM	term_node
						WHERE	nid = 8109;}
AND 			node.type = 'best' 
LIMIT 10;

Basically, I want to get the node titles from a table {node}.

But in another table called {term_node} I want it to select only the titles that correspond to when the term_node.tid is the same as that of the original nid (8109).

Basically, there are thousands of nodes, and some of them have the same term_id. So, if I am looking at a certain node, I'd like to find the other nodes that have the same term_id.

Hope that makes sense. Hopefully you can kind of tell what I am doing by my bad syntax.

I tried "IN" and "=" in the middle part of the query. I also tried it with and without the ";", etc. I'm just not sure how to do this.

Also, with the middle Query, there can be multiple rows corresponding to this.

# ? Feb 20, 2009 20:01

Jethro: Jun 1, 2000; I was raised on the dairy, Bitch!

Try it with parenthesis () not curly braces {} and without the ; in the sub-query.

As an aside, because your WHERE condition refers to the outer table of your LEFT JOIN, you have essentially turned it into an INNER JOIN.

Jethro fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Feb 20, 2009

# ? Feb 20, 2009 20:28

cannibustacap: Jul 7, 2003; Brrrruuuuuiinnssss

Jethro posted:

Try it with parenthesis () not curly braces {} and without the ; in the sub-query.

As an aside, because your WHERE condition refers to the outer table of your LEFT JOIN, you have essentially turned it into an INNER JOIN.

Wow it worked. I love you.

# ? Feb 20, 2009 20:58

cannibustacap: Jul 7, 2003; Brrrruuuuuiinnssss

Jethro posted:

Try it with parenthesis () not curly braces {} and without the ; in the sub-query.

As an aside, because your WHERE condition refers to the outer table of your LEFT JOIN, you have essentially turned it into an INNER JOIN.

Hmm, I'd like to take this to the next level..

The "tid" is a term ID and it can have a parent and even a grandparent in its hierarchy (eventually even more levels of ancestors)

Within that query, how can I order the tid's to have the ones with the most number of "levels" on the top?

So if tid #10 has a parent tid #5 and a grand parent tid #1. I would like that listed above tid 5 (which has only 1 parent, tid #1).

Thanks again

EDIT: I should mention there is another table {table_hierarchy} that has two columns, one for the current tid and another for the direct parent of that tid (which could be the child of another tid too and I'd have to recursively check that parent's tid as well).

This reminds me of a breadth search or one of those binary tree searches from my computer science class way back when. I wonder if there is a function that can do something like that already?

cannibustacap fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Feb 20, 2009

# ? Feb 20, 2009 21:13

Pizza Partisan: Sep 22, 2003

cannibustacap posted:

Hmm, I'd like to take this to the next level..

The "tid" is a term ID and it can have a parent and even a grandparent in its hierarchy (eventually even more levels of ancestors)

Within that query, how can I order the tid's to have the ones with the most number of "levels" on the top?

So if tid #10 has a parent tid #5 and a grand parent tid #1. I would like that listed above tid 5 (which has only 1 parent, tid #1).

Thanks again

You'd want to write a scalar-valued function per tid that loops through the multiple levels of ancestry and returns that number, then order by the function.

# ? Feb 20, 2009 22:11

Zoracle Zed: Jul 10, 2001

cannibustacap posted:

This reminds me of a breadth search or one of those binary tree searches from my computer science class way back when. I wonder if there is a function that can do something like that already?

Depends on your RDMS. Check out Joe Celko's nested sets model, it's pretty awesome for hierarchical systems.

# ? Feb 20, 2009 22:25

Hammerite: Mar 9, 2007; And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.; Jade Ear Joe

I have a table of Users and it has a lot of columns that represent 1/0, true/false settings; like whether the user is banned, whether he is validated, and a whole slew of preference settings that can be either on or off. I've set the columns as TINYINT(1); so basically there are a bunch of columns the size of a single byte that are being used to hold boolean values. Is this particularly inefficient compared to storing these settings, or groups of them, as a single number which can be decomposed into a sum of powers of two ("bitwise" interpretation of numbers I think this is referred to)? Or is the difference negligible?

