I have a data item where its values are populating with some space after it.
For example the data item is State. In output the result is like ORISSA . But after Orissa u have some space. How can I remove that space in cogons reporting for a specific data item?
Trim or some similar function, possibly one which is native to your DB vendor, might be helpful I think.
Related
So is there a way to filter what Grafana shows in a TABLE type of metric?
My issue is that the table returns values which are really really long like a FQDN but for an Azure resource.
It is absolutely unreadable, so I actually want to parse the output with regex or something, to show me only the specific part. At least a line break would suffice.
The row field in the table is something like
azure:///subscriptions/xxxxxxxxxx-4a5b-81ee-04ea1368a7db/resourceGroups/mc_wintermute_wintermute_eastus/providers/Microsoft.Compute/virtualMachineScaleSets/axxxxxxxxvmss/virtualMachines/13
I only need the
subscriptions/xxxxxxxxxx-4a5b-81ee-04ea1368a7db/
It is easier to view it than explain, a
screenshot
Apparently, there is a VALUE MAPPING section in the table parameters, which accepts regular expressions.
I have hundreds of rows of raw data in a CSV. It is stacked like this:
ID.....SS.....P.....Window
S1235...345...48.....Fall
S1235...460....68....Winter
S1123....389....50....Fall
S1123.....598....98.....Winter
What I would like to do is match it up so that all of the IDs match with similar ID on one row only (without doing a manual copy and paste) so it looks like this:
ID.....SS.....P.....Window
S1235...345...48.....Fall..... S1235...460....68....Winter
S1123....389....50....Fall.....S1123.....598....98.....Winter
I don't care if there are multiple columns...because I will manually delete what I don't need. What I need is for all the data with the same ID to appear on one row only. Each piece of information needs to be in it's own cell.
I appreciate the help in advance...I'm not very good with this stuff...but it would be a HUGE time saver if you can help me out!
I have an SDO supplying data to a read-only browser. The SDO query joins several tables and has calculated fields as well as natural data fields.
The users now want a search facility so the browser will only show rows where the search word appears in ANY of the text fields.
For example they want to see rows where
customer.name matches "*bob*" OR
customer.address1 matches "*bob*" OR
product.description matches "*bob*" OR
calc_field_1 matches "*bob*" OR
calc_field_2 matches "*bob*" OR ...
Ideally the answer will filter the SDO output as it is created - but I am also happy to filter the data on the way to the smartbrowser or in the smartbrowser.
The business problem you're trying to solve in fraught with performance issues if you implement it as written. I'd suggest
adding another character column to the table or db,
putting all the words from the other columns in it,
applying a word-index to the new column,
doing a search on that column, and then linking back to the source tables.
It'll be much faster and easier to use.
I used a very simple solution in the end. Users can enter a string they are looking for. If the string is in a cell in the browser then the cell is highlighted in yellow.
Before this the users had to scroll up and down trying to spot the cells of interest in hundreds of rows. We did not have the time or budget for anything fancier.
The important bit of code in the smartbrowser is like this...
on row-display of br_table in frame f-main
do:
if rowObject.field1 matches "*BOB*" then
rowObject.field1:BGCOLOR in browse br_table = 14.
if rowObject.field2 matches "*BOB*" then
rowObject.field2:BGCOLOR in browse br_table = 14.
if rowObject.field3 matches "*BOB*" then
rowObject.field3:BGCOLOR in browse br_table = 14.
... etc ...
it's not hard-coded to only look for Bob - but you should get the idea.
I have a large table which inserts data into the database. The problem is when the user edits the table I have to:
run the query
use lots of lines like value="<cfoutput>getData.firstname#</cfoutput> in the input boxes.
Is there a way to bind the form input boxes to the database via a cfc or cfm file?
Many Thanks,
R
Query objects include the columnList, which is a comma-delimited list of returned columns.
If security and readability aren't an issue, you can always loop over this. However, it basically removes your opportunity to do things like locking certain columns, reduces your ability to do any validation, and means you either just label the form boxes with the column names or you find a way to store labels for each column.
You can then do an insert/update/whatever with them.
I don't recommend this, as it would be nearly impossible to secure, but it might get you where you are going.
If you are using CF 9 you can use the ORM (Object Relation Management) functionality (via CFCs)
as described in this online chapter
https://www.packtpub.com/sites/default/files/0249-chapter-4-ORM-Database-Interaction.pdf
(starting on page 6 of the pdf)
Take a look at <cfgrid>, it will be the easiest if you're editing table and it can fire 1 update per row.
For security against XSS, you should use <input value="#xmlFormat(getData.firstname)#">, minimize # of <cfoutput> tags. XmlFormat() not needed if you use <cfinput>.
If you are looking for an easy way to not have to specify all the column names in the insert query cfinsert will try to map all the form names you submit to the database column names.
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/ColdFusion/9.0/CFMLRef/WSc3ff6d0ea77859461172e0811cbec22c24-7c78.html
This is indeed a very good question. I have no doubt that the answers given so far are helpful. I was faced with the same problem, only my table does not have that many fields though.
Per the docs EntityNew() the syntax shows that you can include the data when instantiating the object:
artistObj = entityNew("Artists",{FirstName="Tom",LastName="Ron"});
instead of having to instantiate and then add the data field by field. In my case all I had to do is:
artistObj = entityNew( "Artists", FORM );
EntitySave( artistObj );
ORMFlush();
NOTE
It does appear from your question that you may be running insert or update queries. When using ORM you do not need to do that. But I may be mistaken.
Please help because I think I'm going mad.
I have a core data collection that contains many thousand records.
Some of the fields in these records contain terms that have a single
quote. When building the database from XML, we created two fields - a
NAME field and a SORTFIELD field.
The NAME field contains the full term and is used for display purposes
in our application.
The SORTFIELD field contains the same content as the NAME field but is
converted to lowercase and has all single quote characters removed
using the following.
[NSString stringByReplacingOccurrencesOfString:#"'" withString:#""];
When the user enters the string for which they wish to search, we
remove single quotes from the search string entered and convert to
lowercase using the same method as when creating the data. However it
does not find any results.
If the user enters Michael's, the system fails to find any records
The predicate is "SORTFIELD like 'michaels'"
If the user enters Michael' (single quote no 's' character), the
system finds all records starting Michael's
The predicate is "SORTFIELD like 'michael'"
I am sure we are doing something very stupid and appreciate any
pointers on how to resolve this issue as we have gone round and round
in circles.
We have placed many NSLog entries to track actual content of the
search fields and record fields and all display as expected.
Thanks
Mike
I finally resolved the issue on finding that the fields being searched
had a non-displayable character when a single quote existed. For
example Michael's displayed but Michaelx's where x= an extended ascii
character, was the actual contents.
By removing this from the fields we were able to perform the searching
as described in our original posting.
However, I still feel that you should be able to search a Core Data collection for strings that contain single quotes without having to do the 'hack' described.
Welcome any thoughts from others on this.
Thanks
Mike