## mysql – Update table_name set column1 from where column2 (column2 mutiple diffirent value)?

Hello, I am working with this query to update all the rows of the table with a multiple value string.
I am trying a little query but I am getting an error

error is "wrong DOUBLE value truncated"

this is my query

``````String text = textarea.getText();

String sql = "UPDATE `table` SET `status`= 'YES' WHERE no_id ='"+text+"'";
pst = conn.prepareStatement(sql);
pst.execute();
``````

my string is from a text area that lists all the different values ​​i need

## probability: PDF of unfair coin tosses with a set of coins skewed differently

Let's say I have a bag of unfair coins. Each coin $$mathit {i = 1 … N}$$ has a probability $$mathit {p_i}$$ to give heads when thrown. If I flip each of my coins once and count the number of heads, what distribution (and parameters) will describe the number of heads I get? I know if I used the same currency $$mathit {i} = I$$ the probability mass function would be a binomial distribution $$Pr (k; n, p_I) = frac {n!} {K! (N-k)!} P_I ^ k (1-p) ^ {n-k}$$ where $$mathit {n}$$ Describe the number of times I flipped the coin. In this case, however, I have $$mathit {n}$$ different currencies with $$mathit {p_1, p_2, …, p_n}$$ probability of throwing heads once each.

## postgresql – declare variable in bash script set var = "psql -c" select * from someting "and run var

I am looking for a way to integrate psql statements into bash scripts for devops reasons.

The simplest way you would do that is:
CMD = & # 39; psql -c "DROP DATABASE restore_database;" & # 39;

then use a bash function to execute the declaration:

``````   EXEC () {

\$CMD > /dev/null 2>&1
if ( \$? -eq 0 )
then
RETVAR="DONE"
else
echo "Command: \$CMD is not working."
echo "- Exiting Function"
exit 0
fi
}
``````

I can't believe this doesn't work …

## magento 1.9 – How to set the value for the attribute?

I have this code:

``````foreach (\$skuScope as \$sku)
{
\$object = Mage::getModel('catalog/product');

\$attributes = \$product->getAttributes();
foreach (\$attributes as \$attribute) {
\$attributeCode = \$attribute->getAttributeCode();
\$value = \$attribute->getFrontend()->getValue(\$product);
}}
``````

I can get all the attributes, all the values, but I don't know how to rewrite values ​​for an attribute

## equation solving: set of multivariable expressions to re-express a single variable

I have a set of expressions like $$frac {3x + y-z} {6x}$$ Y $$frac {3 x-y + z} {12 x}$$, which can be easily re-expressed as $$p$$ Y $$(1-p) / 2$$, where $$p = frac {3x + y-z} {6x}$$, but is there any way to find this? $$p$$, not manually? I mean: how do I find a $$p$$ so that each expression can be expressed solely as a function of $$p$$ in Mathematica? (I to know it is true to find such $$p$$ for a given set, I just can't find it computationally)

## unit: how can I set the position of each next object to scale to the last object to scale the final scale position?

``````using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using UnityEngine;

public class ScalingManager : MonoBehaviour
{
private List positions = new List();

// Start is called before the first frame update
void Awake()
{
var ObjectsToScale = GameObject.FindGameObjectsWithTag("Scaling Object");

// Scale amount of the prefab before - 0.5F
// For example : The scale amount of the prefab before is 10
// So the end scaling position is 10 - 0.5f = 9.5f
// So the next prefab should start scaling at position
// new Vector3(scale amount - 9.5f, objecttoscale.transform.y ,objecttoscale.transform.z );

for(int i = 0; i < ObjectsToScale.Length; i++)
{
}

for (int i = 1; i < positions.Count; i++)
{
ObjectsToScale(i).transform.localPosition = new Vector3(
ObjectsToScale(i - 1).transform.localPosition.x, 0, 0);
}
}

// Update is called once per frame
void Update()
{

}
}
``````

The first object to scale in the original position of the array is in this case 0,0,0 but it could be any position, for example 11,22, -5 but in this case it is 0,0,0

The second object to scale the original position is 12.4, 0.5, -7.39

Both objects are scaled at the same time when the game is run. The first is scaled in the correct direction, the second is scaled in the downward direction.

This is a screenshot of the first object to scale the inspector settings. The start position is 0,0,0 and the red circle shows the position of the final scale on the right:

The second screenshot showing the second object to scale information:

And the last screenshot is what I want to do. I want the second object to scale to start scaling, the position will be where the red circle is in the first screenshot. Therefore, each object to scale if there will be 20 objects to scale each object to scale should start scaling from the final scaling position of the object to be scaled earlier in the array.

So it must start from the second: ObjectsToScale1 put it in the red circle at the end position of ObjectsToScale (0)

Then ObjectsToScale2 must be placed at the end scale position of ObjectsToScale1.

I like this :

The upper red circle shows where ObjectsToScale (0) ends and ObjectsToScale1 begins. The lower red circle shows where ObjectsToScale1 ends and ObjectsToScale2 begins.

ObjectsToScale2 is scaling to the left.

Right, down, left

So if I have 3 objects to scale and set them to scale: Right, Down, Left, no matter what the starting position of each is, it should create the last screenshot form.

The same idea if I have 7 objects to scale: Left, Down, Right, Up, Right, Down, Down. Connect them all from the end of the previous one.

I have SharePoint 2016 in prem. My portal has forms based authentication. Anyone can register an account and log in to access the portal with read permission. By default, users will log out after 25 minutes. I have used the following scripts and update the lifetime of cookies.
But I want administrators to access the portal until I click the Logout button. How can you implement or increase the lifetime of cookies for a particular set of users who have Full Control permission?

\$ sts = Get-SPSecurityTokenServiceConfig
\$ sts.Update ()

## How can I set the bulb shutter on a Canon Powershot SX70?

How can I set the shutter to light bulb settings on a Canon Powershot SX70?

## How can I set the bulb shutter on a power shot sx70 cannon?

How do i set the shutter to light bulb settings on powershot sx70

## set theory: internal models with all generic sets

Question: Under great cardinal axioms, what is the intersection of all internal models? $$M$$ of ZFC such that each set in $$V$$ is set-generic about $$M$$?

Each set belongs to a generic HOD extension, and we expect HOD to be canonical in the true $$V$$, but ordinary large cardinal axioms do not imply that HOD is a canonical model of good behavior. Each accounting model $$M$$ ZFC is HOD from some ZFC model (obtained using class forcing on $$M$$)

However, let's $$M_∞$$ (or $$M_ text {Ord}$$) be the minimum iterable internal model with a suitable class of Woodin cardinals. There is a definable ordinal iteration $$M & # 39; _∞$$ from $$M_∞$$ such that each set in $$V$$ is set-generic about $$M & # 39; _∞$$. Specifically, choose an OD set of ordinals $$X_0$$; iterate the first Cardinal Woodin of $$M_∞$$ to make $$X_0$$ generic; then choose $$X_1$$ and iterate the second Cardinal Woodin to make $$X_1$$ generic, and so on. Also, by using generic character over local HOD, we can choose $$M & # 39; _∞$$ such that $$M & # 39; _∞∩H (λ)$$ is definable in $$H (λ)$$ (for $$λ> c$$) and with each $$X⊂λ$$ being $$M & # 39; _∞$$generic for a poset in $$M & # 39; _∞∩H ((2 ^ λ) ^ +)$$ (as usual, $$H (λ) = {x: | mathrm {tc} (x) | <λ }$$)

But is this optimal? For each $$M$$ in the question and a set of ordinals $$s∈M$$, it is $$M_∞ (s)$$ elementally integrable in a $$M$$-definable submodel of $$M$$? Does the intersection of all those $$M$$ same $$M_∞$$ with the least measurable cardinal iterated away? And what kind of great cardinals should such $$M$$ to have?

Using $$ω$$ induction steps of the central model, each $$M$$ as in the question satisfies the projective determination (PD) in all the generic extensions of $$M$$ (assuming PD in all generic extensions of $$V$$), but I don't know how far central model induction can go here.

Please note that each set $$S$$ is generic about some (depends on $$S$$) iterate from $$M_1$$ (the minimal iterable internal model with a Cardinal Woodin). So for example if there is a super strong cardinal (and each set has a sharp edge) then there is a generic extension of $$M_1$$ with a super strong cardinal. This is analogous to the existence of complicated transitive models in $$L$$; and more Woodin cardinals give models with more closure.

Formalization note: The answer is presumably the same regardless of whether $$M$$ it is $$Σ_2$$ definable using parameters in $$V$$, or we use NBG (plus large cardinal axioms) and try $$M$$ as a class. Furthermore, allowing the choice to fail $$M$$ The answer will likely not change. A large and likely cardinal assumption is that $$M_∞$$ (above) exists and is completely iterable.

Local versions: A variation is to consider internal models $$M$$ with (for a specific $$λ$$) each element of $$H (λ)$$ generic over $$M$$ using a force on $$H (λ)$$. Examples include:
– for accounting purposes strong limit $$λ$$, some iterations of $$M_ω$$
– for singular strong limit $$λ$$ of uncountable cofinality, some iterations of the minimal iterable internal model with a measurable number of Woodin cardinals (i.e. $$κ$$ Woodin cardinals with $$κ$$ measurable in the model)
– for inaccessible $$λ$$, some iterations of $$M_∞$$.

Class forcing:
While part of the class forcing is similar to a set, the class forcing generally lacks the same type of closure. For example, even keeping ZFC, we can encode the universe into a real, even if each set is sharp. Lack of closure makes it easier to do $$V$$ Generic, and if I understand it correctly, it is enough to use an appropriate iteration of the minimal internal model that satisfies "Ord is Woodin" (I'm not sure if we need its acute, or if there are definable issues), with the class forcing a string of Ord satisfactory condition (and therefore behaved well). An analogous relationship should also be valid for various extensions of the set theory language, with "Ord is Woodin" (and the internal model) and the closing properties of classes (and class forcing, or class forcing). Ord-cc) strengthened in the same way
While many iterations should work, a particularly fancy choice and encoding of an iteration is (conjecturally) the & # 39; stability & # 39; $$S = {n, α, β: n <ω ∧ H (α) ≺_ {Σ_n} H (β) }$$. $$(L (S), ∈, S)$$ it's called a stable core (see The stable core and the structural properties of the stable core). Warning (conjectural): the iteration encoded by $$S$$ (There are different encodings, but if it works, between iterations in which $$S$$ is definable, the only iteration that can be defined for each iteration in which $$S$$ is definable) is out of $$(L (S), ∈, S)$$although another iteration is $$text {HOD} ^ {L (S)} = K ^ {L (S)}$$. Without big cardinal assumptions, the stable nucleus theory is not canonical, but we still get the generic character. While the specific choice of $$S$$ It's somewhat arbitrary, I think the use of the cumulative hierarchy is important to genericity, and presumably a different definition would simply lead to a different iteration that works, or would be insufficient or suboptimal.