I have seen a lot of questions about this but I couldn't find the correct answer for me which works.
The object which triggers the problem is like
test123.de.company.com.Database.dbo.Table
Test123.de.company.com
is the database Server.
Object name contains more than the maximum prefixes allowed
I have tried to write it like this [test123.de.company.com].Database.dbo.Table just like [test123.de.company.com].[Database].[dbo].[Table]
Can you tell me what's wrong with this?
Please try this:
["test123.de.company.com"].[Database].[dbo].[Table]
OP also encountered a new problem after implementing this solution above. OP said:
Thank you! This worked for me. To be more precise, the join is for a
view and if I save/close and then later get back to the design option
the quote marks are removed and there is [test123.de.company.com] left
over and the error returns. Is there a way to keep them fixed?
Otherwise if I change anything I always have to add the quote marks
again and again
Then with the help of DaleK that problem also was solved. DaleK:
Don't use the design option, script it as alter instead
Related
I have the following two lines of code:
Debug.Print Forms!DocLoader!DL_RowBox!DLR_FileName.Name
Debug.Print Forms!DocLoader!DL_RowBox.Form!DLR_FileName.Name
The second one, which I have seen recommended in almost every VBA reference, including the answer being suggested from SO as I type this, follows this structure:
Debug.Print Forms![Form Name]![Subform Control Name].Form![Control Name].Name
These two lines of code should produce the same result. However, the second, recommended syntax throws error 40036, "Application-defined or object-defined error" unless I am in design view. I cannot use it at runtime, but I have never seen this limitation mentioned in any of the reference documentation or forum posts I have looked at. The first line, using only default parameters, seems to work no matter the context.
With the second line, I have tried just about every combination of bang and period I can, and I have also tried enclosing field names in brackets, but the common denominator is that as soon as I reference ".Form" the application throws an error. Even something simple like ".Form.Caption" has thrown an error. So what I would like to know is:
Are there any other correct ways of referring to a subform's form properties, since I need these as well as its controls
Why would the first line execute correctly while the second, recommended one does not seem to work?
Running the compiler appears to have fixed the issue.
What im trying to do is write a key to the registry but im stepping from one problem to another, first permissions problem, now this..
This is the line of code.
If PNGchk.Checked = True Then
My.Computer.Registry.Users.CreateSubKey(UserSID & "\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\FileExts\.png\UserChoice", True, Security.AccessControl.RegistryRights.FullControl).SetValue("Progid", "SIV.png", Microsoft.Win32.RegistryValueKind.String)
End If
You must have Option Strict Off for that code to even compile, so you might want to fix that to start with. Option Strict On would have flagged issues with that code right away. You should read the documentation or at least pay attention to Intellisense for that method because your second and third arguments make no sense. No overload that I can see has a Boolean parameter and if you want to use a RegistryRights value you do so within a RegistrySecurity object as far as I can see.
RegistryKeyPermissionCheck.ReadWriteSubTree worked for me.
Using clsid64 = view64.CreateSubKey("Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\FileExts\.png\UserChoice", RegistryKeyPermissionCheck.ReadWriteSubTree)
clsid64.SetValue("StubPath", "SIV.png")
clsid64.Close()
End Using
Following conversion
SELECT to_tsvector('english', 'Google.com');
returns this:
'google.com':1
Why does TSearch2 engine didn't return something like this?
'google':2, 'com':1
Or how can i make the engine to return the exploded string as i wrote above?
I just need "Google.com" to be foundable by "google".
Unfortunately, there is no quick and easy solution.
Denis is correct in that the parser is recognizing it as a hostname, which is why it doesn't break it up.
There are 3 other things you can do, off the top of my head.
You can disable the host parsing in the database. See postgres documentation for details. E.g. something like ALTER TEXT SEARCH CONFIGURATION your_parser_config
DROP MAPPING FOR url, url_path
You can write your own custom dictionary.
