Search Results

Search found 19103 results on 765 pages for 'foreign key'.

Page 2/765 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Three level database - foreign keys

    - by poke
    I have a three level database with the following structure (simplified to only show the primary keys): Table A: a_id Table B: a_id, b_id Table C: a_id, b_id, c_id So possible values for table C would be something like this: a_id b_id c_id 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 ... I am now unsure, how foreign keys should be set; or if they should be set for the primary keys at all. My idea was to have a foreign key on table B B.a_id -> A.a_id, and two foreign key on C C.a_id -> A.a_id and ( C.a_id, C.b_id ) -> ( B.a_id, B.b_id ). Is that the way I should set up the foreign keys? Is the foreign key from C->A necessary? Or do I even need foreign keys at all given that all those columns are part of the primary keys? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MySQL whats wrong with my foreign keys?

    - by Skiy
    Hello, what is wrong with the two foreign keys which I have marked with comments? create database db; use db; create table Flug( Flugbez varchar(20), FDatum Date, Ziel varchar(20), Flugzeit int, Entfernung int, Primary Key (Flugbez, FDatum)); create table Flugzeugtyp( Typ varchar(20), Hersteller varchar(20), SitzAnzahl int, Reisegeschw int, primary key (Typ) ); create table flugzeug( Typ varchar(20), SerienNr int, AnschDatum Date, FlugStd int, primary key(Typ,SerienNr), foreign key(Typ) references Flugzeugtyp(Typ)); create table Abflug( Flugbez varchar(20), FDatum Date, Typ varchar(20), Seriennr int, Kaptaen varchar(20), Primary key(Flugbez,FDatum,Typ,SerienNr), Foreign key(Flugbez) references Flug(Flugbez), -- Foreign key(FDatum) references Flug(FDatum), Foreign key(Typ) references Flugzeugtyp(Typ) -- ,Foreign key(SerienNr) references Flugzeug(SerienNr) ); When I uncomment these, I get: ERROR 1005 (HY000): Can't create table 'db.abflug' (errno: 150)

    Read the article

  • How to assign the array key a value, when the key name is itself a variable

    - by Matrym
    How do I identify an item in a hash array if the key of the array is only known within a variable? For example: var key = "myKey"; var array = {myKey: 1, anotherKey: 2}; alert(array.key); Also, how would I assign a value to that key, having identified it with the variable? This is, of course, assuming that I must use the variable key to identify which item in the array to alert. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • mysql complex key or + auto increment key (guid)

    - by darko
    Hi, I have not very big db. I am using auto increment primary keys and in my case there is no problem with that. GUID is not necessary. I have a table containing this fields: from_destination to_testination shipper quantity Where the fields 1,2,3 needs to be unique. Also I have second table that for the fields 1,2,3 stores bought quantities per day One to many. from_destination to_destination shipper date reserved_quantity case 1 Is it better to make fields 1,2,3 as primary complex key in the first table and the same fields in the second table to be foreign key First table from_destination | to_destination | primary shipper | quaitity Second table second_id - autoincrement primary from_destination | to_destination | foreign key shipper | date reserved_quantity Case 2 or just to add auto increment filed in the first table and make fields 1,2,3 unique. In the second table there will be one ingeger foreign key pointing to the first table, and one auto increment key for the table. First table first_id - autoincrement primary from_destination | to_destination | unique shipper | quaitity Second table second_id - autoincrement primary first_id - forein date reserved_quantity If so why we need complex keys, when we can have one field auto increment or GUID and all other fields that are candidates for complex key to be unique. Regards

    Read the article

  • JUJU and ERROR environment has no access-key or secret-key

    - by Riccardo Magrini
    following the official guide: [1]https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/config-maas.html and considered that I've generated the ssh key (added it to UI of MAAS) and the API key, my environments.yaml file presents in this way: environments: maas: type: maas maas-server: 'http://x.x.x.x/MAAS/' maas-oauth: 'NDPA86PsEzS7bFynSy:vqJLkyHUJbvYzbtY5Q:sXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX admin-secret: 'nothing' default-series: precise authorized-keys-path: ~/.ssh/id_rsa.pub # or any file you want. when I try to run the command: juju bootstrap receive the following error: ERROR environment has no access-key or secret-key Someone can explain me where is the wrong? MAAS and JUJU are installed using their ppa stable on an Ubuntu 12.04.3 Server

