This is my first Table : Tours
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Tours] (
[Id] INT IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL,
[TourId] INT NOT NULL,
[TCountry] NVARCHAR (50) NULL,
[TName] NVARCHAR (100) NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_Tours] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([TourId]),
CONSTRAINT [FK_Tours_ToTourDates] FOREIGN KEY ([TourId]) REFERENCES [TourDates]([TourId]));
and this is the next, Table:TourDates
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[TourDates] (
[Id] INT IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL,
[TourId] INT NOT NULL,
[TourStartDate] DATETIME NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_TourDates] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([Id] ASC));
for first table I have this Error :
SQL71516 :: The referenced table '[dbo].[TourDates]' contains no
primary or candidate keys that match the referencing column list in
the foreign key. If the referenced column is a computed column, it
should be persisted.
How can one define a Candidate key for TourId column in TourDates Table??
I believe that you should be doing something else than you are doing right now.
Tours table seems to hold every tour which should be in 1:N relationship with TourDates provided that I understand it correctly.
Thus, your FOREIGN KEY constraint should actually be declared on TourDates, not Tours table.
As to your issue (which I believe wouldn't if you switch those relationships to what they should be in my understanding) in such cases you would normally need to create a unique index on that column.
You can't reference a column which may contain several exact same values via foreign key constraint, thus the need for some sort of a unique key.
Edit after comment:
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[TourDates]
ADD CONSTRAINT FK_Tour_TourDates
FOREIGN KEY ([TourId]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Tours]([TourId]) ON DELETE CASCADE
Related
I'm creating a SQL table in VS that stores what rooms each client is, So the table has RoomId (int) and UserID (int).
Because I only want to add to the table only rooms and clients that exist they are both keys that have a foreign key to 2 tables, one that stores RoomID and Name and another that stores Client ID and Name.
Room and UserId tables:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[UsersInRoomsTable]
(
RoomId INT NOT NULL,
UserId INT NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT PK_RS PRIMARY KEY(RoomId, UserId),
CONSTRAINT [fk_room] FOREIGN KEY([RoomId]) REFERENCES [dbo].[RoomsTable]([RoomId]),
CONSTRAINT [fk_user] FOREIGN KEY ([UserId]) REFERENCES [dbo].[UserInfoTable] ([UserId])
);
Table that stores all the users:
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[UserInfoTable]
(
[UserName] NVARCHAR (50) NOT NULL,
[UserId] INT NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_roomuser] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([UserName] ASC, [UserId] ASC)
);
Table that stores all the rooms
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[RoomsTable]
(
[RoomId] INT NOT NULL,
[RoomName] NVARCHAR (50) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([RoomId] ASC)
);
Everything works except the last line in the Rooms and users table:
CONSTRAINT [fk_user] FOREIGN KEY ([UserId]) REFERENCES [dbo].[UserInfoTable] ([UserId])
When I try to Update the table I get an error SQL71516:
SQL71516: The referenced table '[dbo].[UserInfoTable]' contains no primary or candidate keys that match the referencing column list in the foreign key.
If the referenced column is a computed column, it should be persisted
How can I solve this problem and what is causing it?
Edit: I think I know what is code is colliding: For some reason I can not have a foreign key connecting to a key that contains 2 indexes IE: fk_user is a Fk to table UserInfoTable that has 2 keys (UserID and UserName)
is there a way to pass this obstacle?
The columns of a foreign key have to match the columns they reference by number, type and order.
You have a primary key on userinfotable of (username, userid). But in usersinroomstable you are trying to let the foreign key (userid) to reference that. The number of columns doesn't match, so the foreign key cannot be added.
Presumably the username shouldn't really be part of the primary key of userinfotable and got there by accident. Remove it from the primary key constraint.
Or, if username has to be in the primary key, add such a column to the table usersinroomstable and add it to the foreign key constraint.
This is what I am trying to create:
CREATE TABLE VEHICLEREPORT
(
DeptID char(2) not null,
Vin# char(3) not null,
Miles varchar(6) not null,
Bill# char(3) not null,
EID char(3) not null,
PRIMARY KEY (DeptID, Vin#),
FOREIGN KEY (bill#) REFERENCES billing,
FOREIGN KEY (EID) REFERENCES Employee
);
The issue is with my reference to billing. The error says:
The number of columns in the referencing column list for foreign key 'FK__VEHICLERE__Bill#__5AEE82B9' does not match those of the primary key in the referenced table 'Billing'.
but my billing table entered fine:
CREATE TABLE BILLING
(
VIN# char(3),
BILL# char(3),
PRIMARY KEY (VIN#, Bill#),
FOREIGN KEY (VIN#) REFERENCES vehicle
);
What am i missing with this?
Appreciate the help.
If you think of the foreign key as establishing a parent-child relationship between two tables, then the parent side column(s) need to be unique.
From Wikipedia:
In the context of relational databases, a foreign key is a field (or collection of fields) in one table that uniquely identifies a row of another table or the same table. ... In simpler words, the foreign key is defined in a second table, but it refers to the primary key or a unique key in the first table.
In your example, there is no guarantee that VIN# is unique in VEHICLEREPORT. Below are your options
VIN# is guaranteed to be unique in VEHICLEREPORT. In this case add a UNIQUE constraint on VIN# on the VEHICLEREPORT table. The error will go away.
VIN# is not unique in VEHICLEREPORT (doesn't seem likely). If this is the case, then likely there is a flaw in the design of your BILLING table as it could likely point to more than one row in VEHICLEREPORT. You should consider adding DeptID column to BILLING and creating a composite foreign key.
Also if VIN# is unique (case 1 above), you should think of why DeptID is present in the PK. Maybe the right fix at the end is to drop DeptID from the primary key.
I know that this question has been already answered a million of times, but I couldn't find any solution. Well I have these three tables on postgres sql.
CREATE TABLE user_account (
id SERIAL not null,
firstName VARCHAR(60) not null,
lastName VARCHAR(60) not null,
password VARCHAR(150) not null,
email VARCHAR(40) not null UNIQUE,
isVolunteer BOOLEAN,
complete BOOLEAN,
CONSTRAINT pk_user PRIMARY KEY (id));
CREATE TABLE incident (
id SERIAL not null,
patientId INTEGER not null,
incidentTime VARCHAR(10) not null,
latitude NUMERIC not null,
longitude NUMERIC not null,
city VARCHAR(60) not null,
state VARCHAR(60),
country VARCHAR(60),
complete BOOLEAN,
CONSTRAINT pk_incident PRIMARY KEY (id, patientId),
CONSTRAINT fk_incident FOREIGN KEY (patientId)
REFERENCES user_account (id) MATCH SIMPLE
ON UPDATE CASCADE ON DELETE CASCADE);
CREATE TABLE incident_has_volunteer (
incidentId INTEGER not null,
volunteerId INTEGER not null,
incidentTime VARCHAR(10) not null,
complete BOOLEAN,
CONSTRAINT pk_incident_has_volunteer PRIMARY KEY (incidentId, volunteerId),
CONSTRAINT fk_volunteer FOREIGN KEY (volunteerId)
REFERENCES user_account (id) MATCH SIMPLE
ON UPDATE CASCADE ON DELETE CASCADE,
CONSTRAINT fk_incident FOREIGN KEY (incidentId)
REFERENCES incident (id) MATCH SIMPLE
ON UPDATE CASCADE ON DELETE CASCADE);
When I try to create the table incident_has_volunteer it throws the error there is no unique constraint matching given keys for referenced table "incident".
I tried to add on the third table and the patientId as a foreign key from table incident table but with no luck. I can't understand why it throws this error even if I have already set the primary keys on the incident table.
I'm not an expert in postgres, but I believe that the problem is while fk_incident is referencing incident.id, incident's primary key is made of id + patientId. Since incident.id is guaranteed to be unique only in combination with patientId, there's no way to ensure referential integrity.
I believe that if you add a unique constraint to incident.id (I'm assuming that it would be unique), your foreign key will be legal.
Very simply - one table of primary key acts as a foreign key for another table, so you must ensure that both key is referenced or not.
Simply you will not assign foreign key to the column of another table which does not have primary key. this is called as RDBMS.
Thanks
I have two tables:
Article
Subscription
In the Article table I have two columns that make up the primary key: id, sl. In the Subscription table I have a foreign key 'idsl`.
I use this constraint :
constraint FK_idsl
foreign key (idsl) references CSS_SubscriptionGroup(id, sl)
But when I run the query, I getting this error:
Number of referencing columns in foreign key differs from number of referenced columns, table X
In Article Table I have two fields that are the primary key: id,sl. In the Subscription Table I have a foreign key 'idsl`
This design is broken - it is apparent that the composite primary key in Article(id, sl) has been mangled into a single compound foreign key in table Subscription. This isn't a good idea.
Instead, you will need to change the design of table Subscription to include separate columns for both id and sl, of the same type as the Article Table, and then create a composite foreign key consisting of both columns, referencing Article in the same order as the primary key, e.g:
CREATE TABLE Article
(
id INT NOT NULL,
sl VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL,
-- Other Columns
CONSTRAINT PK_Article PRIMARY KEY(id, sl) -- composite primary key
);
CREATE TABLE Subscription
(
-- Other columns
id INT NOT NULL, -- Same type as Article.id
sl VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL, -- Same type as Article.sl
CONSTRAINT FK_Subscription_Article FOREIGN KEY(id, sl)
REFERENCES Article(id, sl) -- Same order as Article PK
);
Edit
One thing to consider here is that by convention a column named table.id or table.tableid should be unique, and is the primary key for the table. However, since table Article requires an additional column sl in the primary key, it implies that id isn't unique.
correct syntax for relation:
CONSTRAINT FK_OtherTable_ParentTable
FOREIGN KEY(OrderId, CompanyId) REFERENCES dbo.ParentTable(OrderId, CompanyId)
You must try like this:
constraint FK_idsl foreign key (id,sl) references CSS_SubscriptionGroup(id,sl)
Is it possible to have a table's foreign key be part of another table's composite primary key?
For example, if I have two tables, one contains information on all active projects of different users and another containing information on what equipment is being used by the projects:
Project Table:
Composite Primary Keys: UserId, ProjectId (neither are unique by themselves)
Equipment Table:
Composite Primary Keys: UserId, ProjectId, EquipmentId (neither are unique by themselves)
Now is it possible to set the ProjectId in the equipment table to be a foreign key from the project table? When I try, I get an error saying that the column in Project Table do not match an existing primary key or unique constraint?
No.
When you create a foreign key, the key that you "point to" in the other table must be a UNIQUE or PRIMARY KEY constraint. You cannot establish a foreign key that points to a column that allow duplicate values. It would be very hard to imagine how the data should "act" if you update one of the duplicate values in the other table (for instance).
To do what you want you must establish a Projects table in which ProjectID is UNIQUE or a PRIMARY KEY and then point foreign keys in both the other tables to that table.
Parenthetically, you use the term "Primary Keys" to describe the columns in each table that make up the primary key. In fact, each table can have one and only one primary key. That key can be composed of one or more columns, but the key itself is still referred to in the singular. This is an important difference when using the primary key to optimize searches.
It do not know if that's a good design practice but for sure it is possible to have a composite foreign key of one table that is the part of the composite primary key of other table.
Say we have a table test1 having a composite primary key (A, B)
Now we can have a table say test2 having primary key (P, Q, R) where in (P,Q) of test2 referencing (A,B) of test2.
I ran the following script in the MySql database and it works just fine.
CREATE TABLE `test1` (
`A` INT NOT NULL,
`B` VARCHAR(2) NOT NULL,
`C` DATETIME NULL,
`D` VARCHAR(45) NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`A`, `B`));
CREATE TABLE `test2` (
`P` INT NOT NULL,
`Q` VARCHAR(2) NOT NULL,
`R` INT NOT NULL,
`S` DATETIME NULL,
`T` VARCHAR(8) NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (`P`, `Q`, `R`),
INDEX `PQ_idx` (`P`,`Q` ASC),
CONSTRAINT `PQ`
FOREIGN KEY (`P`, `Q`)
REFERENCES `test1` (`A`,`B`)
ON DELETE CASCADE
ON UPDATE CASCADE);
In the above mentioned case, the database is expecting the combination of (A,B) to be unique and it is, being a primary key in test1 table.
But if you try to do something like following, the script would fail. The database would not let you create the test2 table.
CREATE TABLE `test2` (
`P` INT NOT NULL,
`Q` VARCHAR(2) NULL,
`R` DATETIME NULL,
`S` VARCHAR(8) NULL,
`T` VARCHAR(45) NULL,
INDEX `P_idx` (`P` ASC),
INDEX `Q_idx` (`Q` ASC),
CONSTRAINT `P`
FOREIGN KEY (`P`)
REFERENCES `test1` (`A`)
ON DELETE CASCADE
ON UPDATE CASCADE,
CONSTRAINT `Q`
FOREIGN KEY (`Q`)
REFERENCES `test1` (`B`)
ON DELETE CASCADE
ON UPDATE CASCADE);
In the above mentioned case database would expect the column A to be unique individually and the same follows for column B. It does not matter if combination of (A,B) is unique.
#Larry Lustig
The foreign key can be part of primary key in the other table.
source: Dependent relationship
Check relationship between tables: Zdarzenie(Event) and TypZdarzenia (type of event)