The second (assuming you means [`CONTAINS`][1], and actually put it in a valid query) should be faster, because it can use *some* form of index (in this case, a full text index). Of course, this form of query is only available *if* the column is in a full text index. If it isn&#39;t, then only the first form is available.

The first query, using LIKE, will be unable to use an index, since it starts with a wildcard, so will always require a full table scan.

---

The `CONTAINS` query should be:

    SELECT * FROM table WHERE CONTAINS(Column, &#39;test&#39;);

  [1]: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187787.aspx

Having run both queries on a SQL Server 2012 instance, I can confirm the first query was fastest in my case.

The query with the `LIKE` keyword showed a clustered index scan.

The `CONTAINS` also had a clustered index scan with additional operators for the full text match and a merge join.

![Plan][1]


  [1]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/oli3g.jpg

I think that `CONTAINS` took longer and used `Merge` because you had a dash(&quot;-&quot;) in your query `adventure-works.com`.

The dash is a break word so the `CONTAINS` searched the full-text index for `adventure` and than it searched for `works.com` and merged the results.

Also try changing from this:

        SELECT * FROM table WHERE Contains(Column, &quot;test&quot;) &gt; 0;

To this:

        SELECT * FROM table WHERE Contains(Column, &#39;&quot;*test*&quot;&#39;) &gt; 0;

The former will find records with values like &quot;*this is a test*&quot; and &quot;*a test-case is the plan*&quot;.

The latter will also find records with values like &quot;*i am testing this*&quot; and &quot;*this is the greatest*&quot;.

What is the basic difference between `adb shell input keyevent` and `adb shell sendevent`? Which one should I use for inputting a character? Are the keycodes the same that we pass to both the commands?

ADB Shell Input Events

I&#39;m using KnockoutJS and have a main view and view model. I want a dialog (the jQuery UI one) to popup with another view which a separate child view model to be bound to.

The HTML for the dialog content is retrieved using AJAX so I want to be able to call `ko.applyBindings` once the request has completed, and I want to bind the child view model to just the portion of the HTML loaded via ajax inside the dialog div.

Is this actually possible or do I need to load ALL my views and view models when the page initially loads and then call `ko.applyBindings` once?

Can you call ko.applyBindings to bind a partial view?

Which one of the following queries is faster (LIKE vs CONTAINS)?

    SELECT * FROM table WHERE Column LIKE &#39;%test%&#39;;

or

    SELECT * FROM table WHERE Contains(Column, &quot;test&quot;);


LIKE vs CONTAINS on SQL Server

Which one of the following queries is faster (LIKE vs CONTAINS)?
<pre><code class="hljs language-sql">SELECT * FROM table WHERE Column LIKE '%test%';
</code></pre>
or
<pre><code class="hljs language-sql">SELECT * FROM table WHERE Contains(Column, "test");
</code></pre>

I&#39;m using SQL Server 2008 and I need to make a VARCHAR field bigger, from (200 to 1200) on a table with about 500k rows.  What I need to know is if there are any issues I have not considered. 

I will be using this TSQL statement:

    ALTER TABLE MyTable
    ALTER COLUMN [MyColumn] VARCHAR(1200)

I&#39;ve already tried it on a copy of the data and this statement had no ill effects that I could see. 

So are there any possible problems from doing this that I may not have considered? 

By the way, the column is not indexed. 

When increasing the size of VARCHAR column on a large table could there be any problems?

I&#39;m able to delete, insert and update in my program and I try to do an insert by calling a created stored procedure from my database.  

This button insert I made works well.

    private void btnAdd_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
    {
            SqlConnection con = new SqlConnection(dc.Con);
            SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand(&quot;Command String&quot;, con);
            
            da.InsertCommand = new SqlCommand(&quot;INSERT INTO tblContacts VALUES (@FirstName, @LastName)&quot;, con);
            da.InsertCommand.Parameters.Add(&quot;@FirstName&quot;, SqlDbType.VarChar).Value = txtFirstName.Text;
            da.InsertCommand.Parameters.Add(&quot;@LastName&quot;, SqlDbType.VarChar).Value = txtLastName.Text;

            con.Open();
            da.InsertCommand.ExecuteNonQuery();
            con.Close();

            dt.Clear();
            da.Fill(dt);
        } 

This is the start of the button that calls the procedure named `sp_Add_contact` to add a contact. The two parameters for `sp_Add_contact(@FirstName,@LastName)`. I searched on google for some good examples but found nothing interesting.

    private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
    {
            SqlConnection con = new SqlConnection(dc.Con);
            SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand(&quot;Command String&quot;, con);
            cmd.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure;

            ???
            
            con.Open();
            da. ???.ExecuteNonQuery();
            con.Close();

            dt.Clear();
            da.Fill(dt);
        }


Call a stored procedure with parameter in c#

Please clarify two things for me:

1. Can a Foreign key be NULL?
2. Can a Foreign key be duplicate?

As fair as I know, `NULL` shouldn&#39;t be used in foreign keys, but in some application of mine I&#39;m able to input `NULL` in both Oracle and SQL Server, and I don&#39;t know why.

Can a foreign key be NULL and/or duplicate?

At any time in the past, if someone had asked me the maximum size for a `varchar(max)`, I&#39;d have said 2GB, or looked up a more exact [figure][1] (2^31-1, or 2147483647).

However, in some recent testing, I discovered that `varchar(max)` variables can apparently exceed this size:

    create table T (
    	Val1 varchar(max) not null
    )
    go
    declare @KMsg varchar(max) = REPLICATE(&#39;a&#39;,1024);
    declare @MMsg varchar(max) = REPLICATE(@KMsg,1024);
    declare @GMsg varchar(max) = REPLICATE(@MMsg,1024);
    declare @GGMMsg varchar(max) = @GMsg + @GMsg + @MMsg;
    select LEN(@GGMMsg)
    insert into T(Val1) select @GGMMsg
    select LEN(Val1) from T

Results:

    (no column name)
    2148532224
    (1 row(s) affected)
    Msg 7119, Level 16, State 1, Line 6
    Attempting to grow LOB beyond maximum allowed size of 2147483647 bytes.
    The statement has been terminated.
    
    (no column name)
    (0 row(s) affected)

So, given that I now know that a *variable* can exceed the 2GB barrier - does anyone know what the actual limit is for a `varchar(max)` variable?

---

(Above test completed on SQL Server 2008 (not R2). I&#39;d be interested to know whether it applies to other versions)

  [1]: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms176089.aspx


Maximum size of a varchar(max) variable

I&#39;m trying to create upgrade and backout scripts in SQL.  The upgrade script adds a column like so:

    IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.columns WHERE Name = N&#39;ColumnName&#39; 
        AND object_id = OBJECT_ID(N&#39;[dbo].[TableName]&#39;))

    ALTER TABLE TableName
        ADD ColumnName bit NOT NULL DEFAULT(0) 

The backout script removes the column like so:

    IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.columns WHERE Name = N&#39;ColumnName&#39; 
        AND object_id = OBJECT_ID(N&#39;[dbo].[TableName]&#39;))

    ALTER TABLE TableName
        DROP COLUMN ColumnName

However, the backout script throws this error:

    Msg 5074, Level 16, State 1, Line 5
        The object &#39;DF__TableName__ColumnName__1BF3D5BD&#39; is dependent on column &#39;ColumnName&#39;.
    Msg 4922, Level 16, State 9, Line 5
        ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN ColumnName failed because one or more objects access this column.

I know how to drop the constraint, but the constraint&#39;s name changes everytime (the suffix changes).  I either need SQL Server to stop creating this randomly-named constraint OR I need to be able to remove the constraint in my script using wild-card characters, since the name changes.

Why does SQL Server keep creating a DF constraint?

What is the fastest way to know if a value exists in a list (a list with millions of values in it) and what its index is?

I know that all values in the list are unique as in this example.

**The first method I try is (3.8 sec in my real code):**

    a = [4,2,3,1,5,6]

    if a.count(7) == 1:
        b=a.index(7)
        &quot;Do something with variable b&quot;


**The second method I try is (2x faster: 1.9 sec for my real code):**

    a = [4,2,3,1,5,6]

    try:
        b=a.index(7)
    except ValueError:
        &quot;Do nothing&quot;
    else:
        &quot;Do something with variable b&quot;

**Proposed methods from Stack Overflow user (2.74 sec for my real code):**

    a = [4,2,3,1,5,6]
    if 7 in a:
        a.index(7)

In my real code, the first method takes 3.81 sec and the second method takes 1.88 sec.
It&#39;s a good improvement, but:

I&#39;m a beginner with Python/scripting, and is there a faster way to do the same things and save more processing time?

**More specific explanation for my application:**

In the Blender API I can access a list of particles:

    particles = [1, 2, 3, 4, etc.]

From there, I can access a particle&#39;s location:

    particles[x].location = [x,y,z]

And for each particle I test if a neighbour exists by searching each particle location like so:

    if [x+1,y,z] in particles.location
        &quot;Find the identity of this neighbour particle in x:the particle&#39;s index
        in the array&quot;
        particles.index([x+1,y,z])


Fastest way to check if a value exists in a list

What is the most efficient way to find the size of the intersection of two non-sparse Sets in Java? This is an operation I will be calling on large sets a very large number of times, so optimisation is important. I cannot modify the original sets.

I have looked at Apache Commons CollectionUtils.intersection which appears to be quite slow. My current approach is to take the smaller of the two sets, clone it, and then call .retainAll on the larger of the two sets.

    public static int getIntersection(Set&lt;Long&gt; set1, Set&lt;Long&gt; set2) {
        boolean set1IsLarger = set1.size() &gt; set2.size();
        Set&lt;Long&gt; cloneSet = new HashSet&lt;Long&gt;(set1IsLarger ? set2 : set1);
        cloneSet.retainAll(set1IsLarger ? set1 : set2);
        return cloneSet.size();
    }

Efficiently compute Intersection of two Sets in Java?

I&#39;ve recently seen two really nice and educating languages talks:

[This first one][1] by Herb Sutter, presents all the nice and cool features of C++0x, why C++&#39;s future seems brighter than ever, and how M$ is said to be a good guy in this game. The talk revolves around efficiency and how minimizing heap activity very often improves performance.

[This other one][2], by Andrei Alexandrescu, motivates a *transition* from C/C++ to his new game-changer *D*. Most of D&#39;s stuff seems really well motivated and designed. One thing, however, surprised me, namely that D pushes for garbage collection and that all classes are created solely *by reference*. Even more confusing, the book *The D Programming Language Ref Manual* specifically in the section about *Resource Management*  states the following, quote:

*Garbage collection eliminates the tedious, error prone memory allocation tracking code
necessary in C and C++. This not only means much faster development time and lower
maintenance costs, but the resulting program frequently runs **faster**!*

This conflicts with Sutter&#39;s constant talk about minimizing heap activity. I strongly respect both Sutter&#39;s and Alexandrescou&#39;s insights, so I feel a bit confused about these two key questions

1. *Doesn&#39;t creating class instances solely by reference result in a lot of unnecesseary heap activity?*

2. *In which cases can we use Garbage Collection without sacrificing run-time performance?*


  [1]: http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/C-and-Beyond-2011-Herb-Sutter-Why-C
  [2]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlVpPstLPEc

To GC or Not To GC

I was just trying to add a column called &quot;location&quot; to a table (main_table) in a database. The command I run was

    ALTER TABLE main_table ADD COLUMN location varchar (256);

The main_table contains &gt; 2,000,000 rows. It keeps running for more than 2 hours and still not completed. 

I tried to use `mytop`
to monitor the activity of this database to make sure that the query is not locked by other querying process, but it seems not. Is it supposed to take that long time? Actually, I just rebooted the machine before running this command. Now this command is still running. I am not sure what to do. 


ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN takes a long time

My lower level knowledge of SQL (Server 2008) is limited, and is now being challanged by our DBAs. Let me explain (I have mentioned obvious statements in the hope that I am right, but if you see something wrong, please tell me) the scenario:

We have a table which holds &#39;Court Orders&#39; for people. When I created the table, (Name: CourtOrder), I created it like:

    CREATE TABLE dbo.CourtOrder
    (
      CourtOrderID INT NOT NULL IDENTITY(1,1), (Primary Key)
      PersonId INT NOT NULL,
      + around 20 other fields of different types.
    )

I then applied a non-clustered index to the primary key (for efficiency). My reasons is that it is a unique field (primary key), and should be indexed, mainly for selection purposes, as we often `Select from table where primary key = ...`

I then applied a CLUSTERED index on PersonId. The reason was to group orders for a particular person physically, as the vast majority of work is getting orders for a person. So, `select from mytable where personId = ...`

I have been pulled up on this now. I have been told that we should put the clustered index on the primary key, and the normal index on the personId. That seems very strange to me. First off, why would you put a clustered index on a unique column? what is it clustering? Surely that&#39;s a waste of the clustered index? I&#39;d have believed a normal index would be used on a unique column. Also, clustering the index would mean we can&#39;t cluster a different column (One per table, right?).

The reasoning for me being told I have made a mistake is that they believe putting a clustered index on the PersonId would make inserts slow. For the 5% gain in speed of a select, we would be getting a 95% degradation in speed on inserts and updates. Is that correct and valid?

They say that because we cluster the personId, SQL Server has to rearrange data when ever we insert or make a change to the PersonId.

So then I have asked, why would SQL have the concept of a CLUSTERED INDEX, if it&#39;s so slow? Is it as slow as they&#39;re saying? How should I have setup my indexes to achieve optimum performance? I&#39;d have thought SELECT is used more than INSERT... but they say that we&#39;re having locking issues on INSERTS...

Hope someone can help me.

Clustered vs Non-Clustered

UPDATE 3: According to [this announcement][1], this has been addressed by the EF team in EF6 alpha 2.

UPDATE 2: I&#39;ve created a suggestion to fix this problem. To vote for it, [go here][2].

Consider a SQL database with one very simple table.

    CREATE TABLE Main (Id INT PRIMARY KEY)

I populate the table with 10,000 records.

    WITH Numbers AS
    (
      SELECT 1 AS Id
      UNION ALL
      SELECT Id + 1 AS Id FROM Numbers WHERE Id &lt;= 10000
    )
    INSERT Main (Id)
    SELECT Id FROM Numbers
    OPTION (MAXRECURSION 0)

I build an EF model for the table and run the following query in LINQPad (I am using &quot;C# Statements&quot; mode so LINQPad doesn&#39;t create a dump automatically).

    var rows = 
      Main
      .ToArray();

Execution time is ~0.07 seconds. Now I add the Contains operator and re-run the query.

    var ids = Main.Select(a =&gt; a.Id).ToArray();
    var rows = 
      Main
      .Where (a =&gt; ids.Contains(a.Id))
      .ToArray();

Execution time for this case is **20.14 seconds** (288 times slower)!

At first I suspected that the T-SQL emitted for the query was taking longer to execute, so I tried cutting and pasting it from LINQPad&#39;s SQL pane into SQL Server Management Studio.

    SET NOCOUNT ON
    SET STATISTICS TIME ON
    SELECT 
    [Extent1].[Id] AS [Id]
    FROM [dbo].[Primary] AS [Extent1]
    WHERE [Extent1].[Id] IN (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,...

And the result was

    SQL Server Execution Times:
      CPU time = 0 ms,  elapsed time = 88 ms.

Next I suspected LINQPad was causing the problem, but performance is the same whether I run it in LINQPad or in a console application.

So, it appears that the problem is somewhere within Entity Framework.

Am I doing something wrong here? This is a time-critical part of my code, so is there something I can do to speed up performance?

I am using Entity Framework 4.1 and Sql Server 2008 R2.

UPDATE 1:

In the discussion below there were some questions about whether the delay occurred while EF was building the initial query or while it was parsing the data it received back. To test this I ran the following code,

    var ids = Main.Select(a =&gt; a.Id).ToArray();
    var rows = 
      (ObjectQuery&lt;MainRow&gt;)
      Main
      .Where (a =&gt; ids.Contains(a.Id));
    var sql = rows.ToTraceString();

which forces EF to generate the query without executing it against the database. The result was that this code required ~20 secords to run, so it appears that almost all of the time is taken in building the initial query.

CompiledQuery to the rescue then? Not so fast ... CompiledQuery requires the parameters passed into the query to be fundamental types (int, string, float, and so on). It won&#39;t accept arrays or IEnumerable&lt;int&gt;, so I can&#39;t use it for a list of Ids.


  [1]: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/adonet/archive/2012/12/10/ef6-alpha-2-available-on-nuget.aspx
  [2]: http://data.uservoice.com/forums/72025-ado-net-entity-framework-ef-feature-suggestions/suggestions/2598644-improve-the-performance-of-the-contains-operator

Why does the Contains() operator degrade Entity Framework&#39;s performance so dramatically?

I have two strings in scala and I want to find out, if the bigger string (`needle`) contains a smaller string (`haystack`).

What I found is doing it with regexps and matches like this ([from this question][1]):

`needle.r.pattern.matcher(haystack).matches`

which is (1) grossly overcomplicated for such a simple problem, but more importantly, (2) doesn&#39;t work for me, because

`&quot;needle&quot;.r.pattern.matcher(&quot;Finding needle in haystack&quot;).matches`

returns

`Boolean = false`

  [1]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3021813/how-to-check-whether-a-string-fully-matches-a-regex-in-scala

What is the idiomatic scala way of finding, if a given string contains a given substring?

I have some XML that is structured like this:

    &lt;whatson&gt;
      &lt;productions&gt;    
        &lt;production&gt;
          &lt;category&gt;Film&lt;/category&gt;
        &lt;/production&gt;
        &lt;production&gt;
          &lt;category&gt;Business&lt;/category&gt;
        &lt;/production&gt;
        &lt;production&gt;
          &lt;category&gt;Business training&lt;/category&gt;
        &lt;/production&gt;
      &lt;/productions&gt;
    &lt;/whatson&gt;

And I need to select every production with a category that doesn&#39;t contain &quot;Business&quot; (so just the first production in this example).

Is this possible with XPath? I tried working along these lines but got nowhere:

    //production[not(contains(category,&#39;business&#39;))]

How to use not contains() in XPath?

If I&#39;ve got an array of strings, can I check to see if a string is in the array without doing a `for` loop?  Specifically, I&#39;m looking for a way to do it within an `if` statement, so something like this:

    if [check that item is in array]:

Check if item is in an array / list

Like the title says, I want to replace a specific part of the text in a div.

The structure looks like this:

    &lt;div class=&quot;text_div&quot;&gt;
        This div contains some text.
    &lt;/div&gt;

And I want to replace only &quot;contains&quot; with &quot;hello everyone&quot;, for example.
I can&#39;t find a solution for this.

jQuery if div contains this text, replace that part of the text

The field `table`.`name` contains &#39;Stylus Photo 2100&#39; and with the following query

    SELECT `name` FROM `table` WHERE `name` LIKE &#39;%Stylus 2100%&#39;

I get no results. Of course i would if i searched

    SELECT `name` FROM `table` WHERE `name` LIKE &#39;%Photo 2100%&#39;

How can I select the record by searching &#39;Stylus 2100&#39; ?

Thanks 

MySQL SELECT LIKE or REGEXP to match multiple words in one record

I want to use Eloquent&#39;s active record building to build a search query, but it is going to be a LIKE search. I have found the `User::find($term)` or `User::find(1)`, but this is not generating a like statement. I&#39;m not looking for a direct answer, but if someone could at least give me a direction to look in that&#39;d be great!




Using Eloquent ORM in Laravel to perform search of database using LIKE

&gt; **Possible Duplicate:**  
&gt; [Mysql Like Case Sensitive](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8083455/mysql-like-case-sensitive)  

&lt;!-- End of automatically inserted text --&gt;

Mysql ignores case for its LIKE comparisons.

How can you force it to perform case-sensitive LIKE comparisons?

How do you force mysql LIKE to be case sensitive?

In the [documentation about the LIKE operator][1], nothing is told about the case-sensitivity of it. Is it? How to enable/disable it?

I am querying `varchar(n)` columns, on an Microsoft SQL Server 2005 installation, if that matters.

  [1]: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179859.aspx


Is the LIKE operator case-sensitive with SQL Server?

&lt;br/&gt;I have the following data in a Table
&lt;br/&gt;PriceOrderShipped
&lt;br/&gt;PriceOrderShippedInbound
&lt;br/&gt;PriceOrderShippedOutbound
&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;In SQL I need to write a query which searches for a string in a table. While searching for  a string it should ignore case. For the below mentioned SQL query

    SELECT DISTINCT COL_NAME FROM myTable WHERE COL_NAME LIKE &#39;%PriceOrder%&#39; 
gives all the above data, whereas

    SELECT DISTINCT COL_NAME FROM myTable WHERE COL_NAME LIKE &#39;%Priceorder%&#39; 
doesn&#39;t give.

Eg. when I search for &#39;PriceOrder&#39; or &#39;priceOrder&#39; it works but &#39;priceorder&#39; or &#39;Priceorder&#39; doesn&#39;t work.
I have tried with the below query using COLLATE, but its not working. Do let me know where im going wrong.

    SELECT DISTINCT COL_NAME FROM myTable WHERE 
    COL_NAME COLLATE latin1_general_cs LIKE &#39;%Priceorder%&#39;



Content Type	Original Author	Original Content on Stackoverflow
Question	user667429	View Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - Sql Server	Damien_The_Unbeliever	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - Sql Server	MI C	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 3 - Sql Server	Omri Valfer	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 4 - Sql Server	John Doe	View Answer on Stackoverflow

LIKE vs CONTAINS on SQL Server

Sql Server Problem Overview

Sql Server Solutions

Solution 1 - Sql Server

Solution 2 - Sql Server

Solution 3 - Sql Server

Solution 4 - Sql Server

Can you call ko.applyBindings to bind a partial view?

ADB Shell Input Events

Attributions