Using MySQL if it matters.

# ? Feb 21, 2009 00:56

Bad Titty Puker: Nov 3, 2007; Soiled Meat

Hammerite posted:

I have a table of Users and it has a lot of columns that represent 1/0, true/false settings; like whether the user is banned, whether he is validated, and a whole slew of preference settings that can be either on or off. I've set the columns as TINYINT(1); so basically there are a bunch of columns the size of a single byte that are being used to hold boolean values. Is this particularly inefficient compared to storing these settings, or groups of them, as a single number which can be decomposed into a sum of powers of two ("bitwise" interpretation of numbers I think this is referred to)? Or is the difference negligible?

Using MySQL if it matters.

If you can model the info by replacing "Boolean" columns with one or more encoding schemes, and/or detail tables, it's more normalized and *may* perform better. For example, if the table models a single status element in several mutually exclusive columns, you can make up codes and use one column. Or if you have a set of boolean values that are not mutually exclusive, but model the same kind of thing, you can often use a detail table, again with an encoding scheme.

For example, if a user can be either Active, Banned, Suspended or OnVacation (I'm pulling these out of my rear end) and these are mutually exclusive, you could make up an encoding scheme and replace them with a user_status column.

Or if a set of the columns model user Interests, and they're not mutually exclusive, you could again make up an encoding scheme and use a UserInterests detail table. Each row represents a user interest.

This is more normalized and may perform better, and part of the reason is because you can get good selective index(es) on the new columns.

# ? Feb 21, 2009 03:38

Golbez: Oct 9, 2002; 1 2 3!
If you want to take a shot at me get in line, line
1 2 3!
Baby, I've had all my shots and I'm fine

It would be horribly unnormalized to do something like this, wouldn't it:

Interests: Driving = 1 Flying = 2 Gaming = 4 Movies = 8 Baseball = 16

etc etc, so someone who likes driving, gaming and baseball would have an entry of 21. I guess this would only be useful if the decoding had to be done in runtime. And even then, no.

# ? Feb 21, 2009 04:09

Bad Titty Puker: Nov 3, 2007; Soiled Meat

Golbez posted:

It would be horribly unnormalized to do something like this, wouldn't it:

Interests: Driving = 1 Flying = 2 Gaming = 4 Movies = 8 Baseball = 16

etc etc, so someone who likes driving, gaming and baseball would have an entry of 21. I guess this would only be useful if the decoding had to be done in runtime. And even then, no.

Yeah, theoretically, because it stores more than one attribute in a single column, and practically because you would have to mess with encoding and decoding, and writing queries is a bit of a hassle. Plus, adding a new interest is a pain in the rear end. If you use a detail table and have a bunch of interests, then you get a good selective index and you would want to consider that design.

# ? Feb 21, 2009 04:19

Hammerite: Mar 9, 2007; And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.; Jade Ear Joe

Thanks for the answers. I have another, unrelated question.

I recently was obliged to restore my database from a backup copy and have just found out that throughout the replacement version, wherever the pound sterling character � should appear it has been replaced with a question mark. Thankfully, the question mark is a character that ought never to appear anywhere so I was able to correct this using a simple query (UPDATE TableName SET ColumnName = REPLACE(ColumnName, '?', '�')). But why did this happen in the first place, and how can I prevent it happening the next time I either back up the database or have to restore it from backup?

Looking at the SQL export file that forms my backup copy, I see that the fault exists in the backup copy of the database. The backup was produced by phpMyAdmin's export facility. All of the tables in this export file are specified in the following way:

CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS TableName ( {some stuff} ) ENGINE=MyISAM DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 AUTO_INCREMENT={some number} ;

I'm assuming that the problem arises out of some character encoding issue. So is there some way I can set the character encoding of my tables so that this won't happem in future, or is it a limitation of the method I am using to back up the database? I was previously unaware of any need to supervise a character encoding, as no problems have been evident up to this point.

# ? Feb 22, 2009 02:02

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

Is that character's code > 127? I'm guessing so. Different programs interpret > 127 characters differently. I'm not even sure there's any kind of convention. You'll probably have to look in the documentation of all the tools in the chain that you are using and verify they all agree upon how to encode characters. Also read Joel on Unicode.