    Read the article

  • Encryption Product Keys : Public and Private key encryption

    - by Aran Mulholland
    I need to generate and validate product keys and have been thinking about using a public/private key system. I generate our product keys based on a client name (which could be a variable length string) a 6 digit serial number. It would be good if the product key would be of a manageable length (16 characters or so) I need to encrypt them at the base and then distrubute the decryption/validation system. As our system is written in managed code (.NET) we dont want to distribute the encryption system, only the decryption. I need a public private key seems a good way to do this, encrypt with the one key that i keep and distribute the other key needed for decrpytion/verification. What is an appropriate mechanism to do this with the above requirements?

    Read the article

  • Foreign key reference to a two-column primary key

    - by Adam Ernst
    One of my tables has a two-column primary key: CREATE TABLE tournament ( state CHAR(2) NOT NULL, year INT NOT NULL, etc..., PRIMARY KEY(state, year) ); I want a reference to the tournament table from another table, but I want this reference to be nullable. Here's how I might do it, imagining that a winner doesn't necessarily have a tournament: CREATE TABLE winner ( name VARCHAR NOT NULL, state CHAR(2) NULL, year INT NULL ); If state is null but year is not, or vice-versa, the table would be inconsistent. I believe the following FOREIGN KEY constraint fixes it: ALTER TABLE winner ADD CONSTRAINT FOREIGN KEY fk (name, state) REFERENCES tournament (name, state); Is this the proper way of enforcing consistency? Is this schema properly normalized?

    Read the article

  • Primary Key Identity Value Increments On Unique Key Constraint Violation

    - by Jed
    I have a SqlServer 2008 table which has a Primary Key (IsIdentity=Yes) and three other fields that make up a Unique Key constraint. In addition I have a store procedure that inserts a record into the table and I call the sproc via C# using a SqlConnection object. The C# sproc call works fine, however I have noticed interesting results when the C# sproc call violates the Unique Key constraint.... When the sproc call violates the Unique Key constraint, a SqlException is thrown - which is no surprise and cool. However, I notice that the next record that is successfully added to the table has a PK value that is not exactly one more than the previous record - For example: Say the table has five records where the PK values are 1,2,3,4, and 5. The sproc attempts to insert a sixth record, but the Unique Key constraint is violated and, so, the sixth record is not inserted. Then the sproc attempts to insert another record and this time it is successful. - This new record is given a PK value of 7 instead of 6. Is this normal behavior? If so, can you give me a reason why this is so? (If a record fails to insert, why is the PK index incremented?) If this is not normal behavior, can you give me any hints as to why I am seeing these symptoms?

    Read the article

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

    - by 109221793
    Hi guys, 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?

    Read the article

  • MySQL Error 1452 - Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails

    - by dscher
    I've looked at other people's questions on this topic but can't seem to find where my error is coming from. Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm including as much as I can think of that might help find the problem: CREATE TABLE stocks ( id INT AUTO_INCREMENT NOT NULL, user_id INT(11) UNSIGNED NOT NULL, ticker VARCHAR(20) NOT NULL, name VARCHAR(20), rating INT(11), position ENUM("strong buy", "buy", "sell", "strong sell", "neutral"), next_look DATE, privacy ENUM("public", "private"), PRIMARY KEY(id), FOREIGN KEY (user_id) REFERENCES users(id) ON DELETE CASCADE ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8; CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `stocks_tags` ( `stock_id` INT NOT NULL, `tag_id` INT NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`stock_id`,`tag_id`), KEY `fk_stock_tag` (`tag_id`), KEY `fk_tag_stock` (`stock_id`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8; ALTER TABLE `stocks_tags` ADD CONSTRAINT `fk_stock_tag` FOREIGN KEY (`tag_id`) REFERENCES `tags` (`id`) ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE, ADD CONSTRAINT `fk_tag_stock` FOREIGN KEY (`stock_id`) REFERENCES `stocks` (`id`) ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE; CREATE TABLE tags( id INT AUTO_INCREMENT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, tags VARCHAR(30), UNIQUE(tags) ) ENGINE=INNODB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8; And the error I'm getting: Database_Exception [ 1452 ]: Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails (`ddmachine`.`stocks_tags`, CONSTRAINT `fk_stock_tag` FOREIGN KEY (`tag_id`) REFERENCES `tags` (`id`) ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE) [ INSERT INTO `stocks_tags` (`stock_id`, `tag_id`) VALUES (19, 'cash') ] I did see that someone else had a similar problem based on their enum columns but don't think that's it.

