I Not able to add foreign key to tbl1 referencing tbl2 (Desc), here are the two tables :
please notice Tbl1 includes all values,tbl2 Has more values that doesn't necessarily exists in tbl1
Error(Msg 1776): There are no primary or candidate keys in the referenced table 'tbl2' that match the referencing column list in the foreign key 'fk_desc'.
tbl1:
alter table tbl1 add constraint pk_desc primary key (desc)
The Error:**alter table tbl1 add constraint fk_desc foreign key (desc)
references tbl2(desc)**
Desc
Astrogator
Geologist
Technician
tbl2:
alter table tbl2 add constraint pk_canid_desc primary
key(id,desc)
ID
Desc
1001
Astrogator
1001
Geologist
1001
Technician
2003
Biochemist
thank you for the help,
you cant make Desc that at table tbl2 as a FK while it contains values not exists at the table tbl1
Adding a foreign key is different depending on the flavor of SQL your using. For sql server you would bring up the parent db in SSMS using table design. Select Foreign key relationships and add a new relationship. From there select other table and column which has foreign key. Keep in mind that there needs to exist a foreign key for each Primary record or you will get an error.
I need to create a table having a field, which is a foreign key referencing to another query rather than existing table. E.g. the following statement is correct:
CREATE TABLE T1 (ID1 varchar(255) references Types)
but this one throws a syntax error:
CREATE TABLE T2 (ID2 varchar(255) references SELECT ID FROM BaseTypes UNION SELECT ID FROM Types)
I cannot figure out how I can achieve my goal. In the case it’s needed to introduce a temporary table, how can I force this table being updated each time when tables BaseTypes and Types are changed?
I am using Firebird DB and IBExpert management tool.
A foreign key constraint (references) can only reference a table (or more specifically columns in the primary or unique key of a table). You can't use it to reference a select.
If you want to do that, you need to use a CHECK constraint, but that constraint would only be checked on insert and updates: it wouldn't prevent other changes (eg to the tables in your select) from making the constraint invalid while the data is at rest. This means that at insert time the value could meet the constraint, but the constraint could - unnoticed! - become invalid. You would only notice this when updating the row.
An example of the CHECK-constraint could be:
CREATE TABLE T2 (
ID2 varchar(255) check (exists(
SELECT ID FROM BaseTypes WHERE BaseTypes.ID = ID2
UNION
SELECT ID FROM Types WHERE Types.ID = ID2))
)
For a working example, see this fiddle.
Alternatively, if your goal is to 'unite' two tables, define a 'super'-table that contains the primary keys of both tables, and reference that table from the foreign key constraint. You could populate and update (eg insert and delete) this table using triggers. Or you could use a single table, and replace the existing views with an updatable view (if this is possible depends on the exact data, eg IDs shouldn't overlap).
This is more complex, but would give you the benefit that the foreign key is also enforced 'at rest'.
I know that this question belongs to the very early stages of the database theory, but I have not encountered such a problem since several months. If someone has a database with some tables associated together as "chain" with foreign keys and they want to delete a record from a table which has some "dependent" tables, what obstacles arise? In particular, in a database with tables: Person, Profile, Preference, Filter exist the associations as Person.id is foreign key in Profile and Profile.id is foreign key in Preference and Filter.id is foreign key in Preference, so as that all the associationsenter code here are OneToMany. Is it possible to delete a Person with a simple query:
Delete from Person p where p.id= 34;
If no, how should look like the query in order to perform the delete successfully?
If the database in the application is managed by hibernate, what constraints (annotations) should I apply to the associated fields of each entity, so as to be able with the above simple query to perform the delete?
FOR SQL VERSION
Look at the Screenshot. you can use the Insert Update Specificaiton Rules. as it has Delete and Update Rules. you can set either of these values.
Foreign key constraints may be created by referencing a primary or unique key. Foreign key constraints ensure the relational integrity of data in associated tables. A foreign key value may be NULL and indicates a particular record has no parent record. But if a value exists, then it is bound to have an associated value in a parent table. When applying update or delete operations on parent tables there may be different requirements about the effect on associated values in child tables. There are four available options in SQL Server 2005 and 2008 as follows:
No Action
Cascade
SET NULL
SET Default
Use this article for Refrence.
http://www.mssqltips.com/sqlservertip/2365/sql-server-foreign-key-update-and-delete-rules/
ORACLE VERSION
you can use one of below.
alter table sample1
add foreign key (col1)
references
sample (col2)
on delete no action;
alter table sample1
add foreign key (col1)
references
sample (col2)
on delete restrict;
alter table sample1
add foreign key (col1)
references sample (col2)
on delete cascade;
for refrance.
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14200/clauses002.htm
answer is no if there is foreign key constraint then you have to delete leaf node table data first
that is first delete from Preference table
then from Profile and Filter Table
then delete record from Person table
This is the generic concept that you apply anywhere
I need to make some changes to a SQL Server 2008 database.
This requires the creation of a new table, and inserting a foreign key in the new table that references the Primary key of an already existing table. So I want to set up a relationship between my new tblTwo, which references the primary key of tblOne.