# ? Feb 22, 2009 02:42

Hammerite: Mar 9, 2007; And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.; Jade Ear Joe

Reading on Wiki I note that the � symbol can be reliably obtained in HTML, even in a textarea environment, using the code £. Perhaps I ought to consider moving to this way of storing the symbol in the database.

EDIT: This is what I've chosen to do.

Hammerite fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Feb 22, 2009

# ? Feb 22, 2009 03:21

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

Those are called character entity references; I often see them called "character entities" for short.

# ? Feb 22, 2009 23:27

Triple Tech: Jul 28, 2006; So what, are you quitting to join Homo Explosion?

Hypothesis: A query can only use one index per instance of a table in a query. Confirm/deny? If I have a query:

select ... where id = ? and group_id = ?

And I have two indexes, one on id, one on group_id, will the query only use one of them or both?

To me, the proper solution would be to use an index that's a composite of group_id -> id, but I'm not asking about that.

Edit: After doing a bit more Googling, it seems that SQL Server and Oracle can both take advantage of multiple indexes for one query. So yeah, neat.

Triple Tech fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Feb 23, 2009

# ? Feb 23, 2009 19:51

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

It all depends on the table statistics. It isn't always most efficient to use an index! If you want to go nuts, create an index on both columns. However, you know the rule about the more indexes...

# ? Feb 23, 2009 19:52

Hammerite: Mar 9, 2007; And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.; Jade Ear Joe

Regarding my character encoding problem, I noticed that all accented characters that my users have typed (I have users speaking a variety of languages) were also changed to question marks in the backup. I could use character entities for these too (I found out that PHP has a function that does this), but that seems just OTT. So looking around on the Internet, I saw commentary on changing the character encoding of MySQL tables.

I've converted all of my tables from latin1 character encoding, latin1_swedish_ci collation to UTF-8 character encoding, utf8_general_ci collation. I made a backup copy both before and after doing this; I was pleased to see that in the "after" backup, the accented characters have come out correctly. But I was also confused when I noted that in the "before" backup, at which time the tables were still in latin1 encoding, the accented characters also survived - which is in contrast with what I expected would be the case given their state in the export file a couple of days ago when I first found the problems. I guess I don't know whether I've made the slightest bit of difference by changing the character encodings of my tables.

# ? Feb 23, 2009 20:06

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

Read what I said before: some code in the "pipeline" or "call chain" was probably loving things up. Accented characters have codes > 127.

# ? Feb 23, 2009 20:40

Hammerite: Mar 9, 2007; And you don't remember what I said here, either, but it was pompous and stupid.; Jade Ear Joe

Victor posted:

Read what I said before: some code in the "pipeline" or "call chain" was probably loving things up. Accented characters have codes > 127.

I read it, and I appreciate it; I'm just remarking that I found it surprising that I got a different result re:accented characters the two times I made a backup from the latin1_swedish_ci database despite thinking I was doing absolutely everything just the same. Of course, I probably did something subtly different the 2nd time, or looked for the wrong things in the export file.

Edit: I did some experimenting with a test database and couldn't reproduce the "replace with question marks" behaviour at all, although the export function does behave better in general when the table is defined to be UTF-8, so it seems like the conversion was a worthwhile thing to do...

Hammerite fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Feb 23, 2009

# ? Feb 23, 2009 22:24

glompix: Jan 19, 2004; propane grill-pilled

I'm sort of stuck on an SQL Server 2005 problem.

We have a stored procedure that runs in a job every 5 or so minutes. It's painfully slow, taking a minute or so to complete, even though the select statement driving it runs almost instantly on its own. My boss wrote the code, so some of this I'm not sure about, but I'm pretty sure the cursor is the problem. Sadly, I'm not sure how to do this without using a cursor. SQL isn't my strong suit.

code:

ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[importwebrequests]
AS
  BEGIN
    -- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
    -- interfering with SELECT statements.
    SET nocount  ON;
    
    DECLARE  @insertedWebRequestNumber INT
    
    DECLARE wrcursor CURSOR  FOR
    SELECT wr.webrequestnumber
    FROM   dbo.webrequests wr
           LEFT JOIN dbo.requests r
             ON wr.webrequestnumber = r.webrequestnumber
    WHERE  r.requestnumber IS NULL
    
    OPEN wrcursor
    
    FETCH  wrcursor
    INTO @insertedWebRequestNumber
    
    WHILE @@FETCH_STATUS = 0
      BEGIN
        EXEC dbo.Createrequestfromwebrequest
          @webRequestNumber = @insertedWebRequestNumber
        
        FETCH  wrcursor
        INTO @insertedWebRequestNumber
      END
    
    DEALLOCATE wrcursor
  END

GO

# ? Feb 24, 2009 00:20

Bad Titty Puker: Nov 3, 2007; Soiled Meat

glompix posted:

I'm sort of stuck on an SQL Server 2005 problem.

We have a stored procedure that runs in a job every 5 or so minutes. It's painfully slow, taking a minute or so to complete, even though the select statement driving it runs almost instantly on its own. My boss wrote the code, so some of this I'm not sure about, but I'm pretty sure the cursor is the problem. Sadly, I'm not sure how to do this without using a cursor. SQL isn't my strong suit.
code:
ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[importwebrequests]
AS
  BEGIN
    -- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
    -- interfering with SELECT statements.
    SET nocount  ON;
    
    DECLARE  @insertedWebRequestNumber INT
    
    DECLARE wrcursor CURSOR  FOR
    SELECT wr.webrequestnumber
    FROM   dbo.webrequests wr
           LEFT JOIN dbo.requests r
             ON wr.webrequestnumber = r.webrequestnumber
    WHERE  r.requestnumber IS NULL
    
    OPEN wrcursor
    
    FETCH  wrcursor
    INTO @insertedWebRequestNumber
    
    WHILE @@FETCH_STATUS = 0
      BEGIN
        EXEC dbo.Createrequestfromwebrequest
          @webRequestNumber = @insertedWebRequestNumber
        
        FETCH  wrcursor
        INTO @insertedWebRequestNumber
      END
    
    DEALLOCATE wrcursor
  END

GO 

Can you post DDL, including the CREATE PROCEDURE statement for "Createrequestfromwebrequest"?

The ideal would be do replace the procedural, one-record-at-a-time processing with set-based processing, such as an INSERT statement that acts on the whole set of 'webrequests' that do not reference a row in 'requests' (not having any DDL, I'm guessing).

# ? Feb 24, 2009 02:25

Sergeant Hobo: Jan 7, 2007; Zhu Li, do the thing!

Victor posted:

However, you know the rule about the more indexes...

I don't think I'm entirely sure what you mean. It kind of sounds like a "Too many chefs in the kitchen" thing but I just want to be clear.

# ? Feb 24, 2009 02:58

Triple Tech: Jul 28, 2006; So what, are you quitting to join Homo Explosion?

I think he means a superfluous amount of indexes will never decrease read performance, but it will decrease write performance.

# ? Feb 24, 2009 03:11

Sergeant Hobo: Jan 7, 2007; Zhu Li, do the thing!

So index the important stuff then? Like primary/alternate keys, fields you know are going to involve queries, etc.?

# ? Feb 24, 2009 03:29

Xae: Jan 19, 2005

Sergeant Hobo posted:

So index the important stuff then? Like primary/alternate keys, fields you know are going to involve queries, etc.?

PKs almost always create an index automatically.

I normally throw indexes on the columns that end up in where and group by clauses the most.

# ? Feb 24, 2009 04:11

Triple Tech: Jul 28, 2006; So what, are you quitting to join Homo Explosion?

I only know three cases for a "short" rule of thumb...

1) Things you know you're going to search by. Usually category_id, id, state (a type of category), pseudo keys (last name)

2) Things you want to "cover" (technical term). If you want "birthday by user id", you create a composite index of "user_id -> birthday". This functions as both your user_id only index as well as an optimized case when you want just the birthday and nothing else. That's called a covering index.

3) When you want to "defrag" a table by re/building a clustered index.