    Read the article

  • Pros and cons of programmatically enforcing foreign key than in database

    - by Jeffrey
    It is causing so much trouble in terms of development just by letting database enforcing foreign key. Especially during unit test I can’t drop table due to foreign key constrains, I need to create table in such an order that foreign key constrain warning won’t get triggered. In reality I don’t see too much point of letting database enforcing the foreign key constrains. If the application has been properly designed there should not be any manual database manipulation other than select queries. I just want to make sure that I am not digging myself into a hole by not having foreign key constrains in database and leaving it solely to the application’s responsibility. Am I missing anything? P.S. my real unit tests (not those that use mocking) will drop existing tables if the structure of underlying domain object has been modified.

    Read the article

  • Working with foreign keys - cannot insert

    - by Industrial
    Hi everyone! Doing my first tryouts with foreign keys in a mySQL database and are trying to do a insert, that fails for this reason: Integrity constraint violation: 1452 Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails Does this mean that foreign keys restrict INSERTS as well as DELETES and/or UPDATES on each table that is enforced with foreign keys relations? Thanks! Updated description: Products ---------------------------- id | type ---------------------------- 0 | 0 1 | 3 ProductsToCategories ---------------------------- productid | categoryid ---------------------------- 0 | 0 1 | 1 Product table has following structure CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `alpha`.`products` ( `id` MEDIUMINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `type` TINYINT(2) UNSIGNED NOT NULL DEFAULT 0 , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , CONSTRAINT `prodsku` FOREIGN KEY (`id` ) REFERENCES `alpha`.`productsToSku` (`product` ) ON DELETE CASCADE, ON UPDATE CASCADE) ENGINE = InnoDB;

    Read the article

  • SSH Public Key - No supported authentication methods available (server sent public key)

    - by F21
    I have a 12.10 server setup in a virtual machine with its network set to bridged (essentially will be seen as a computer connected to my switch). I installed opensshd via apt-get and was able to connect to the server using putty with my username and password. I then set about trying to get it to use public/private key authentication. I did the following: Generated the keys using PuttyGen. Moved the public key to /etc/ssh/myusername/authorized_keys (I am using encrypted home directories). Set up sshd_config like so: PubkeyAuthentication yes AuthorizedKeysFile /etc/ssh/%u/authorized_keys StrictModes no PasswordAuthentication no UsePAM yes When I connect using putty or WinSCP, I get an error saying No supported authentication methods available (server sent public key). If I run sshd in debug mode, I see: PAM: initializing for "username" PAM: setting PAM_RHOST to "192.168.1.7" PAM: setting PAM_TTY to "ssh" userauth-request for user username service ssh-connection method publickey [preauth] attempt 1 failures 0 [preauth] test whether pkalg/pkblob are acceptable [preauth[ Checking blacklist file /usr/share/ssh/blacklist.RSA-1023 Checking blacklist file /etc/ssh/blacklist.RSA-1023 temporarily_use_uid: 1000/1000 (e=0/0) trying public key file /etc/ssh/username/authorized_keys fd4 clearing O_NONBLOCK restore_uid: 0/0 Failed publickey for username from 192.168.1.7 port 14343 ssh2 Received disconnect from 192.168.1.7: 14: No supported authentication methods available [preauth] do_cleanup [preauth] monitor_read_log: child log fd closed do_cleanup PAM: cleanup Why is this happening and how can I fix this?

    Read the article

  • does the order a composite key is defined matter?

