In my application search option is there it took time to search almost 60 seconds i just want to do search function just like a make my trip searching feature
At this point only thing i can do is recommend few technologies to achieve this
Sql Server -> Full Text Specification, Search with Contains, 'case when then' in query, stored procedure, limit the results for paging using 'Offset 10 Fetch next 10' method, Grouping to generate the total result count with in the query, ##Rowcount to get he total number of results .. i dont know if this help
Related
I have a list of unique customers who have made transactions over a year (Jan – Dec). They have bought products using 3 different methods (card, cash, check). My goal is to build a multi-classification model to predict the method pf payment.
To do this I am engineering some Recency and Frequency features into my training data, but am having trouble with the following frequency count because the only way I know how to do it is in Excel using the Countifs and SUMIFs functions, which are inhibitingly slow. If someone can help and/or suggest another solution, it would be very much appreciated:
So I have a data set with 3 columns (Customer ID, Purchase Date, and Payment Type) that is sorted by Purchase Date then Customer ID. How do I then get a prior frequency count of payment type by date that does not include the count of the current row transaction or any future transactions that are > the Purchase Date. So basically I want to do a running count of each payment option, based on a unique Customer ID, and a date range that is < purchase date of that training row. In my head I see it as “crawling” backwards through the transactions and counting. Simplified screenshot of data frame is below with the 3 prior count columns I am looking to generate programmatically.
Screenshot
This gives you the answer as a list of CustomerID, PurchaseDate, PaymentMethod and prior counts
SELECT CustomerID, PurchaseDate, PaymentMethod,
(
select count(CustomerID) from History T
where
T.CustomerID=History.CustomerID
and T.PaymentMethod=History.PaymentMethod
and T.PurchaseDate<History.PurchaseDate
)
AS PriorCount
FROM History;
You can save this query and use it as the source for a crosstab query to get the columnar format you want
Some notes:
I assumed "History" as the source table name - you can change the query above to use the correct source
To use this as a query, open a new query in design view. Close the window that asks what tables the query is to be built on. Open the SQL view of the query design - like design view, but it shows the SQL instead of the normal design interface. Copy the above into the SQL view.
You should now be able to switch to datasheet view and see the results
When the query is working to your satisfaction, save it with any appropriate name
Open a new query in design view
When you get the list of tables to include, switch to the list of queries and include the query you just saved
Change the query type to crosstab and update the query as needed to select rows, columns and values - look up "access crosstab queries" if you need more help.
Another tip to see what is happening here:
You can take the subquery - the parts inside the () above - and make
just that statement into it's own query, excluding the opening and closing (). Then you can look at it's design view to see what it does
Save it with an appropriate name and put it into the query above in place of the statement in () - then you can look at the design view.
Sometimes it's easier to visualize and learn from 2 queries strung together this way than to work with sub queries.
I am wanting to keep track of multi stage processing job.
Likely just need the following fields
batchId (guid) | eventId (guid) | statusId (int) | timestamp | message (string)
There are relatively small number of events per batch.
I want to be able to easily query events that have a statusId less than n (still being processed or didn't finish processing).
Would using multiple rows for each status change, and querying for latest status be the best approach? I would use global secondary index but StatusId does not seem like a good candidate for hashkey (less than 10 statuses).
Instead of using multiple rows for every status change, if you updated the same event row instead, you could use a technique described in the DynamoDB documentation in the section 'Use a Calculated Value'. Basically this would involve adding another attribute (say 'derivedStatusId') which would be derived by appending a random number to statusId at the time of writing to DynamoDB. For example, for a statusId of 2, derivedStatusId could be one of {"2-00", "2-01", .. "2-99"}. Setting up a Global Secondary Index on derivedStatusId would give you some fan-out that will help in preventing the index from becoming hot.
If you are sure that you will use this index for only unfinished events, then removing the derivedStatusId attribute from the record when it transitions to a finished status will remove it from index as well - which may be a good property if events are expected to finish processing eventually, and if they stay around forever. This technique is called "Sparse Index" and is described in more detail here.
From your question, it seems like keeping status history recording is a desired property (I assume this because you want to have multiple rows for status changes). Consider putting this historical information in the same row. DynamoDB supports list data types and also has a generous 400KB item limit which may just allow you to capture all the desired historical information in the same record.
I have a problem that I've been going round and round with in Access 2010. Imagine a table with these columns:
Name Date Time
Now, I have a query that asks the user to input a begin date and an end date and returns all records that are between those two dates. This works fine. However, as soon as I add a sort to the Date column things go awry. Once you put a sort on a column with a parameter the user gets asked to enter the parameter twice. From what I've been able to find out this is normal (although annoying) behavior in Access.
If I add the Date column in a second time and show the column with the sort and don't show the column with the parameter it works fine. The query would look something like:
Name Date (shown & sorted) Date (not shown & parameters) Time
Now when I run the query it all works well and comes out the way I want it to. This would obviously be a great solution then. However, there's another problem. When I save the query, leave, and reopen the query the two columns are merged back into each other. Thus, the change is lost and the user again sees two inputs.
My question is this: what can I do differently to achieve the desired results?
Some possible things I've thought about but don't know the answer to are:
Is there a way to make it so the columns don't merge? Do I have to use a form with the input boxes and take the data from that (I'd prefer not to do that as it will require a lot of additional work to handle the various things I am doing in the database). Is there some obvious thing I'm missing?
Thanks for any suggestions.
FYI: Here is the SQL from the query
SELECT Intentions.Intention, Intentions.MassDate, Intentions.[Time Requested], Intentions.[Place Requested], Intentions.[Offered By], Intentions.Completed
FROM Intentions
WHERE (((Intentions.MassDate) Between [Enter start date] And [Enter end date]))
ORDER BY Intentions.MassDate, Intentions.[Time Requested];
It is true that sometimes the Query Designer in Access will "reorganize" a query when you save it. However, I don't recall an instance where such a reorganization actually broke anything.
For what it's worth, the following query seems to do what you desire. After saving and re-opening it looks and behaves just the same:
For reference, the SQL behind it is
PARAMETERS startDate DateTime, endDate DateTime;
SELECT NameDateTime.Name, NameDateTime.Date, NameDateTime.Time
FROM NameDateTime
WHERE (((NameDateTime.Date) Between [startDate] And [endDate]))
ORDER BY NameDateTime.Date DESC , NameDateTime.Time DESC;
I have had the same problem and I have discovered the reason:
If, after you have run your query, sort a collumn in the result grid and the say yes to save changes to the query the sort action will be stored with the query. This will actually cause the query to run twice. First to create the result and then one more time to sort. You'll therefore be asked twice for the parameters.
SOLUTION: Run the query (entering your parameters twice ;-) ). Then remove the Sorting by clicking on the AZ-eraser symbol in the task bar above (in the sorting compartment).
Then open your query in design-mode and add the sorting order to the appropriate collumn.
Your are then good to go.
Regards
Jan
I'm using YQL to retrieve several RSS feeds (channels) at once, using the following query:
SELECT * FROM feednormalizer
WHERE output="rss_2.0"
AND url in ("http://rss.cnn.com/rss/edition.rss",
"http://bad.url.com/nothing",
"http://rss.cnn.com/rss/edition_space.rss")
so i actually have 2 questions:
How can i limit each feed to a certain amount of items? (for example, I want to get top 3 items from each channel)
Notice that the 2nd URL is invalid (not a URL of a real RSS). in that case, the YQL result returns 2 valid channels plus an error, but there is no indication of which URLs are valid and which one failed.
in other words - for each result feed, there is no indication from which URL it arrived.
any ideas as to how identify each channel?
thanks
1st question:
the first thought that comes to mind is using query.multi:
SELECT rss.channel.item FROM query.multi WHERE queries="
SELECT channel.item FROM feednormalizer WHERE output='rss_2.0' AND url = 'http://rss.cnn.com/rss/edition.rss' LIMIT 3;
SELECT channel.item FROM feednormalizer WHERE output='rss_2.0' AND url = 'http://rss.cnn.com/rss/edition_space.rss' LIMIT 3;"
Not the most elegant way but it works.
2nd question:
I don't think it is possible. As YQL's WHERE x IN ()... syntax is not really an SQL join, it is not possible to select parts of the inner subquery in the projection, what you would need for your case.
Would be happy if anybody would proove me wrong on this one, as I needed that a couple of times myself and always had to work around it programatically :)
I have a datagrid control which is bound to a table which containing more than 1000 records. And i want to show only 25 records once a time. I have used paging in datagrid. But each time the next page index is set, query is fired again. This takes lots of time. So what is the easiest way to bound data in this case to improve performance..??
I don't recommend using caching since the whole data will be returned to the server anyway for the first time.
You can improve performance by using custom paging queries to the database.
Assuming you're working with at least SQL Server 2005,
Here's a great article for your purpose with different benchmarking results
have you considered caching your data set? then you would only need to query the data if the cache is empty or expired.
When you handle your Page Changed event, you need to pull in the new page information. You will need to create a stored procedure that takes CurrentPageNumber and PageSize as arguments.
This is in addition to any other arguments you already supply when bringing down your data.
In the SP, you fill up a temporary table or table variable (or you can use a CTE) with the data that you are returning, but also the RowNumber.
Based upon your CurrentPageNumber argument, you are able to return all the results between CurrentPageNumber * PageSize and (CurrentPgaeNumber + 1) * PageSize - 1.
Here's a good resource:
How to return a page of results from SQL?