You can pre-parse your data before it's inserted into the database in some manner (maybe splitting all domains before going into the database).
I had a similar issue to you last year and opted for solution (2), above.
My solution was to write a custom dictionary that splits words up on non-word characters. A custom dictionary is a lot easier & quicker to write than a new parser. You still have to write C tho :)
The dictionary I wrote would return something like 'www.facebook.com':4, 'com':3, 'facebook':2, 'www':1' for the 'www.facebook.com' domain (we had a unique-ish scenario, hence the 4 results instead of 3).
The trouble with a custom dictionary is that you will no longer get stemming (ie: www.books.com will come out as www, books and com). I believe there is some work (which may have been completed) to allow chaining of dictionaries which would solve this problem.
First off in case you're not aware, tsearch2 is deprecated in favor of the built-in functionality:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9/static/textsearch.html
As for your actual question, google.com gets recognized as a host by the parser:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/textsearch-parsers.html
If you don't want this to occur, you'll need to pre-process your text accordingly (or use a custom parser).
Here is the single line from one of my functions to test if any objects in my array have a given property with a matching value
Return ((From tag In DataCache.Tags Where (tag.FldTag = strtagname) Select tag).Count = 1)
WHERE....
DataCache.Tags is an array of custom objects
strtagname = "brazil"
and brazil is definitely a tag name stored within one of the custom objects in the array.
However the function continually returns false.
Can someone confirm to me that the above should or should not work.
and if it wont work can someone tell me the best way to test if any of the objects in the array contain a property with a specific value.
I suppose in summary I am looking for the equivalent of a SQL EXISTS statement.
Many thanks in hope.
Your code is currently checking whether the count is exactly one.
The equivalent of EXISTS in LINQ is Any. You want something like:
Return DataCache.Tags.Any(Function(tag) tag.FldTag = strtagname)
(Miraculously it looks like that syntax may be about right... it looks like the docs examples...)
Many Thanks for the response.
Your code did not work. Then I realised that I was comparing to an array value so it would be case sensitive.
However glad I asked the question, as I found a better way than mine.
Many thanks again !
In this question, a user commented to never use the With block in VB. Why?
"Never" is a strong word.
I think it fine as long as you don't abuse it (like nesting)
IMHO - this is better:
With MyCommand.Parameters
.Count = 1
.Item(0).ParameterName = "#baz"
.Item(0).Value = fuz
End With
Than:
MyCommand.Parameters.Count = 1
MyCommand.Parameters.Item(0).ParameterName = "#baz"
MyCommand.Parameters.Item(0).Value = fuz
There is nothing wrong about the With keyword. It's true that it may reduce readibility when nested but the solution is simply don't use nested With.
There may be namespace problems in Delphi, which doesn't enforce a leading dot but that issue simply doesn't exist in VB.NET so the people that are posting rants about Delphi are losing their time in this question.
I think the real reason many people don't like the With keyword is that is not included in C* languages and many programmers automatically think that every feature not included in his/her favourite language is bad.
It's just not helpful compared to other options.
If you really miss it you can create a one or two character alias for your object instead. The alias only takes one line to setup, rather than two for the With block (With + End With lines).
The alias also gives you a quick mouse-over reference for the type of the variable. It provides a hook for the IDE to help you jump back to the top of the block if you want (though if the block is that large you have other problems). It can be passed as an argument to functions. And you can use it to reference an index property.
So we have an alternative that gives more function with less code.
Also see this question:
Why is the with() construct not included in C#, when it is really cool in VB.NET?
The with keyword is only sideswiped in a passing reference here in an hilarious article by the wonderful Verity Stob, but it's worth it for the vitriol: See the paragraph that starts
While we are on identifier confusion. The with keyword...
Worth reading the entire article!
The With keyword also provides another benefit - the object(s) in the With statement only need to be "qualified" once, which can improve performance. Check out the information on MSDN here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/wc500chb(VS.80).aspx
So by all means, use it.