    I have a table with (col1,col2) as a composite primary key. create table twokeytable(col1 int,col2 int,constraint twokeytable_pk primary key (col1,col2)); and another table with col3,col4 collumns witha composite foreign key(col3,col4) which references the(col1,col2) primary key. For some processing I need to drop the foreign key and primary constraints .While restoring the constraints does order of the keys matter?. are these same? create table fktwokeytable(col3 int,col4 int,constraint fkaddfaa_fk foreign key(col4,col3) references twokeytable(col1,col2)) and create table fktwokeytable(col3 int,col4 int,constraint fkaddfaa_fk foreign key(col3,col4) references twokeytable(col1,col2))

    Read the article

  • Standard way to hash an RSA key?

    - by Adam J.R. Erickson
    What's the algorithm for creating hash (sha-1 or MD5) of an RSA public key? Is there a standard way to do this? Hash just the modulus, string addition of both and then take a hash? Is SHA-1 or MD5 usually used? I want to use it to ensure that I got the right key (have the sender send a hash, and I calculate it myself), and log said hash so I always know which exact key I used when I encrypt the payload.

    Read the article

  • Poll Results: Foreign Key Constraints

    - by Darren Gosbell
    A few weeks ago I did the following post asking people – if they used foreign key constraints in their star schemas. The poll is still open if you are interested in adding to it, but here is what the chart looks like as of today. (at the bottom of the poll itself there is a link to the live results, unfortunately I cannot link the live results in here as the blogging platform blocks the required javascript)   Interestingly the results are fairly even. Of the 78 respondents, fractionally over half at least aim to start with referential integrity in their star schemas. I did not want to influence the results by sharing my opinion, but my personal preference is to always aim to have foreign key constraints. But at the same time, I am pragmatic about it, I do have projects where for various reasons some constraints are not defined. And I also have other designs that I have inherited, where it would just be too much work to go back and add foreign key constraints. If you are going to implement foreign keys in your star schema, they really need to be there at the start. In fact this poll was was the result of a feature request for BIDSHelper asking for a feature to check for null/missing foreign keys and I am entirely convinced that BIDS is the wrong place for this sort of functionality. BIDS is a design tool, your data needs to be constantly checked for consistency. It's not that I think that it's impossible to get a design working without foreign key constraints, but I like the idea of failing as soon as possible if there is an error and enforcing foreign key constraints lets me "fail early" if there are constancy issues with my data. By far the biggest concern with foreign keys is performance and I suppose I'm curious as to how often people actually measure and quantify this. I worked on a project a number of years ago that had very large data volumes and we did find that foreign key constraints did have a measurable impact, but what we did was to disable the constraints before loading the data, then enabled and checked them afterwards. This saved as time (although not as much as not having constraints at all), but still let us know early in the process if there were any consistency issues. For the people that do not have consistent data, if you have ETL processes that you control that are building your star schema which you also control, then to be blunt you only have yourself to blame. It is the job of the ETL process to make the data consistent. There are techniques for handling situations like missing data as well as  early and late arriving data. Ralph Kimball's book – The Data Warehouse Toolkit goes through some design patterns for handling data consistency. Having foreign key relationships can also help the relational engine to optimize queries as noted in this recent blog post by Boyan Penev

    Read the article

  • violation of primary key constraint .Cannot insert duplicate key in object using ADO

    - by CREFLY
    Hi All we are working on a users apllication using Access2003(VBA) as software language and SQL Server 2005 as database. We are using ADO method and we encounter a problem. when users create new record in a ADO Screen and they want to save the record after implementing it they receive this error : error -2147217873 violation of primary key constraint 'PK_ '.Cannot insert duplicate key in object 'Pk_...' Any help will be appreciated Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • foreign key and index issue

    - by George2
    Hello everyone, I am using SQL Server 2008 Enterprise. I have a table and one of its column is referring to another column in another table (in the same database) as foreign key, here is the related SQL statement, in more details, column [AnotherID] in table [Foo] refers to another table [Goo]'s column [GID] as foreign key. [GID] is primary key and clustered index on table [Goo]. My question is, in this way, if I do not create index on [AnotherID] column on [Foo] explicitly, will there be an index created automatically for [AnotherID] column on [Foo] -- because its foreign key reference column [GID] on table [Goo] already has primary clustered key index? CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Foo]( [ID] [bigint] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [AnotherID] [int] NULL, [InsertTime] [datetime] NULL CONSTRAINT DEFAULT (getdate()), CONSTRAINT [PK_Foo] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [ID] ASC )WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Foo] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Foo] FOREIGN KEY([Goo]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Goo] ([GID]) ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Foo] CHECK CONSTRAINT [FK_Foo] thanks in advance, George

    Read the article

  • Using datetime float representation as primary key

    - by devanalyst
    From my experience I have learn that using an surrogate INT data type column as primary key esp. an IDENTITY key column offers better performance than using GUID or char/varchar data type column as primary key. I try to use IDENTITY key as primary key wherever possible. But recently I came across a schema where the tables were horizontally partitioned and were managed via a Partitioned view. So the tables could not have an IDENTITY column since that would make the Partitioned View non updatable. One work around for this was to create a dummy 'keygenerator' table with an identity column to generate IDs for primary key. But this would mean having a 'keygenerator' table for each of the Partitioned View. My next thought was to use float as a primary key. The reason is the following key algorithm that I devised DECLARE @KEY FLOAT SET @KEY = CONVERT(FLOAT,GETDATE())/100000.0 SET @KEY = @EMP_ID + @KEY Heres how it works. CONVERT(FLOAT,GETDATE()) gives float representation of current datetime since internally all datetime are represented by SQL as a float value. CONVERT(FLOAT,GETDATE())/100000.0 converts the float representation into complete decimal value i.e. all digits are pushed to right side of ".". @KEY = @EMP_ID + @KEY adds the Employee ID which is an integer to this decimal value. The logic is that the Employee ID is guaranteed to be unique across sessions since an employee cannot connect to an application more than once at the same time. And for the same employee each time a key will be generated the current datetime will be unique. In all an unique key across all employee sessions and across time. So for Emp Ids 11 and 12, I have key values like 12.40046693321566357, 11.40046693542361111 But my concern whether float data type as primary key offer benefits compared to choosing GUID or char/varchar as primary keys. Also important thing is because of partitioning the float column is going to be part of a composite key.

    Read the article

  • Foreign Key Relationships and "belongs to many"

    - by jan
    I have the following model: S belongs to T T has many S A,B,C,D,E (etc) have 1 T each, so the T should belong to each of A,B,C,D,E (etc) At first I set up my foreign keys so that in A, fk_a_t would be the foreign key on A.t to T(id), in B it'd be fk_b_t, etc. Everything looks fine in my UML (using MySQLWorkBench), but generating the yii models results in it thinking that T has many A,B,C,D (etc) which to me is the reverse. It sounds to me like either I need to have A_T, B_T, C_T (etc) tables, but this would be a pain as there are a lot of tables that have this relationship. I've also googled that the better way to do this would be some sort of behavior, such that A,B,C,D (etc) can behave as a T, but I'm not clear on exactly how to do this (I will continue to google more on this) What do you think is the better solution? UML: Here's the DDL (auto generated). Just pretend that there is more than 3 tables referencing T. -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`T` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`T` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) ) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`S` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`S` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `thing` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `t` INT NOT NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `fk_S_T` (`id` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `fk_S_T` FOREIGN KEY (`id` ) REFERENCES `mydb`.`T` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`A` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`A` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `T` INT NOT NULL , `stuff` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `bar` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `foo` VARCHAR(45) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `fk_A_T` (`T` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `fk_A_T` FOREIGN KEY (`T` ) REFERENCES `mydb`.`T` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`B` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`B` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `T` INT NOT NULL , `stuff2` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `foobar` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `other` VARCHAR(45) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `fk_A_T` (`T` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `fk_A_T` FOREIGN KEY (`T` ) REFERENCES `mydb`.`T` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB; -- ----------------------------------------------------- -- Table `mydb`.`C` -- ----------------------------------------------------- CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `mydb`.`C` ( `id` INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `T` INT NOT NULL , `stuff3` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `foobar2` VARCHAR(45) NULL , `other4` VARCHAR(45) NULL , PRIMARY KEY (`id`) , INDEX `fk_A_T` (`T` ASC) , CONSTRAINT `fk_A_T` FOREIGN KEY (`T` ) REFERENCES `mydb`.`T` (`id` ) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) ENGINE = InnoDB;

    Read the article

  • Foreign keys with Rails' ActiveRecord::Migration?

    - by Earlz
    Hello, I'm new to Ruby on Rails (I know Ruby just decently though) and looking at the Migration tools, it sounds really awesome. Database schemas can finally (easily) go in source control. Now my problem with it. When using Postgres as the database, it does not setup foreign keys. I would like the benefits of foreign keys in my schema such as referential integrity. So how do I apply foreign keys with Migrations?

    Read the article

  • Foreign keys vs partitioning

    - by Industrial
    Hi! Since foreign keys are not supported by partitioned mySQL databases for the moment, I would like to hear some pro's and con's for a read-heavy application that will handle around 1-400 000 rows per table. Unfortunately, I dont have enough experience yet in this area to make the conclusion by myself... Thanks a lot! References: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1537219/how-to-handle-foreign-key-while-partitioning http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2496140/mysql-partitioning-with-foreign-keys

    Read the article

  • Foreign keys in MySQL?

    - by icco
    I have been slowly learning SQL the last few weeks. I've picked up all of the relational algebra and the basics of how relational databases work. What I'm trying to do now is learn how it's implemented. A stumbling block I've come across in this, is foreign keys in MySQL. I can't seem to find much about the other than that they exist in the InnoDB storage schema that MySQL has. What is a simple example of foreign keys implemented in MySQL? Here's part of a schema I wrote that doesn't seem to be working if you would rather point out my flaw than show me a working example. CREATE TABLE `posts` ( `pID` bigint(20) NOT NULL auto_increment, `content` text NOT NULL, `time` timestamp NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, `uID` bigint(20) NOT NULL, `wikiptr` bigint(20) default NULL, `cID` bigint(20) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`pID`), Foreign Key(`cID`) references categories, Foreign Key(`uID`) references users ) ENGINE=InnoDB;

    Read the article

  • Please help me to create a insert query (error of foreign key constrant)

    - by Rajesh Rolen- DotNet Developer
    I want to move data from one database's table to another database's table its giving me foreign key error. please tell me how can i insert all those data which is valid except those rows who have error of foreign key. i am using sql server 2005 My query is : SET IDENTITY_INSERT City ON INSERT INTO City ([cityid],[city],[country],[state],[cityinfo] ,[enabled],[countryid],[citycode],[stateid],[latitude],[longitude]) SELECT [cityid],[city],[country],[state],[cityinfo] ,[enabled],[countryid],[citycode],[stateid],[latitude],[longitude] FROM TD.DBo.City getting this error: The INSERT statement conflicted with the FOREIGN KEY constraint "FK__city__countryid__3E52440B". The conflict occurred in database "schoolHigher", table "dbo.country", column 'countryId'. please tell how can i move those data whose foreign key is valid.

    Read the article

  • Foreign key not working in MySQL: Why can I INSERT a value that's not in the foreign column?

    - by stalepretzel
    I've created a table in MySQL: CREATE TABLE actions ( A_id int NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, type ENUM('rate','report','submit','edit','delete') NOT NULL, Q_id int NOT NULL, U_id int NOT NULL, date DATE NOT NULL, time TIME NOT NULL, rate tinyint(1), PRIMARY KEY (A_id), CONSTRAINT fk_Question FOREIGN KEY (Q_id) REFERENCES questions(P_id), CONSTRAINT fk_User FOREIGN KEY (U_id) REFERENCES users(P_id)); This created the table I wanted just fine (although a "DESCRIBE actions;" command showed me that the foreign keys were keys of type MUL, and I'm not sure what this means). However, when I try to enter a Q_id or a U_id that does not exist in the questions or users tables, MySQL still allows these values. What did I do wrong? How can I prevent a table with a foreign key from accepting invalid data? If I add TYPE=InnoDB to the end, I get an error: ERROR 1005 (HY000): Can't create table './quotes/actions.frm' (errno: 150) Why might that happen? I'm told that it's important to enforce data integrity with functional foreign keys, but also that InnoDB should not be used with MySQL. What do you recommend?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >