SQL Compact (CE) problem with creating foreign key - sql

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.

Related

SQL server 2012, combined primary key needs to be unique?

Hello i have a question i assume mainly about SQL server functionality. Im building a test database and i have stumbled a problem when i try to insert data into my tables.
picture 1 shows the error message i get when trying to add rows.
https://i.stack.imgur.com/GW3C2.png
Picture 2 shows all relations in the database
//i.stack.imgur.com/7BhHa.png
picture 3 shows the table i am currently trying to update
//i.stack.imgur.com/3JqtA.png
In the table i have a combined primary key ("SDat" and "Kurs") The error message i get implyes that primary key must be uniqe, but what dont understand is since i have a third column "Elev" which makes the row uniqe, why wont SQL server me insert this row to table? I have tried making the same database in Acess and it works so i assume problem is something in SQL server
Regards Robert
A Primary Key by definition means the value must be unique. So if you have a combined primary key on 2 fields, then that value on those 2 fields needs to be unique meaning it can only have 1 row. If you need to enforce unique values on the combination of 3 fields (SDat, Kurs, and Elev) then your PK needs to include all 3 fields.
If you really need to enforce a unique constraint across alot of fields in a table, I wouldn't use a PK to enforce that, but instead use a UNIQUE constraint.
ALTER TABLE tablename ADD CONSTRAINT constraintname UNIQUE (column1, ..., columnn)
Then you can create a different column for your Primary Key so that as you add columns and need to require those additional columns be unique, you don't have to edit your PK and rebuild your table.

How to update 2 columns in 2 tables that have foreign key

I know the question of how to update multiple tables in SQL has been asked before and the common answer seems to be do them separately in a transaction.
However, the 2 columns I need to update have a foreign key so cannot be updated separately.
e.g.
Table1.a is a foreign key to Table2.a
One of the entries in the tables is wrong, e.g. both columns are 'xxx' and should be 'yyy'
How do I update Table1.a and Table2.a to be 'yyy'?
I know I could temp remove the key and replace but surely there's another way.
Thanks
You can't do the update simultaneously, however you can force SQL to do the update. You need to make sure your foreign keys have the referential triggered action ON UPDATE CASCADE
e.g.
ALTER TABLE YourTable
ADD CONSTRAINT FK_YourForeignKey
FOREIGN KEY (YourForeignKeyColumn)
REFERENCES YourPrimaryTable (YourPrimaryKeyColumn) ON UPDATE CASCADE
Not being a fan of on update cascade, I would suggest a different route.
First you do not update the Parent table, you add a new record with the value you want (and the same data as the other record for all other fields). Then you have no difficulty updating the child tables to use this value instead of that value. Further you now have the ability to to do the work in batches to avoid locking the system up while the change promulgates through it. Once all the child tables have been updated, you can delete the original bad record.
my answer is based on the following link: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms174123%28v=SQL.90%29.aspx
You need to make sure that your table_constraint will be defined as ON UPDATE CASCADE
CREATE TABLE works_on1
(emp_no INTEGER NOT NULL,
project_no CHAR(4) NOT NULL,
job CHAR (15) NULL,
enter_date DATETIME NULL,
CONSTRAINT prim_works1 PRIMARY KEY(emp_no, project_no),
CONSTRAINT foreign1_works1 FOREIGN KEY(emp_no) REFERENCES employee(emp_no) ON DELETE CASCADE,
CONSTRAINT foreign2_works1 FOREIGN KEY(project_no) REFERENCES project(project_no) ON UPDATE CASCADE)
and then when you will change the value of your primary key
see the following quote:
For ON DELETE or ON UPDATE, if the CASCADE option is specified, the
row is updated in the referencing table if the corresponding
referenced row is updated in the parent table. If NO ACTION is
specified, SQL Server Compact Edition returns an error, and the update
action on the referenced row in the parent table is rolled back.
For example, you might have two tables, A and B, in a database. Table
A has a referential relationship with table B: the A.ItemID foreign
key references the B.ItemID primary key.
If an UPDATE statement is executed on a row in table B and an ON
UPDATE CASCADE action is specified for A.ItemID, SQL Server Compact
Edition checks for one or more dependent rows in table A. If any
exist, the dependent rows in table A are updated, as is the row
referenced in table B.
Alternatively, if NO ACTION is specified, SQL Server Compact Edition
returns an error and rolls back the update action on the referenced
row in table B when there is at least one row in table A that
references it.

SQL Server foreign key constraint - pair (same tuple)

Suppose these 2 tables:
tbl1
ID
name
fkID1
fkID2
tbl2
ID
pkID1
pkID2
Whenever data is inserted into tbl1, how can I ensure (fkID1, fkID2) exists as a row (tuple) in tbl2 in the form (pkID1, pkID2)?
I have no problem making a constraint so fkID1 must exist and that fkID2 must exist but I want to ensure they exist in the same row.
Either via SQL or instructions to create it via management studio would be great.
You can just comma delimit the columns you want to check. Just make sure they're in order.
alter table tbl1 with check
add constraint FK_tbl1_tbl2
foreign key (fkID1, fkID2)
references tbl2 (pkID1, pkID2)

SQL Server 2008: The columns in table do not match an existing primary key or unique constraint

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

Database table id-key Null value and referential integrity

I'm learning databases, using SQLce. Got some problems, with this error:
A foreign key value cannot be inserted because a corresponding primary key value does not exist.
How does the integrity and acceptance of data work when attempting to save a data row that does not have specified one foreign key. Isn't it possible to set it to NULL in some way, meaning it will not reference the other table? In case, how would I do that? (For an integer key field)
Also, what if you save a row with a valid foreign key that corresponds to an existing primary key in other table. But then decide to delete that entry in this other table. So the foreign key will no longer be valid. Will I be allowed to delete? How does it work? I would think it should then be simply reset to a null value.. But maybe it's not that simple?
What you need to do is insert your data starting from the parent down.
So if you have an orders table and an items table that refers to orders, you have to create the new order first before adding all the children to the list.
Many of the data access libraries that you can get (in C# there is Linq to SQL) which will try and abstract this problem.
If you need to delete data you actually have to go the other way, delete the items before you delete the parent order record.
Of course, this assumes you are enforcing the foreign key, it is possible to not enforce the key, which might be useful during a bulk delete.
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.
For example, if you have a column called some_id in TableA with values 1 through 10 and a column called some_id in TableB with values 1 through 11 then TableA has no corresponding value (11) for that which you have already in TableB.
You can make a foreign key nullable but I don't recommend it. There are too many problems and inconsistencies that can arise. Redesign your tables so that you don't need to populate the foreign key for values that don't exist. Usually you can do that by moving the column to a new table for example.