|
Something like this?
<br />
SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("SELECT some_column FROM some_table WHERE another_column = @some_value");<br />
cmd.Parameters.Add("@some_value", your_parameter);<br />
cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();<br />
(You put in your parameter in the second line...)
|
|
|
|
|
My parameter is coming from a textbox as its input. Is the "your_parameter" where i refererence the textbox?
|
|
|
|
|
This is what I tried to add and it caused and exception
Me.SqlCommand1.Parameters.Add("@WEIGHT", SqlDbType.Decimal)
Me.SqlCommand1.Parameters("@WEIGHT").Value = Me.TextBox_SBR_Runtime.Text
Me.SqlConnection1.Open()
Me.SqlCommand1.ExecuteNonQuery()
Me.SqlConnection1.Close()
The exception occured on this line:
Me.SqlCommand1.ExecuteNonQuery()
|
|
|
|
|
Hi all,
I would like to know how to create a inheritance relationship in Ms Access 2000.
I want to create a database for the product in a bookstore. But they have 2 types of products: Normal and consignment.
Each of the products will have a product ID. Since i need to have another relationship to the "invoice" table, I need to create this inheritance so that the invoice table can "connect" to all products.
e.g.
Normal Table:
*Prod_id
title...etc.
Consignment Table:
*Prod_id
title....etc.
Parent Table for product:
*Prod_id
Invoice Table:
*Invoice_id
*Prod_id
Qty...etc.
I cannot merge two products into a table because they carry different information.
Does anyone know????? thank!!!!
Note: Normal product and consignment product cannot be the same product, so the design that the "invoice" table carries the Normal_Prod_id and Consign_Prod_id DO NOT work in this case....i don't want to waste database space.
|
|
|
|
|
ChiYung wrote:
I cannot merge two products into a table because they carry different information.
I don't buy that at all... If this is a book store then most certainly thier products will have some attributes that are the same. They are all books and thus have attributes that are the same.
The rule is that all consignments are products, but not all products are consignment.
Create a general table that will hold ALL the common data about each 'product' (title, ISBN, etc...) then create secondary tables for those attributes that specificaly make them a 'Normal'or 'Consignment' type product. It might just be simpler, depending upon how many attributes that make them different, to just keep it all in one table and populate fields as needed, leaving some null wheer they don't apply.
Paul Watson wrote:
"At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote:
"Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
If the physicists find a universal theory describing the laws of universe, I'm sure the a**hole constant will be an integral part of that theory.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your suggestion! I will see if it works in my case. (coz the item in this bookstore includes many things such as gifts, cards....etc.)
But I would like to know how to create such a "inherit" table in Access, so that I can create it by my own in the future. (for other cases)
Thanks a lot!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
ChiYung wrote:
(coz the item in this bookstore includes many things such as gifts, cards....etc.)
Oh, that makes a bit more sense then... I thought that they were all books.
Create one table that only contains a listing of the productID, and productType (normal; consignment; etc...) and maybe even a text description, then create secondary tables that use the productID as a foreign key to provide the extra data.
This really goes back to the first idea that I had though with keeping everything that is relivent to all products (and no matter WHAT it is that you seel, there will be relivent similarities between them all) in one table.
Paul Watson wrote:
"At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote:
"Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
If the physicists find a universal theory describing the laws of universe, I'm sure the a**hole constant will be an integral part of that theory.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your reply.
But i still have questions. I think i need to give you more information of my current problem.
HERE IS MY ORIGINAL DATABASE DESIGN:
For normal product, i have to store these attributes:
<code>- Prod_id
- Prod_title
- Prod_ISBN
- Prod_publisher
- Prod_cost
- Prod_retailprice
- Prod_description
- Category_id
- Prod_max (Max On Hand)
- Prod_min (Min On Hand)
- Shelf_id
- Status_id</code>
For consignment product, i have to store these attributes:
<code>- Cons_Prod_id
- Cons_Prod_description
- Cons_cost
- Cons_retailprice
- Cons_member_id [FK] (for the table that stores the info of the person who consign this item)</code>
For Invoice, i have:
<code>- Invoice_number
- Prod_id [FK]
- Cons_Prod_id [FK]
- Qty</code>
I think in the invoice table, it's not making sense to have both Prod_id and Cons_Prod_id in the table. Because if a product has Prod_id, it won't have Cons_Prod_id or vice versa. In this case, there will be wasting memory space.
So I decided to modify it and use inherit relationship in order to use ONE Prod_id ONLY in the invoice table.
However, if i use your suggestion, it just solves the problem on how to distinguish the normal and consignment product.
I still need a table to store those extra information such as Cons_member_id because some information won't exist in both products. (e.g. Consignment table does not need Prod_max and Prod_min, but need cons_member_id)
Then i stuck here now...
I very appreciate your help to solve my problem!!
Thanks alot!!!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
tblProducts
<code>
-ProdID [PK]
-ProdDescription
-ProdType [FK]
-Cost
-RetailPrice
</code>
tblProdNormal
<code>
-ProdID [FK]
-Title
-ISBN
-Publisher
-CategoryID
-Max (Max On Hand)
-Min (Min On Hand)
-ShelfID
-StatusID
</code>
tblProdCons
<code>
-ProdID
-MemberID [FK] (for the table that stores the info of the person who consign this item)
</code>
This does pretty good at getting things down to common stuff.
Paul Watson wrote:
"At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote:
"Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
If the physicists find a universal theory describing the laws of universe, I'm sure the a**hole constant will be an integral part of that theory.
|
|
|
|
|
how can i edit,save and delete data in a datagrid which datasource is a datable in a dataset,whick will make it look like microsoft access
|
|
|
|
|
hi,
Please try this website this will help you.. www.asp.net then goto tutotials then go to webcontrols then datagrids. Everything bout datagrid is there....
Dabuskol
|
|
|
|
|
thx i ve found the solution,just to put the endcurrentedit and update for the dataset code in the (CurrentCellChanged) Event of the DataGrid.. am using a windows application dunno if it is the same as Asp.net or not
|
|
|
|
|
I have 16Million records using SQL Server 2000. I'm retriving it using stored procedure in which the dates "from" and "to" is my criteria, at the same time I group all the records. Is this the best way??? please give advice.......
My stored procedure is working although i'm not satisfied with the result time. form 700,000 records it took me 1 min and 38 seconds....
|
|
|
|
|
Check indexes on the db table you are selecting from. Are there any index on dates column?
Tomas Rampas
------------------------------
gedas CR s.r.o.
System analyst, MCP
TGM 840,
293 01 Mlada Boleslav,
Czech Republic
Telefon/phone +420(326)711411
Telefax/fax +420(326)711420
rampas@gedas.cz
http://www.gedas.com/
------------------------------
To be or not to be is true...
George Bool
|
|
|
|
|
yes there were indexes on all fields which are part of the group by.
Thank You for the effort. Let's close this item and I will create another one for dynamic where clause. I think my stored procedure is working fine.
|
|
|
|
|
The Ado Dc shows a dialog box for building connection string for the ole db providers present on the system. how can i myself make this dialog for buiding query strings at runtime
|
|
|
|
|
data source=SERVERNAME;initial catalog=DATABASENAME;password=PASSWORD;persist security info=True;user id=USERID;
Try this one...
|
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I have got problem with $SUBJECT.
When I call Clear method of the DataSet, the data doesn't available, but a memory (by the TaskManager) remains on the same level. So when I refill the DataSet memory allocation is rising.
Any suggstions?
Thanks.
Tom
PS Remove _nospam to contact me via e-mail.
|
|
|
|
|
The free operation is performed basically by setting all the row references of all the tables to null (or Nothing, depending on favourite language  ).
The actual freeing of memory is done by the garbage collector whenever it next decides to run.
The size you see in the Task Manager is (by default) the process's working set size - the set of all memory pages currently in physical memory for this process. Note that shared pages are counted once for each process, so the sum of this column can exceed the size of your physical memory.
If memory demands get tight, Windows will swap out pages that haven't been referenced recently. If there's an area of the managed heap that is all garbage waiting to be collected, which is one or more pages in size, this might get swapped out. Because the memory is writable, it will be written to the page file rather than just discarded.
The garbage collector won't reduce the virtual memory size of the managed heap unless it opts to compact the heap (moving objects down in memory). It does this periodically, IIRC.
I wouldn't worry about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Simple question :
I have a table and one column is ID (int identity(1,1) not null).
Say I have 5 rows:
[u]ID Name Color [/u]
1 Bob White
2 Jane Black
3 Lucy Red
4 Gang Brown
5 Dub Yellow
If I delete the row 3, the remaining ID's are 1, ,2, 4, 5.
Is it possible to make the remaining after the deletion row 3 1, 2, 3, 4?
that is the above ID's to decrement.
__________________
Best regards,
Exceter.
|
|
|
|
|
you can make a delete trigger on this table and update recordes with ID > deletedID
|
|
|
|
|
Sir,
Sorry for a such question, but I am new in SQL.
Could you show how that trigger is written?
Respectfully
exceter.
|
|
|
|
|
Why would you want to do this?
If your ID column is referenced from somewhere else, you will have to update all those tables too.
Let the hole be! Especially if you're using IDENTITY.
(It can be done, but will be some work, as you first will have to temporarily SET IDENTITY INSERT ON for your table. Insert row 4 in row 3's place, delete row4, insert row 5 in row 4's place. (Which you offcourse will do in a loop.))
If you really really need this functionality, it is better NOT to use the IDENTITY column, since that will allow you to use an UPDATE statement instead. (Possibly in a trigger or a stored proc...)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I have a problem in listing all records in my mdb file.
steps.
1. I made a mymdb.mdb file.
2. added some records.
3. deleted some records.
4. added new records.
5. repeat 2,3,4 steps several times.
Finally, when I list all the records in mdb file - I used MoveFirst(),
read record and MoveNext() until all the records were
populated. - the added records in 4th step were inserted
somewhere near the deleted records in 2nd step.
I don't know exactly this behavior is caused my code or it is a nature of mdb.
I want to place the new records always in the last of the mdb.
How can I do that?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
