I have a sql statement and I am trying to add a unique constraint that prevents an duplicate entry from being entered twice in the table. Can anyone help me out with my code if I am writing it correctly?
CREATE TABLE GroupMembership
(GroupID INT REFERENCES dbo.Groups (GroupID),
IndividualID INT NOT NULL REFERENCES dbo.Individuals (IndividualID) PRIMARY KEY(GroupID, IndividualID),
CONSTRAINT AK_IndividualID UNIQUE IndividualID);
I tried to test it via SQL server but it is giving me an error.
You are missing a couple of things:
A comma after the IndividualId column specification (as the primary key does not relate to it - it's a multiple-column constraint)
Brackets around the IndividualId column in the unique constraint specification.
So:
CREATE TABLE GroupMembership
(GroupID INT REFERENCES dbo.Groups (GroupID),
IndividualID INT NOT NULL REFERENCES dbo.Individuals (IndividualID),
PRIMARY KEY(GroupID, IndividualID),
CONSTRAINT AK_IndividualID UNIQUE (IndividualID)
);
Related
If I am manually inserting hundreds of rows, how should I efficiently write the insert statements so that each insert will not run only if both foreign keys are already present together in a record in that database?
Create a constraint on the columns, here is a great reference starting point.
Here is an example of a FOREIGN KEY constraint, and for defining a FOREIGN KEY constraint on multiple columns, use the following SQL syntax:
MySQL / SQL Server / Oracle / MS Access:
CREATE TABLE Orders
(
O_Id int NOT NULL,
OrderNo int NOT NULL,
P_Id int,
PRIMARY KEY (O_Id),
CONSTRAINT fk_PerOrders FOREIGN KEY (P_Id)
REFERENCES Persons(P_Id)
)
You can add a unique constraint as described by #BrianAtkins and you can also use a MERGE statement instead of INSERT in order to avoid breaking the entire insert on a unique constraint violation.
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)
I have not seen any clear, concise examples of this anywhere online.
With an existing table, how do I add a foreign key which references this table? For example:
CREATE TABLE dbo.Projects(
ProjectsID INT IDENTITY(1,1) PRIMARY KEY,
Name varchar(50)
);
How would I write a command to add a foreign key which references the same table? Can I do this in a single SQL command?
I'll show you several equivalent ways of declaring such a foreign key constraint. (This answer is intentionally repetitive to help you recognise the simple patterns for declaring constraints.)
Example: This is what we would like to end up with:
Case 1: The column holding the foreign keys already exists, but the foreign key relationship has not been declared / is not enforced yet:
In that case, run this statement:
ALTER TABLE Employee
ADD FOREIGN KEY (ManagerId) REFERENCES Employee (Id);
Case 2: The table exists, but it does not yet have the foreign key column:
ALTER TABLE Employee
ADD ManagerId INT, -- add the column; everything else is the same as with case 1
FOREIGN KEY (ManagerId) REFERENCES Employee (Id);
or more succinctly:
ALTER TABLE Employee
ADD ManagerId INT REFERENCES Employee (Id);
Case 3: The table does not exist yet.
CREATE TABLE Employee -- create the table; everything else is the same as with case 1
(
Id INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
ManagerId INT
);
ALTER TABLE Employee
ADD FOREIGN KEY (ManagerId) REFERENCES Employee (Id);
or, declare the constraint inline, as part of the table creation:
CREATE TABLE Employee
(
Id INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
ManagerId INT,
FOREIGN KEY (ManagerId) REFERENCES Employee (Id)
);
or even more succinctly:
CREATE TABLE Employee
(
Id INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
ManagerId INT REFERENCES Employee (Id)
);
P.S. regarding constraint naming: Up until the previous revision of this answer, the more verbose SQL examples contained CONSTRAINT <ConstraintName> clauses for giving unique names to the foreign key constraints. After a comment by #ypercube I've decided to drop these clauses from the examples, for two reasons: Naming a constraint is an orthogonal issue to (i.e. independent from) putting the constraint in place. And having the naming out of the way allows us to focus on the the actual adding of the constraints.
In short, in order to name a constraint, precede any mention of e.g. PRIMARY KEY, REFERENCES, or FOREIGN KEY with CONSTRAINT <ConstraintName>. The way I name foreign key constraints is <TableName>_FK_<ColumnName>. I name primary key constraints in the same way, only with PK instead of FK. (Natural and other alternate keys would get the name prefix AK.)
You can add the column and constraint in one operation
ALTER TABLE dbo.Projects ADD
parentId INT NULL,
CONSTRAINT FK FOREIGN KEY(parentid) REFERENCES dbo.Projects
Optionally you could specify the PK column in brackets after the referenced table name but it is not needed here.
If the table already exists: Assuming you don't already have a column to store this data. If you do then skip this step.
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[project]
ADD [fkProjectsId] INT;
GO
ALTER TABLE [dbo].[projects]
ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Projects_ProjectsId] FOREIGN KEY ([fkProjectsId]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Projects] ([ProjectsID])
GO
I have the following error appearing:
INSERT INTO GroupMembers VALUES ('Goldfrat', 'Simon Palm')
*
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-02291: integrity constraint (SHAHA1.IAM_IS_GROUP_FK) violated - parent key
not found
The constraint in the GroupMembers table is:
CONSTRAINT iam_is_group_fk FOREIGN KEY(is_group) REFERENCES Members(group_name)
The Members Table looks like this:
CREATE TABLE Members (
group_name VARCHAR2(40),
CONSTRAINT g_id_pk PRIMARY KEY(group_name),
CONSTRAINT m_group_name_fk FOREIGN KEY(group_name) REFERENCES Artist(artistic_name));
All of the tables are created fine until it comes to creating the GroupMembers table. Anyone have any ideas? I've been scratching for quite a while.
The problem is that
CONSTRAINT iam_is_group_fk FOREIGN KEY(is_group) REFERENCES Members(group_name); references the table Members on the group_name field.
This means that the field is_group on the table GroupMembers must have an identical value on the table Members and group_name field.
In my opinion, this is bad practice.
First of all, you should have a primary key field on the table GroupMembers. You should not store the names of the group members in the table GroupMembers, but their corresponding id from the table Members.
Also, the table Members should look something like this:
CREATE TABLE Members (
member_id NUMBER PRIMARY KEY
member_name VARCHAR2(40),
CONSTRAINT g_id_pk PRIMARY KEY(member_id),
CONSTRAINT m_group_name_fk FOREIGN KEY(group_name) REFERENCES Artist(artistic_name));
Then on the table GroupMembers, I suppose you want to associate some members to their set of groups and back, so you should do something like this:
CREATE TABLE GroupMembers (
member_id NUMBER,
group_id NUMBER
)
CONSTRAINT iam_is_member_fk FOREIGN KEY(member_id) REFERENCES Members(member_id);
CONSTRAINT iam_is_member_fk FOREIGN KEY(group_id) REFERENCES Groups(group_id);
Supposing that you have a table Groups containing all the group details, with the primary key stored as number , and name group_id.
Always remember that each table must have a primary key. It is good practice for this key to be a number.
So by having member_id in Members, group_id in Groups, you can create a many-to-many relationship in GroupMembers. Also, put a unique index on this table so you don't have duplicates ( the same member associated with the same id several times ).
Look at this example linking users to roles. It is the same case:
error is
you have to use same column name which is defined in reference table
i.e
CONSTRAINT m_group_name_fk FOREIGN KEY(group_name) REFERENCES Artist(group_name)
That group_name should be define as primary key in Artist Table.
Order in which you are insert is the reason for the error.
Members(group_name) does not contain Goldfrat. If this is not true then it's not there in the table Artists.
Naive question with the answer "No" , I believe, but still would like to ask.
Table_parent
pk_parent_surrogate
parent_natural_unique_key
Table_child
pk_child_surrogate
child_natural_NOT_unique
Is that true that the only possible declarative relationship among main database vendors is
pk_parent_surrogate ----------< pk_child_surrogate
and we can't have declarative constraint or foreign key in other words for pair
parent_natural_unique_key -------< child_natural_NOT_unique
My answer here is based on my MS SQL knowledge - although I believe the same answer is correct for ANSI standards as well, i'm not 100% sure...
YES - you CAN do this as long as you've got a unique constraint on the column in your parent table that you want to use as the anchor column for the key.
You can create a FOREIGN KEY constraint as part
of the table definition when you create a table.
If a table already exists, you can add a
FOREIGN KEY constraint, provided that the
FOREIGN KEY constraint is linked to an existing
PRIMARY KEY constraints or UNIQUE constraint in
another, or the same, table. A table can contain
multiple FOREIGN KEY constraints.
And as an example of this sort of key...
use tempdb
CREATE TABLE parent(
pk int identity primary key,
candidate_key int unique not null)
CREATE TABLE child(
pk int identity primary key,
join_key int references parent(candidate_key))
See here for more information.
Try code like this:
create table testunique (id int identity(1,1) primary key, otherid int)
go
create unique index ixOther on testunique(otherid)
go
create table testFK (id int identity(1,1) primary key, someid int)
go
alter table testFK add constraint fkTest foreign key (someid) references testunique(otherid)
Rob