I want to create table with composite key, combinations of which must be unique.
For example,
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[TEST3](
[field1][int] NOT NULL,
[field2][int] NOT NULL
PRIMARY KEY (field1,field2)
)
GO
rows:
field1 field2
----------------
1 2
2 1
How to prevent such behavior? I need to have an error when user inserts row (2,1) to the table which already has row (1,2)
You may be able to do that using a user-defined type, but IMHO this sounds like a bad design and possibly an XY problem.
If you are trying to create a many-to-many table (e.g. a table for mutual friends) I would recommend instead using a check constraint to always make sure field1 is strictly less than field2.
You can even take it a step further and require the use of a stored procedure to insert rows, or create an INSTEAD OF INSERT trigger. This would put the row in the right order for you, this way you don't have to rely on the front end knowing which order the columns should be in.
Some insert ( and update ) trigger would be possible solution, i.e.
create trigger prevent
on TEST3
for insert
as
if (select count(1)
from TEST3, inserted
where TEST3.field1=inserted.field2 and TEST3.field2=inserted.field1) > 0
/* Cancel the insert and print a message.*/
begin
rollback transaction
print "Failed."
end
/* Otherwise, allow it. */
else
print "Added!"
Related
I have the following problem, I want to have Composite Primary Key like:
PRIMARY KEY (`base`, `id`);
for which when I insert a base the id to be auto-incremented based on the previous id for the same base
Example:
base id
A 1
A 2
B 1
C 1
Is there a way when I say:
INSERT INTO table(base) VALUES ('A')
to insert a new record with id 3 because that is the next id for base 'A'?
The resulting table should be:
base id
A 1
A 2
B 1
C 1
A 3
Is it possible to do it on the DB exactly since if done programmatically it could cause racing conditions.
EDIT
The base currently represents a company, the id represents invoice number. There should be auto-incrementing invoice numbers for each company but there could be cases where two companies have invoices with the same number. Users logged with a company should be able to sort, filter and search by those invoice numbers.
Ever since someone posted a similar question, I've been pondering this. The first problem is that DBs don't provide "partitionable" sequences (that would restart/remember based on different keys). The second is that the SEQUENCE objects that are provided are geared around fast access, and can't be rolled back (ie, you will get gaps). This essentially this rules out using a built-in utility... meaning we have to roll our own.
The first thing we're going to need is a table to store our sequence numbers. This can be fairly simple:
CREATE TABLE Invoice_Sequence (base CHAR(1) PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED,
invoiceNumber INTEGER);
In reality the base column should be a foreign-key reference to whatever table/id defines the business(es)/entities you're issuing invoices for. In this table, you want entries to be unique per issued-entity.
Next, you want a stored proc that will take a key (base) and spit out the next number in the sequence (invoiceNumber). The set of keys necessary will vary (ie, some invoice numbers must contain the year or full date of issue), but the base form for this situation is as follows:
CREATE PROCEDURE Next_Invoice_Number #baseKey CHAR(1),
#invoiceNumber INTEGER OUTPUT
AS MERGE INTO Invoice_Sequence Stored
USING (VALUES (#baseKey)) Incoming(base)
ON Incoming.base = Stored.base
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET Stored.invoiceNumber = Stored.invoiceNumber + 1
WHEN NOT MATCHED BY TARGET THEN INSERT (base) VALUES(#baseKey)
OUTPUT INSERTED.invoiceNumber ;;
Note that:
You must run this in a serialized transaction
The transaction must be the same one that's inserting into the destination (invoice) table.
That's right, you'll still get blocking per-business when issuing invoice numbers. You can't avoid this if invoice numbers must be sequential, with no gaps - until the row is actually committed, it might be rolled back, meaning that the invoice number wouldn't have been issued.
Now, since you don't want to have to remember to call the procedure for the entry, wrap it up in a trigger:
CREATE TRIGGER Populate_Invoice_Number ON Invoice INSTEAD OF INSERT
AS
DECLARE #invoiceNumber INTEGER
BEGIN
EXEC Next_Invoice_Number Inserted.base, #invoiceNumber OUTPUT
INSERT INTO Invoice (base, invoiceNumber)
VALUES (Inserted.base, #invoiceNumber)
END
(obviously, you have more columns, including others that should be auto-populated - you'll need to fill them in)
...which you can then use by simply saying:
INSERT INTO Invoice (base) VALUES('A');
So what have we done? Mostly, all this work was about shrinking the number of rows locked by a transaction. Until this INSERT is committed, there are only two rows locked:
The row in Invoice_Sequence maintaining the sequence number
The row in Invoice for the new invoice.
All other rows for a particular base are free - they can be updated or queried at will (deleting information out of this kind of system tends to make accountants nervous). You probably need to decide what should happen when queries would normally include the pending invoice...
you can use the trigger for before insert and assign the next value by taking the max(id) with "base" filter which is "A" in this case.
That will give you the max(id) value as 2 and than increment it by max(id)+1. now push the new value to the "id" field. before insert.
I think this may help you
MSSQL Triggers: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-in/library/ms189799.aspx
Test Table
CREATE TABLE MyTable
( base CHAR(1),
id INT
)
GO
Trigger Definition
CREATE TRIGGER dbo.tr_Populate_ID
ON dbo.MyTable
INSTEAD OF INSERT
AS
BEGIN
SET NOCOUNT ON;
INSERT INTO MyTable (base,id)
SELECT i.base, ISNULL(MAX(mt.id),0) +1 AS NextValue
FROM inserted i left join MyTable mt
on i.base = mt.base
GROUP BY i.base
END
Test
Execute the following statement multiple times and you will see the next values available in that group will be assigned to ID.
INSERT INTO MyTable VALUES
('A'),
('B'),
('C')
GO
SELECT * FROM MyTable
GO
I have a table, something like:
create table state {foo int not null, bar int not null, baz varchar(32)};
create unique index on state(foo,bar);
I'd like to lock for a unique record in this table. However, if there's no existing record I'd like to prevent anyone else from inserting a record, but without inserting myself.
I'd use "FOR UPDATE WITH RS USE AND KEEP EXCLUSIVE LOCKS" but that only seems to work if the record exists.
A) You can let DB2 create every ID number. Let's say you have defined your Customer table
CREATE TABLE Customers
( CustomerID Int NOT NULL
GENERATED ALWAYS AS IDENTITY
PRIMARY KEY
, Name Varchar(50)
, Billing_Type Char(1)
, Balance Dec(9,2) NOT NULL DEFAULT
);
Insert rows without specifying the CustomerID, since DB2 will always produce the value for you.
INSERT INTO Customers
(Name, Billing_Type)
VALUES
(:cname, :billtype);
If you need to know what the last value assigned in your session was, you can then use the IDENTITY_VAL_LOCAL() function.
B) In my environment, I generally specify GENERATED BY DEFAULT. This is in part due to the nature of our principle programming language, ILE RPG-IV, where developers have traditionally to allowed the compiler to use the entire record definition. This leads me to I can tell everyone to use a sequence to generate ID values for a given table or set of tables.
You can grant select to only you, but if there are others with secadm or other privileges, they could insert.
You can do something with a trigger, something like check the current session, and if the user is your user, then it inserts the row.
if (SESSION_USER <> 'Alex) then
rollback -- or generate an exception
end if;
It seems that you also want to keep just one row, then, you can control that also in a trigger:
select count(0) into value from state
if (value > 1) then
rollback -- or generate an exception
end if;
In a database application, I want to insert, update and delete records in a table of database.
Table is as below:
In this table, Ga1_ID is Primary Key.
Suppose, I insert 5 records as show currently.
In second attempt, if I want to insert 5 other records and if any of these new records contains a primary key attribute which is already present in table it show error. Its fine.
But, when I insert new 5 records... how I can verify these new records's primary key value is not present. I mean, how to match or calculate the already present primary key attributes and then insert new records.
What is the best approach to manage this sort of situation ?
use following query in dataadapter:
da=new SqlDataAdapter("select Ga1_ID from table where Ga1_ID=#pkVal",conn);
DataSet=new DataSet();
da.fill(ds);
//pass parameter for #pkVal
da.SelectCommand.Parameters(1).Value = pkValue;
if(ds.Tables[0].Rows.Count>0) //If number of rows >0 then record exists
BEGIN
messagebox.show("Primary key present");
END
Hope its helpful.
Do not check existing records in advance, i.e. do not SELECT and then INSERT. A better (and pretty common) approach is to try to INSERT and handle exceptions, in particular, catch a primary key violation if any and handle it.
Do the insert in a try/catch block, with different handling in case of a primary key violation exception and other sql exception types.
If there was no exception, then job's done, record was inserted.
If you caught a primary key violation exception, then handle it appropriately (your post does not specify what you want to do in this case, and it's completely up to you)
If you want to perform 5 inserts at once and want to make sure they all succeed or else roll back if any of them failed, then do the inserts within a transaction.
you can do a lookup first before inserting.
IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM tableName WHERE GA1_id=#newId)
BEGIN
UPDATE tableName SET Ga1_docid = #newdocID, GA1_fieldNAme = #newName, Ga1_fieldValue = #newVal where GA1_id=#newId
END
ELSE
BEGIN
INSERT INTO tableName(GA1_ID, Ga1_docid, GA1_fieldNAme Ga1_fieldValue) VALUES (value1,val2,value3,value4)
END
If you're using SQL Server 2012, use a sequence object - CREATE SEQUENCE.
This way you can get the next value using NEXT VALUE FOR.
With an older SQL Server version, you need to create the primary key field as an IDENTITY field and use the SCOPE_IDENTITY function to get the last identity value and then increment it manually.
Normally, you would like to have a surrogate key wich is generally an identity column that will automatically increment when you are inserting rows so that you don't have to care about knowing which id already exists.
However, if you have to manually insert the id there's a few alternatives for that and knowing wich SQL database you are using would help, but in most SQL implementations, you should be able to do something like:
IF NOT EXISTS
IF NOT EXISTS(
SELECT 1
FROM your_table
WHERE Ga1_ID = 1
)
INSERT INTO ...
SELECT WHERE NOT EXISTS
INSERT INTO your_table (col_1, col_2)
SELECT col_1, col_2
FROM (
SELECT 1 AS col_1, 2 AS col_2
UNION ALL
SELECT 3, 4
) q
WHERE NOT EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM your_table
WHERE col_1 = q.col_1
)
For MS SQL Server, you can also look at the MERGE statement and for MySQL, you can use the INSERT IGNORE statement.
I would like to add a BOOLEAN column to a MySQL table which will be named is_default. In this column, only one record can have is_default set to true.
How can I add this constraint to my column with MySQL?
Thanks!
UPDATE
If it is not a constraint that I should add. How are we dealing with this type of problem on DBs?
I think this is not the best way to model the situation of a single default value.
Instead, I would leave the IsDefault column out and create a separate table with one row and only the column(s) that make(s) up the primary key of your main table. In this table you place the PK value(s) that identify the default record.
This results in considerably less storage and avoids the update issue of temporarily not having a default value (or, alternatively, temporarily having two default values) when you update.
You have numerous options for ensuring that there is one-and-only-one row in the default table.
You can't have such a constraint in MySQL.
However if instead of TRUE and FALSE you use the values TRUE and NULL then it will work because a UNIQUE column can have multiple NULL values. Note that this doesn't apply to all databases, but it will work in MySQL.
CREATE TABLE table1(b BOOLEAN UNIQUE);
INSERT INTO table1 (b) VALUES (TRUE); // Succeeds
INSERT INTO table1 (b) VALUES (TRUE); // Fails: duplicate entry '1' for key 'b'
INSERT INTO table1 (b) VALUES (FALSE); // Succeeds
INSERT INTO table1 (b) VALUES (FALSE); // Fails: duplicate entry '0' for key 'b'
INSERT INTO table1 (b) VALUES (NULL); // Succeeds
INSERT INTO table1 (b) VALUES (NULL); // Succeeds!
How are we dealing with this type of problem on DBs?
In some DBMS you can create a partial index.
In PostgreSQL this would look like this:
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX only_one_true
ON the_table (is_default)
WHERE is_default
SQL Server 2008 has a very similar syntax.
On Oracle it's a bit more complicated but doable as well:
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX only_one_true
ON the_table (CASE
WHEN is_default = 1 THEN 1
ELSE null
END)
The Oracle solution might work on any DBMS that supports expression for an index definition.
Check out triggers. They were introduced in version 5.0.2, I believe. You want a "before insert" trigger. If there is already a row with is_default=true, raise an error. I don't know what problems you might with concurrency and so on, but hopefully this is enough to you started.
I don't think it is a problem with the database as much as it is a problem with your model. It is hard for me to come up with a good example of how to solve it since you haven't mentioned what type of data you are representing, but a XXXType or XXXConfiguration table would be able to hold a defaultXXXId column.
Think of it like this: Should the color blue know that it is default or should something else know that the color blue is default when used in a given context?
Changing the way you model your data is often a much better approach to cross-database compatibility than trying to use specific features of one database flavor to represent data in a way that is not necessarily natural to your problem domain if you think about it.
Check constraints are not supported in MySQL, this is the solution using trigger:
create table if not exists myTable (
id int not null auto_increment primary key,
is_default bit not null
) engine=innodb;
select 'create trigger tbi_myTable';
drop trigger if exists tbi_myTable;
delimiter //
create trigger tbi_myTable
before insert on myTable
for each row
begin
if (select count(1) from myTable where is_default=true) > 0 && NEW.is_default then
-- Signal is only in 5.6 and above use another way to raise an error: if less than 5.6
SIGNAL SQLSTATE '50000' SET MESSAGE_TEXT = 'Cannot insert into myTable only one row with is_default true is allowed!';
end if;
END //
delimiter ;
insert into myTable (is_default) values (false);
insert into myTable (is_default) values (true);
insert into myTable (is_default) values (false);
insert into myTable (is_default) values (false);
-- This will generate an error
insert into myTable (is_default) values (true);
insert into myTable (is_default) values (false);
select * from myTable;
-- will give
/*
id is_default
1 false
2 true
3 false
4 false
*/
I have an web application that creates printable forms, these forms have a unique number on them, the problem is I have 2 forms that separate numbers need to be created for them.
ie)
Form1- Numbered 2000000-2999999
Form2- Numbered 3000000-3999999
dbo.test2 - is my form information table
Tsel - is my autoinc table for the 3000000 series numbers
Tadv - is my autoinc table for the 2000000 series numbers
What I have done is create 2 tables with just autoinc row (one for 2000000 series numbers and one for 3000000 series numbers), I then created a trigger to add a record to the coresponding table, read back the autoinc number and add it to my table that stores the form information including the just created autoinc number for the right series of forms.
Although it does work, I'm concerned that the numbers will get messed up under load.
I'm not sure the ##IDENTITY will always return the right value when many people are using the system. (I cannot have duplicates and I need to use the numbering form show above.
See code below.
**** TRIGGER ****
CREATE TRIGGER MAKEANID2 ON dbo.test2
AFTER INSERT
AS
SET NOCOUNT ON
declare #someid int
declare #someid2 int
declare #startfrom int
declare #test1 varchar(10)
select #someid=##IDENTITY
select #test1 = (Select name1 from test2 where sysid = #someid )
if #test1 = 'select'
begin
insert into Tsel Default values
select #someid2 = ##IDENTITY
end
if #test1 = 'adv'
begin
insert into Tadv Default values
select #someid2 = ##IDENTITY
end
update test2
set name2=(#someid2) where sysid = #someid
SET NOCOUNT OFF
The best way to keep the two IDs in sync is to create a persisted Computed Column based on the actual identity column. Where Col1 is the identity column and Col2 is the persisted computed column that is the result of some formula based on Col1. You can then even Create Indexes on Computed Columns.
test this out:
CREATE TABLE YourTable
(Col1 int not null identity(2000000,1)
,Col2 AS (Col1-2000000+3000000) PERSISTED
,Col3 varchar(5)
)
GO
insert into YourTable (col3) values ('a')
insert into YourTable (col3) SELECT 'b' UNION SELECT 'c'
SELECT * FROM YourTable
OUTPUT:
Col1 Col2 Col3
----------- ----------- -----
2000000 3000000 a
2000001 3000001 b
2000002 3000002 c
(3 row(s) affected)
EDIT After OPs comments, I'm still not 100% sure what you are after.
I never used SQL Server 2000 (we skipped that version), and I don't really want to look up how to do everything in that version, it is so limited without the OUTPUT clause and ROW_NUMBER(), CTEs, etc.
I can think of three methods to do:
1) You could just create a sequence table, where you have 2 rows one for A and one for B, each time you need to insert one, look up, increment, and save the value of the type of seq you need and then insert with that value. for example if you are inserting a type "A" row, do this:
INSERT INTO test2
(col1, col2, col3,...)
SELECT
ISNULL(MAX(NextSeq),0)+1, col2, col3,...
FROM YourSequenceTable WITH (UPDLOCK, HOLDLOCK)
WHERE SequenceType='A'
UPDATE YourSequenceTable
SET NextSeq=ISNULL(NextSeq,0)+1
WHERE SequenceType='A'
2) change your table structure to just save the data in Tsel or Tadv and have a trigger insert into a third common table table where you can have your additional "common" identity. common table would be like
CommonTable
ID int not null indentity(1,1) primary key
TselID int null FK to Tsel.PK
TadvID int null FK to Tadv.PK
3) if you need a single table, try this, which is a real hack. Change your Tsel and Tadv tables to contain all the necessary columns and from the application INSERT INTO Tsel when the value is select and have a trigger grab that identity value and then INSERT that into test2, then remove the data from tsel. Then, from the application when the value is adv just INSERT INTO Tadv an have a trigger on that table insert the data into test2, and remove the data from Tadv. You need to have all data columns in Tsel and Tadv so the trigger can copy the values to test2, but the trigger will remove the rows from there (the identity will be sequential even if the original rows are removed).
your Tsel trigger would look like:
CREATE Trigger MAKEANID2_Tsel ON dbo.Tsel
AFTER INSERT
AS
--copy data from Tsel into test2., test2 can still have its own identity value
INSERT INTO test2
(PK, col1, col2, col3,...)
SELECT
col0, col1, col2, col3,....
FROM INSERTED
--remove rows from Tsel, which were just copied and not needed anymore.
DELETE Tsel
WHERE PK IN (SELECT PK FROM INSERTED)
GO
YOu are right to worry about ##identity, it is not a recommended peice of code, if somone else adds a differnet trigger that inserets an identity and that one triggers first, that is the value you will get.
But you have much bigger problems. Your trigger is deisgned to work on only one record ata time. This is a very very very bad thing to do with a trigger. Triggers operate on sets of data and must ALWAYS even if you think therer will never be more than one record inserted ata time) be set up to handle sets of data not one record. Further, you don;t need to ask for the identity, you have the identities of all records inserted inteh batch in a psuedotable availlble in triggers called inserted.
Now reading one of your comments, you say you can't have any missing values at all. Inthat case you cannot under any circustance use an identity column as it will have gaps if any transaction is rolled back. You will have to write your own process to create the numbers based onteh last number and look out for race conditions.