However when I tried to do this (through SQL Server Management Studio) I got the following error:
The columns in table 'tblOne' do not
match an existing primary key or
UNIQUE constraint
I'm not really sure what this means, and I was wondering if there was any way around it?
It means that the primary key in tblOne hasn't been properly declared - you need to go to tblOne and add the PRIMARY KEY constraint back onto it.
If you're sure that tblOne does have a PRIMARY KEY constraint, then maybe there are multiple tblOne tables in your DB, belonging to different schemas, and your references clause in your FK constraint is picking the wrong one.
If there's a composite key (which your comment would indicate), then you have to include both columns in your foreign key reference also. Note that a table can't have multiple primary keys - but if it has a composite key, you'll see a key symbol next to each column that is part of the primary key.
If you have a composite key the order is important when creating a FK, and sometimes the order is not how it is displayed.
What I do is go to the Keys section of the table1 and select script primary key as create to clipboard and then create FK using the order as shown in script
I've had this situation that led me to this topic. Same error but another cause. Maybe it will help someone.
Table1
ColA (PK)
ColB (PK)
ColC
Table2
ID (PK)
ColA
COLB
When trying to create foreign key in Table2 I've choose values from combobox in reverse order
Table1.ColB = Table2.ColB
Table1.ColA = Table2.ColA
This was throwing me an error like in topic name. Creating FK keeping order of columns in Primary key table as they are, made error disappear.
Stupid, but.. :)
If you still get that error after you have followed all advice from the above answers and everything looks right.
One way to fix it is by Removing your Primary keys for both tables, Save, Refresh, and add them again.
Then try to add your relationship again.
This Error happened with me When I tried to add foreign key constraint starting from PrimaryKey Table
Simpy go to other table and and create this foreign key constraint from there (foreign key Table)
This issue caught me out, I was adding the relationship on the wrong table. So if you're trying to add a relationship in table A to table B, try adding the relationship in table B to table A.
That looks like you are trying to create a foreign key in tblTwo that does not match (or participate) with any primary key or unique index in tblOne.
Check this link on MSDN regarding it. Here you have another link with a practical case.
EDIT:
Answwering to your comment, I understand you mean there are 2 fields in the primary key (which makes it a composite). In SQL it is not possible to have 2 primary keys on the same table.
IMHO, a foreign key field should always refer to a single register in the referenced table (i.e. the whole primary key in your case). That means you need to put both fields of the tblOne primary key in tblTwo before creating the foreign key.
Anyway, I have investigated a bit over the Internet and it seems SQL Server 2008 (as some prior versions and other RDBMS) gives you the possibility to reference only part of the primary key as long as this part is a candidate key (Not Null and Unique) and you create an unique constraint on it.
I am not sure you can use that in your case, but check this link for more information on it.
I have found that the column names must match.
Example:
So if tblOne has id called categoryId a reference in tblTwo must also be called categoryId.
_tblname, primary key name, foreign key_
tblOne, "categoryId", none
tblTwo, "exampleId", "categoryId"
I noticed this when trying to create foreign key between 2 tables that both had the column name "id" as primary key.
If nothing helps, then this could be the reason:
Considering this case:
Table A:
Column 1 (Primary Key)
Column 2 (Primary Key)
Column 3
Column 4
Table B:
Column a (Primary Key)
Column b
Column c
when you are defining a dependency B to A, then you are forced to respect the order in which the primaries are defined.
That's mean your dependency should look like this:
Table A Table B
Column 1 Column b
Column 2 Column c
AND NOT:
Table A Table B
Column 2 Column c
Column 1 Column b
then this will lead to the error you are encountering.
I've found another way to get this error. This can also happen if you are trying to make a recursive foreign key (a foreign key to the primary key in the same table) in design view in SQL Management Studio. If you haven't yet saved the table with the primary key it will return this message. Simply save the table then it will allow you to create the foreign key.
If you have data in your tables this could be the issue.
In my case I had some data in the Account table that I loaded at 3 pm, and some data in Contact table that I loaded at 3:10 pm, so Contact table had some values that weren't in my Account table yet.
I ended up deleting these values from the contact table and then managed to add a key without any problems.
Kindly also see that there are no existing data inside the table where the primary key is defined while setting the foreign key with another table column.
this was the cause of the error in my case.
I had to take backup empty the table set the relationship and then upload the data back.
sharing my experience
Was using ms sql smss
I'm trying to create a foreign key in a SQL Compact database but I keep getting the error message "A foreign key value cannot be inserted because a corresponding primary key value does not exist."
TableA is referencing TableB already and I'm trying to create a reference from TableC using the same primary key in TableB. Since I already have a reference to TableB there has to be a valid primary key in that table.
I've double checked and tripple checked the keys and datatypes of all field so I'm stumped.
I've tried to use both the gui option in Visual Studio 2008 and using a SQL command.
This is because of "bad data" you have in the tables. Check if you have all corresponding values in the primary table.
DBMS checks the referential integrity for ensuring the "correctness" of data within database.
example:
If you have column StatusId in the Table1 with the values from 1 to 10 and column StatusId in the Table2 with the values from 1 to 11 you cannot use Table1 as a parent because there is no corresponding value (11) you have already in Table2.