Search Results

Search found 1787 results on 72 pages for 'foreign'.

Page 8/72 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Foreign Keys and Primary Keys at the same time

    - by Bader
    hello , i am trying to create table (orderdetails) , the table has two FKs and PKs at the same keys here is my code create table OrderDetails2 ( PFOrder_ID Number(3) PFProduct_ID Number(3) CONSTRAINT PF PRIMARY KEY (PFOrder_ID,PFProduct_ID), CONSTRAINT FK_1 FOREIGN KEY (PFProudct_ID) REFERENCES Product(Product_ID), CONSTRAINT FK_2 FOREIGN KEY (PFOrder_ID) REFERENCES Orderr(Order_ID) ); i am using Oracle express , a problem pops when i run the code , here is it ORA-00907: missing right parenthesis what is the problem ?

    Read the article

  • Foreign Keys in SQLITE in the Google Gears framework

    - by Maxim Gershkovich
    Hi all, Could someone please tell me why the following foreign key constraint (although executes fine) is not enforced by SQLITE? Could someone pleasse provide an example of how I can go about enforcing the relationship? CREATE TABLE User (UserID TEXT Unique NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, FirstName TEXT NOT NULL, LastName TEXT NOT NULL, Username TEXT NOT NULL, Password TEXT NOT NULL, Email TEXT NOT NULL, SignupDate TEXT NOT NULL) CREATE TABLE Category (CategoryID TEXT Unique NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, UserID TEXT, FOREIGN KEY(UserID) REFERENCES User(UserID))

    Read the article

  • mysql circular dependency in foreign key constraints

    - by Flavius
    Given the schema: What I need is having every user_identities.belongs_to reference an users.id. At the same time, every users has a primary_identity as shown in the picture. However when I try to add this reference with ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION, MySQL says #1452 - Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails (yap.#sql-a3b_1bf, CONSTRAINT #sql-a3b_1bf_ibfk_1 FOREIGN KEY (belongs_to) REFERENCES users (id) ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION) I suspect this is due to the circular dependency, but how could I solve it (and maintain referential integrity)?

    Read the article

  • Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails

    - by Tom
    table 1 +----------+-------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +----------+-------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | UserID | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | Password | varchar(20) | NO | | | | | Username | varchar(25) | NO | | | | | Email | varchar(60) | NO | | | | +----------+-------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ table2 +------------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +------------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | UserID | int(11) | NO | MUL | | | | PostID | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | Title | varchar(50) | NO | | | | | Summary | varchar(500) | NO | | | | +------------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.MySQLIntegrityConstraintViolationException: Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails (myapp/table2, CONSTRAINT table2_ibfk_1 FOREIGN KEY (UserID) REFERENCES table1 (UserID)) What have I done wrong? I read this: http://www.w3schools.com/Sql/sql_foreignkey.asp and i don't see whats wrong. :S

    Read the article

  • What's wrong with foreign keys?

    - by kronoz
    I remember hearing Joel mention in the podcast that he'd barely ever used a foreign key (if I remember correctly). However, to me they seem pretty vital to avoid duplication and subsequent data integrity problems throughout your database. Do people have some solid reasons as to why (to avoid a discussion in lines with SO principals)? Edit: "I've yet to have a reason to create a foreign key, so this might be my first reason to actually set up one."

    Read the article

  • MySQL Relational Database Foreign Key

    - by user623879
    To learn databasing, I am creating a movie database. To associate multiple directors with a movie, I have the following schema: movie(m_ID, ....) m_director(dirID, dirName)//dirID is a autoincrement primary key m_directs(dirID, m_ID) //dirID, m_ID are set as foreign Keys in the mysql database(InnoDB engine) I have a program that connects to the db that needs to add a movie to the database. I can easily add a new entry to the movie table and the m_director table, but I am having trouble adding a entry in the m_directs table. INSERT INTO m_director (dirName) VALUES("Jason Reitman"); INSERT INTO m_directs (dirID, m_ID) VALUES(LAST_INSERT_ID(), "tt0467406"); I am using this sql statement to insert a new director and add the association to the movie. I know the primary key of the movie, but I don't know the dirID, so I use LAST_INSERT_ID() to get the last id of the director just inserted. The problem I am having is that I get the following error: MySql.Data.MySqlClient.MySqlException (0x80004005): Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails (`siteproducts`. `m_directs`, CONSTRAINT `m_directs_ibfk_2` FOREIGN KEY (`dirID`) REFERENCES `m_directs` (`dirID`) ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE) Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • entity framework - getting null exception using foreign key

    - by Nick
    Having some trouble with what should be a very simple scenario. For example purposes, I have two tables: -Users -Comments There is a one-to-many relationship set up for this; there is a foreign key from Comments.CommentorID to Users.UserID. When I do the LINQ query and try to bind to a DataList, I get a null exception. Here is the code: FKMModel.FKMEntities ctx = new FKMModel.FKMEntities(); IQueryable<Comment> CommentQuery = from x in ctx.Comment where x.SiteID == 101 select x; List<Comment> Comments = CommentQuery.ToList(); dl_MajorComments.DataSource = Comments; dl_MajorComments.DataBind(); In the ASPX page, I have the following as an ItemTemplate (I simplified it and took out the styling, etc, for purposes of posting here since it's irrelevant): <div> <%# ((FKMModel.Comment)Container.DataItem).FKMUser.Username %> <%# ((FKMModel.Comment)Container.DataItem).CommentDate.Value.ToShortDateString() %> <%# ((FKMModel.Comment)Container.DataItem).CommentTime %> </div> The exception occurs on the first binding (FKMUser.Username). Since the foreign key is set up, I should have no problem accessing any properties from the Users table. Intellisense set up the FKMUser navigation property and it knows the properties of that foreign table. What is going on here??? Thanks, Nick

    Read the article

  • Foreign/accented characters in sql query

    - by FromCanada
    I'm using Java and Spring's JdbcTemplate class to build an SQL query in Java that queries a Postgres database. However, I'm having trouble executing queries that contain foreign/accented characters. For example the (trimmed) code: JdbcTemplate select = new JdbcTemplate( postgresDatabase ); String query = "SELECT id FROM province WHERE name = 'Ontario';"; Integer id = select.queryForObject( query, Integer.class ); will retrieve the province id, but if instead I did name = 'Québec' then the query fails to return any results (this value is in the database so the problem isn't that it's missing). I believe the source of the problem is that the database I am required to use has the default client encoding set to SQL_ASCII, which according to this prevents automatic character set conversions. (The Java environments encoding is set to 'UTF-8' while I'm told the database uses 'LATIN1' / 'ISO-8859-1') I was able to manually indicate the encoding when the resultSets contained values with foreign characters as a solution to a previous problem with a similar nature. Ex: String provinceName = new String ( resultSet.getBytes( "name" ), "ISO-8859-1" ); But now that the foreign characters are part of the query itself this approach hasn't been successful. (I suppose since the query has to be saved in a String before being executed anyway, breaking it down into bytes and then changing the encoding only muddles the characters further.) Is there a way around this without having to change the properties of the database or reconstruct it? PostScript: I found this function on StackOverflow when making up a title, it didn't seem to work (I might not have used it correctly, but even if it did work it doesn't seem like it could be the best solution.):

    Read the article

  • NHibernate One to One Foreign Key ON DELETE CASCADE

    - by xll
    I need to implement One-to-one association between Project and ProjecSettings using fluent NHibernate: public class ProjectMap : ClassMap<Project> { public ProjectMap() { Id(x => x.Id) .UniqueKey(MapUtils.Col<Project>(x => x.Id)) .GeneratedBy.HiLo("NHHiLoIdentity", "NextHiValue", "1000", string.Format("[EntityName] = '[{0}]'", MapUtils.Table<Project>())) .Not.Nullable(); HasOne(x => x.ProjectSettings) .PropertyRef(x => x.Project); } } public class ProjectSettingsMap : ClassMap<ProjectSettings> { public ProjectSettingsMap() { Id(x => x.Id) .UniqueKey(MapUtils.Col<ProjectSettings>(x => x.Id)) .GeneratedBy.HiLo("NHHiLoIdentity", "NextHiValue", "1000", string.Format("[EntityName] = '[{0}]'", MapUtils.Table<ProjectSettings>())); References(x => x.Project) .Column(MapUtils.Ref<ProjectSettings, Project>(p => p.Project, p => p.Id)) .Unique() .Not.Nullable(); } } This results in the following sql for Project Settings: CREATE TABLE ProjectSettings ( Id bigint PRIMARY KEY NOT NULL, Project_Project_Id bigint NOT NULL UNIQUE, /* Foreign keys */ FOREIGN KEY (Project_Project_Id) REFERENCES Project() ON DELETE NO ACTION ON UPDATE NO ACTION ); What I am trying to achieve is to have ON DELETE CASCADE for the FOREIGN KEY (Project_Project_Id), so that when the project is deleted through sql query, it's settings are deleted too. How can I achieve this ? EDIT: I know about Cascade.Delete() option, but it's not what I need. Is there any way to intercept the FK statement generation?

    Read the article

  • Guid Primary /Foreign Key dilemma SQL Server

    - by Xience
    Hi guys, I am faced with the dilemma of changing my primary keys from int identities to Guid. I'll put my problem straight up. It's a typical Retail management app, with POS and back office functionality. Has about 100 tables. The database synchronizes with other databases and receives/ sends new data. Most tables don't have frequent inserts, updates or select statements executing on them. However, some do have frequent inserts and selects on them, eg. products and orders tables. Some tables have upto 4 foreign keys in them. If i changed my primary keys from 'int' to 'Guid', would there be a performance issue when inserting or querying data from tables that have many foreign keys. I know people have said that indexes will be fragmented and 16 bytes is an issue. Space wouldn't be an issue in my case and apparently index fragmentation can also be taken care of using 'NEWSEQUENTIALID()' function. Can someone tell me, from there experience, if Guid will be problematic in tables with many foreign keys. I'll be much appreciative of your thoughts on it...

    Read the article

  • How do people handle foreign keys on clients when synchronizing to master db

    - by excsm
    Hi, I'm writing an application with offline support. i.e. browser/mobile clients sync commands to the master db every so often. I'm using uuid's on both client and server-side. When synching up to the server, the servre will return a map of local uuids (luid) to server uuids (suid). Upon receiving this map, clients updated their records suid attributes with the appropriate values. However, say a client record, e.g. a todo, has an attribute 'list_id' which holds the foreign key to the todos' list record. I use luids in foreign_keys on clients. However, when that attribute is sent over to the server, it would dirty the server db with luids rather than the suid the server is using. My current solution, is for the master server to keep a record of the mappings of luids to suids (per client id) and for each foreign key in a command, look up the suid for that particular client and use the suid instead. I'm wondering wether others have come across thus problem and if so how they have solved it? Is there a more efficient, simpler way? I took a look at this question "Synchronizing one or more databases with a master database - Foreign keys (5)" and someone seemed to suggest my current solution as one option, composite keys using suids and autoincrementing sequences and another option using -ve ids for client ids and then updating all negative ids with the suids. Both of these other options seem like a lot more work. Thanks, Saimon

    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

  • insert or update on table violates foreign key constraint

    - by sprasad12
    Hi, I have two tables entitytype and project. Here are the create table statements: Create table project ( pname varchar(20) not null, primary key(pname) ); create table entitytype( entityname varchar(20) not null, toppos char(100), leftpos char(100), pname varchar(20) not null, primary key(entityname), foreign key(pname) references project(pname) on delete cascade on update cascade ); Now when i try to insert any values into entitytype table i am getting the following error: ERROR: insert or update on table "entitytype" violates foreign key constraint "entitytype_pname_fkey" Detail: Key (pname)=(494) is not present in table "project". Can someone please shed some light on what i am doing wrong. Any input will be of great help. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Ria Services loading foreign keys with Linq-to-SQL

    - by Stephan
    I have a database that consists of 5 tables : Course, Category, Location, CourseCategories, and CourseLocations. The last 2 tables just contain the two foreign keys. A Course has many-to-many relationships with both category and location. I am trying to load the data into a Silverlight app using Ria Services. My DB model is Linq-to-SQL. I have tried adding the [Include] attribute to the metadata classes and I have added the DataLoadOptions so it should load the all tables when you ask for a Course. However on the client side I am never getting back any entries in the CourseCategories and CourseLocations properties. What else needs to be done to get the foreign key relationships to exist across the serialization.

    Read the article

  • Field contains foreign IDs for different tables

    - by Rich
    I am developing a php/mysql driven facebook game. I am stuck on an element the table design. When a user completes a task I want to trigger any number of events. I was thinking of something like so: tbl_events *event_id - serogate primary ID *task_id - foreign ID of the task just completed *event_type - what type of event e.g is it a facebook stream publish or a message to the user or does it unlock a new element of the game? *event_param - this is where it gets tricky... the event parameter is a problem for two reasons, 1) it will contain different foreign ids... dependent on the event_type and thus it will not be possible to join to x table. Meaning I would have to call two queries. 2) Most events require a single id or text, however some events require multiple parameters - like the facebook stream publish.

    Read the article

  • Change list link to foreign key change page

    - by Adam
    When viewing the admin change list for a model, is it possible to make the columns that correspond to foreign keys links to their respective pages? A simple example is I have a Foo object which contains Bar as a foreign key. If I'm viewing the admin change list for Foo (and have it set to include Bar in the display_list columns), the main column would link to the Foo instance's edit page while the Bar column would link to the Boo instance's edit page. I understand I can override the template that's used, but I was curious if there was a solution that didn't require that.

    Read the article

  • MySQL foreign key constraint disappearing

    - by Bramjam
    This is my table: /* oefenreeks leerplan */ CREATE TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ( leerplan_oefenreeks_id INT PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT NOT NULL, leerplan_id INT NOT NULL, oefenreeks_id INT NOT NULL, plaats INT NOT NULL ); /* fk */ ALTER TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ADD CONSTRAINT fk_leerp_oefenr_leerplan FOREIGN KEY(leerplan_id) REFERENCES leerplan (leerplan_id) ON DELETE CASCADE; ALTER TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ADD CONSTRAINT fk_leerp_oefenr_oefenreeks FOREIGN KEY(oefenreeks_id) REFERENCES oefenreeks (oefenreeks_id) ON DELETE CASCADE; /* when I execute the nexline, my fk_leerp_oefenr_leerplan constraint vanishes/disappears*/ ALTER TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ADD CONSTRAINT un_leerp_oefenr UNIQUE(leerplan_id, oefenreeks_id); ALTER TABLE leerplan_oefenreeks ADD CONSTRAINT un_leerp_oefenr_plaats UNIQUE(leerplan_id, plaats); When I go and check only 3 constraints exist. fk_leerp_oefenr_leerplan disappears. I don't understand why this happens.

    Read the article

  • Working in a Foreign Country [closed]

    - by iersoy
    How does it look like to be working in a foreign country? can u share your experiences with me? Is MCPD or MCITP certification and TOEFL-IELTS-Cambridge degrees will be enough for working in a foreign country? What needs to be done to find an employer to work in his/her company? EDIT: I live in Turkey,Istanbul and i like to work in one of these countries: USA UK Germany Italy France Sweden Denmark Finland Norway Switzerland Austria Holland Belgium Canada i need to make quick moves about my career and my path nowadays Thanks a lot

    Read the article

  • SQL update a table with a foreign key

    - by drousseau
    I have a categories table, which one of the fields serves as the foreign key for a sub-categories table. One field that serves as part of the primary key for each table is the language id. I need to update these in both tables. Basically, wherever the language id = x in both tables, I need to set it to y. When I try to do an update on either table, I get a 'The UPDATE statement conflicted with the REFERENCE constraint..' which refers to the foreign key constraint. How can I update the language field on both of these tables?

    Read the article

  • Cascading Deletes in SQL Sever 2008 not working.

    - by Vaccano
    I have the following table setup. Bag | +-> BagID (Guid) +-> BagNumber (Int) BagCommentRelation | +-> BagID (Int) +-> CommentID (Guid) BagComment | +-> CommentID (Guid) +-> Text (varchar(200)) BagCommentRelation has Foreign Keys to Bag and BagComment. So, I turned on cascading deletes for both those Foreign Keys, but when I delete a bag, it does not delete the Comment row. Do need to break out a trigger for this? Or am I missing something? (I am using SQL Server 2008) Note: Posting requested SQL. This is the defintion of the BagCommentRelation table. (I had the type of the bagID wrong (I thought it was a guid but it is an int).) CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Bag_CommentRelation]( [Id] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [BagId] [int] NOT NULL, [Sequence] [int] NOT NULL, [CommentId] [int] NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_Bag_CommentRelation] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [BagId] ASC, [Sequence] ASC )WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Bag_CommentRelation] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Bag_CommentRelation_Bag] FOREIGN KEY([BagId]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Bag] ([Id]) ON DELETE CASCADE GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Bag_CommentRelation] CHECK CONSTRAINT [FK_Bag_CommentRelation_Bag] GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Bag_CommentRelation] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_Bag_CommentRelation_Comment] FOREIGN KEY([CommentId]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Comment] ([CommentId]) ON DELETE CASCADE GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Bag_CommentRelation] CHECK CONSTRAINT [FK_Bag_CommentRelation_Comment] GO The row in this table deletes but the row in the comment table does not.

    Read the article

  • Using Constraints on Hierarchical Data in a Self-Referential Table

    - by pbarney
    Suppose you have the following table, intended to represent hierarchical data: +--------+-------------+ | Field | Type | +--------+-------------+ | id | int(10) | | parent | int(10) | | name | varchar(45) | +--------+-------------+ The table is self-referential in that the parent_id refers to id. So you might have the following data: +----+--------+---------------+ | id | parent | name | +----+--------+---------------+ | 1 | 0 | fruit | | 2 | 0 | vegetable | | 3 | 1 | apple | | 4 | 1 | orange | | 5 | 3 | red delicious | | 6 | 3 | granny smith | | 7 | 3 | gala | +----+--------+---------------+ Using MySQL, I am trying to impose a (self-referential) foreign key constraint upon the data to update on cascades and prevent deletion of fruit if they have "children." So I used the following: CREATE TABLE `idtlp_main`.`fruit` ( `id` INT(10) UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `parent` INT(10) UNSIGNED, `name` VARCHAR(45) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`), CONSTRAINT `fk_parent` FOREIGN KEY (`parent`) REFERENCES `fruit` (`id`) ON UPDATE CASCADE ON DELETE RESTRICT ) ENGINE = InnoDB; From what I understand, this should fit my requirements. (And parent must default to null to allow insertions, correct?) The problem is, if I change the id of a record, it will not cascade: Cannot delete or update a parent row: a foreign key constraint fails (`iddoc_main`.`fruit`, CONSTRAINT `fk_parent` FOREIGN KEY (`parent`) REFERENCES `fruit` (`id`) ON UPDATE CASCADE) What am I missing? Feel free to correct me if my terminology is screwed up... I'm new to constraints.

    Read the article

  • Is it Possible to Use Constraints on Hierarchical Data in a Self-Referential Table?

    - by pbarney
    Suppose you have the following table, intended to represent hierarchical data: +--------+-------------+ | Field | Type | +--------+-------------+ | id | int(10) | | parent | int(10) | | name | varchar(45) | +--------+-------------+ The table is self-referential in that the parent_id refers to id. So you might have the following data: +----+--------+---------------+ | id | parent | name | +----+--------+---------------+ | 1 | 0 | fruit | | 2 | 0 | vegetable | | 3 | 1 | apple | | 4 | 1 | orange | | 5 | 3 | red delicious | | 6 | 3 | granny smith | | 7 | 3 | gala | +----+--------+---------------+ Using MySQL, I am trying to impose a (self-referential) foreign key constraint upon the data to cascade on update and prevent deletion of a record if it has any "children." So I used the following: CREATE TABLE `test`.`fruit` ( `id` INT(10) UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `parent` INT(10) UNSIGNED, `name` VARCHAR(45) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`), CONSTRAINT `fk_parent` FOREIGN KEY (`parent`) REFERENCES `fruit` (`id`) ON UPDATE CASCADE ON DELETE RESTRICT ) ENGINE = InnoDB; From what I understand, this should fit my requirements. (And parent must default to null to allow insertions, correct?) The problem is, if I change the id of a record, it will not cascade: Cannot delete or update a parent row: a foreign key constraint fails (`test`.`fruit`, CONSTRAINT `fk_parent` FOREIGN KEY (`parent`) REFERENCES `fruit` (`id`) ON UPDATE CASCADE) What am I missing? Feel free to correct me if my terminology is screwed up... I'm new to constraints.

    Read the article

  • MySQL - are FK's useful / viable in a web app?

    - by yoda
    Hi all, I've encountered this discussion related to FK's and web applications. Basically some people say that FK's in web applications doesn't represent a real improvement and can even make the application slower in some cases. What do you guys think, what's your experience? -- A quote from Heikki Tuuri, creator of InnoDB engine, founder and CEO of Innobase: InnoDB checks foreign keys as soon as a row is updated, no batching is performed or checks delayed till transaction commit Foreign keys are often serious performance overhead, but help maintain data consistency Foreign Keys increase amount of row level locking done and can make it spread to a lot of tables besides the ones directly updated

    Read the article

  • Rails Nested Attributes, Relationship for Shared or Common Object

    - by SooDesuNe
    This has to be a common problem, so I'm surprised that Google didn't turn up more answers. I'm working on a rails app that has several different kinds of entities, those entities by need a relation to a different entity. For example: Address: a Model that stores the details of a street address (this is my shared entity) PersonContact: a Model that includes things like home phone, cell phone and email address. This model needs to have an address associated with it DogContact: Obviously, if you want to contact a dog, you have to go to where it lives. So, PersonContact and DogContact should have foreign keys to Address. Even, though they are really the "owning" object of Address. This would be fine, except that accepts_nested_attributes_for is counting on the foreign key being in Address to work correctly. What's the correct strategy to keep the foreign key in Address, but have PersonContact and DogContact be the owning objects?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >