|
1h
|
|
comment |
Javascript: Sort multi dimensional Array based on first arrays sort results And you made sure it's a stable sort, too. +1. |
|
5h
|
|
comment |
Create evenly spaced out sequence in SQL So basically you want to create a smooth line going from the 5th %ile value to the 95th, having 100 steps between them? Is it possible that you really want 90 steps (so that each step could represent a %ile point)? |
|
5h
|
|
revised |
Return id where count of value associated with that id on other table is 0 deleted 4 characters in body |
|
5h
|
|
comment |
Return id where count of value associated with that id on other table is 0 You're right, sorry about that. I scanned too fast. |
|
5h
|
|
revised |
Return id where count of value associated with that id on other table is 0 added 220 characters in body |
|
5h
|
|
answered | Return id where count of value associated with that id on other table is 0 |
|
7h
|
|
comment |
Alternative term to "Blacklist" and "Whitelist" They only "sound strange" to [insulting term for a class of people lacking an important personal attribute]. Seriously. Soon we won't be able to say niggardly, denigrate, or Nigeria or use the terms black heart, black/white knight, blacken one's name, black market, and so on! This is so pathetic. It's strikingly similar to the mother who wanted to name her daughter (rhymes with Regina) Vagina. Utter ignorance is driving this. |
|
12h
|
|
comment |
Javascript: Sort multi dimensional Array based on first arrays sort results @DavidTorno It works great, but I just can't resist saying that it's a band-aid on top of a less-than-optimal strategy of data storage. |
|
12h
|
|
comment |
Javascript: Sort multi dimensional Array based on first arrays sort results I'd give you +1 only I can't because your sort function tries to do math on string values... ? |
|
1d
|
|
comment |
Javascript: Sort multi dimensional Array based on first arrays sort results Just because you're populating a listbox GUI doesn't mean you have to have a multi-dimensional array. You could very easily rewrite your code to use an array of objects, ala [{col1:'d', col2:'ee'}, {col1:'a', col2:'rr'}, {col1:'b', col2:'mm'}, {col1:'c', col2:'yy'}]. This is in my mind a superior way to store the data and work with it for many reasons, not the least of which that then you can sort it and the related data stays together! It just doesn't make sense to put data into separate arrays, when elements are supposed to be correlated. Don't use nested arrays to store row-type data!
|
|
1d
|
|
comment |
SQL Delete and Update didn't delete and update @retailcoder Additionally, if you open a transaction on a connection, you can issue many commands before you roll it back or commit it. So I really was thinking statement-level, not command-level. |
|
1d
|
|
comment |
SQL Delete and Update didn't delete and update @retailcoder Not exactly. A command execution can be turned by the provider into multiple statements, however, there is going to be at least one statement that performs the DML operation, and that statement is what I was thinking about. The provider is free to wrap the whole batch in a transaction if it wants--or not (and then each statement will auto-commit). Some DBMSes do require an explicit COMMIT; but MS Access, and yes, SQL Server, do not--if you don't begin a transaction, then the implicit tran begun by any statement is also auto-committed after executing that statement.
|
|
1d
|
|
comment |
SQL Delete and Update didn't delete and update @retailcoder No explicit transaction is needed. Each statement has an implicit transaction. |
|
1d
|
|
comment |
SQL Server: get records that their date is either begining or end of the month It's perfectly valid, of course! I was just curious if you had a particular reason. The ability to include other columns made it seem to me a natural choice to avoid aggregates here. But no biggie! Ironically, my answer uses aggregates, too, (though in a way that lets me still include other columns). :) |
|
1d
|
|
revised |
SQL to Parse a Key-Value String edited tags |
|
1d
|
|
answered | SQL to Parse a Key-Value String |
|
1d
|
|
comment |
SQL to Parse a Key-Value String What version of SQL Server? |
|
1d
|
|
comment |
SELECT a single field by ordered value What version of SQL Server, please? |
|
1d
|
|
comment |
SELECT a single field by ordered value I think the original post had all the information you needed to understand the requirements, especially the part about "since student 2's latest score was above > 80." |
|
1d
|
|
revised |
SELECT a single field by ordered value added 576 characters in body |