# ? Feb 24, 2009 04:25

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

glompix posted:

code:

  ...
    
    DECLARE wrcursor CURSOR  FOR
    SELECT wr.webrequestnumber
    FROM   dbo.webrequests wr
           LEFT JOIN dbo.requests r
             ON wr.webrequestnumber = r.webrequestnumber
    WHERE  r.requestnumber IS NULL
    
    ...
    
    WHILE @@FETCH_STATUS = 0
      ...
        EXEC dbo.Createrequestfromwebrequest
          @webRequestNumber = @insertedWebRequestNumber
        
  ...

camels is almost definitely correct: it would be best to do set-based processing instead of sprocs -- unfortunately, TSQL 2005 and below have no good way to pass sets to sprocs (2008 does); this means you either use a lovely way to pass sets of values or you resort to record-at-a-time foolishness
you could mark the proper webrequests as being processed, then copy those to a temporary table; this will eliminate locking contention
use a FAST_FORWARD cursor (cursors must be used if you want to run a sproc against every row in a projection and you can't pass that projection to the sproc somehow)

# ? Feb 24, 2009 09:26

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

Sergeant Hobo posted:

I don't think I'm entirely sure what you mean. It kind of sounds like a "Too many chefs in the kitchen" thing but I just want to be clear.

In addition to a few generalized rules of thumb that don't work in all circumstances:

measure
measure
measure
...

# ? Feb 24, 2009 09:27

glompix: Jan 19, 2004; propane grill-pilled

Victor posted:

use a FAST_FORWARD cursor (cursors must be used if you want to run a sproc against every row in a projection and you can't pass that projection to the sproc somehow)

Holy poo poo, thank you thank you thank you. I didn't know about this keyword, but it made that procedure go from running in ~50 seconds to running practically instantly. That CreateRequestFromWebRequest procedure is pretty huge and we wanted to keep it separate. Now we can have our cake and eat it too!

:hfive:

# ? Feb 24, 2009 17:58

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

Yeah, I've never dug into the details of cursors because I have never needed anything besides FAST_FORWARD. If you need another kind of cursor, you might just be doing it wrong.

# ? Feb 24, 2009 19:48

MrHyde: Dec 17, 2002; Hello, Ladies

I have a query that looks like this

code:

SELECT
	up.LastName, 
	up.FirstName, 
	up.Company, 
	up.Email, 
	up.DateAdded,
	MAX(uaa.ActivityDate) MostRecentActivity
FROM UserProfile up
	INNER JOIN UserApplicationActivity uaa ON up.UserProfileID = uaa.UserProfileID
GROUP BY
	up.LastName, 
	up.FirstName, 
	up.Company, 
	up.Email, 
	up.DateAdded
ORDER BY
	MostRecentActivity DESC

The problem is, I want to also get uaa.ActivityID so I can join on some other stuff but when I put it in, it has to be in the "GROUP BY" clause which causes a bunch of extra records I don't care about. I want the most recent activity, not the most recent activity for each type of activity.

I have been trying to figure this out for a few hours and google searches land me on a lot of examples that don't really make sense or apply. Sorry if it's a retarded question, I don't normally do SQL for my job so this thing is killing me.

edit: SQL 2005

# ? Feb 25, 2009 01:05

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

Let me know if this post helps.

# ? Feb 25, 2009 01:41

indulgenthipster: Mar 16, 2004; Make that a pour over

Trying to work with MySQLi prepared statements. I figure I could use it for all my INSERT/UPDATE queries (no matter how small) as it seems to be the best way to prevent injection attacks (am I right believing this?). I have the following code that is not working with my UPDATE statement...

code:

$sql = 'UPDATE people SET firstname = ?, lastname = ?';
	$stmt = mysqli_stmt_init($connect);
	if (mysqli_stmt_prepare($stmt, $sql)) {
		mysqli_stmt_bind_result($stmt, $postarray['firstname'], $postarray['lastname']);
		mysqli_stmt_execute($stmt);
	}

It is throwing the error: Warning: mysqli_stmt_bind_result() [function.mysqli-stmt-bind-result]: Number of bind variables doesn't match number of fields in prepared statement in on line 44 (mysqli_stmt_bind_result($stmt, $postarray['firstname'], $postarray['lastname'])

A similar SELECT query works fine. I only have two ?'s and two binded variables, I can't figure out why it's not liking that.

# ? Feb 25, 2009 02:20

Jethro: Jun 1, 2000; I was raised on the dairy, Bitch!

VerySolidSnake posted:

Trying to work with MySQLi prepared statements. I figure I could use it for all my INSERT/UPDATE queries (no matter how small) as it seems to be the best way to prevent injection attacks (am I right believing this?). I have the following code that is not working with my UPDATE statement...
code:
$sql = 'UPDATE people SET firstname = ?, lastname = ?';
	$stmt = mysqli_stmt_init($connect);
	if (mysqli_stmt_prepare($stmt, $sql)) {
		mysqli_stmt_bind_result($stmt, $postarray['firstname'], $postarray['lastname']);
		mysqli_stmt_execute($stmt);
	}
It is throwing the error: Warning: mysqli_stmt_bind_result() [function.mysqli-stmt-bind-result]: Number of bind variables doesn't match number of fields in prepared statement in on line 44 (mysqli_stmt_bind_result($stmt, $postarray['firstname'], $postarray['lastname'])

A similar SELECT query works fine. I only have two ?'s and two binded variables, I can't figure out why it's not liking that.

You need to bind parameters using mysqli_stmt_bind_param. mysqli_stmt_bind_result is used to execute a query and insert the resulting columns into variables. I think.

# ? Feb 25, 2009 05:30

moostaffa: Apr 2, 2008; People always ask me about Toad, It's fantastic. Let me tell you about Toad. I do very well with Toad. I love Toad. No one loves Toad more than me, BELIEVE ME. Toad loves me. I have the best Toad.

Just a quick question:
I have a set of data with about 2 billion rows, indexed by a user account ID. (The total size of this is expected to be around 60gb, if that helps)
Once per day I will insert about 10-12 million rows in one go.

I currently have all this data in one table (No expensive queries will be needed on this, only lookups on the single index), would it give any performance boost to split this table into, say, 10 or 100 smaller tables?

# ? Feb 25, 2009 14:22

MrHyde: Dec 17, 2002; Hello, Ladies

Victor posted:

Let me know if this post helps.

Yes it helped

I used this

code:

SELECT 
	up.LastName, 
	up.FirstName, 
	up.Company, 
	up.Email, 
	up.DateAdded,
	mraSet.MostRecentActivity,
	av.Version
FROM UserProfile up
	INNER JOIN (
		SELECT UserProfileID, MAX(ActivityDate) MostRecentActivity
		FROM UserApplicationActivity
		GROUP BY UserProfileID
		) mraSet ON mraSet.UserProfileID = up.UserProfileID
	INNER JOIN UserApplicationActivity uaa ON uaa.UserProfileID = up.UserProfileID AND
		uaa.ActivityDate = mraSet.MostRecentActivity
	INNER JOIN ApplicationVersion av ON uaa.VersionID = av.VersionID

Thanks

MrHyde fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Feb 25, 2009

# ? Feb 25, 2009 17:25

Victor: Jun 18, 2004

moostaffa, it's called sharding or partitioning -- these two search terms should help you look for stuff on the internets.

# ? Feb 25, 2009 19:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 14, 2024 09:37

MrHyde: Dec 17, 2002; Hello, Ladies

Is it possible to do something like:

code:

select Email, Email LIKE '%p.com' isPEmail FROM UserProfile

so the result set would come out like:

code:

+------------------------+------------+
| email                  | isPEmail   |
+------------------------+------------+
| someguy@wi3dtoae.com   | 0          |
+------------------------+------------+
| someguy@p.com          | 1          |
+------------------------+------------+

edit: Got it, like this

code:

select Email, CASE WHEN Email LIKE '%p.com' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END AS isPEmail FROM UserProfile

MrHyde fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Feb 25, 2009

# ? Feb 25, 2009 19:48

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > SELECT * FROM Questions WHERE Type = 'Stupid'

«‹›303 »