Good day
I have a situation where two users are saving data to the same database and there are primary key conflicts.
Is it possible to write a stored procedure or trigger which will generate a unique identity by adding two columns.
For instance: I have table2 related to table1 by Table1ID. Increment and seed is 1 for both.
If I had to add a row to table2 I would like the autogenerated ID number to be added to a text column thereby making it unique. So the ID would be something like JoeSoap5.
If you want to generated something unique you can use the build-in function "NEWID()". Type and executed the following code:
SELECT NEWID()
If you need to insert record in second table when record in your first table is inserted, is is possible to implement this using TRIGGERS. In your case you can use "AFTER INSERT TRIGGER" or "BEFORE INSERT TRIGGER" - generally this will be a piece of code that will be executed AFTER/BEFORE row in your first table is inserted.
You don't specify your SQL Server version.
SQL 2012 introduces the concept of a sequence - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff878091.aspx - which would allow you to do just what you want.
Related
I have a TABLE A with 3000 records with 25 columns. I want to have a history table called Table A history holding all the changes updates and deletes for me to look up any day. I usually use cursors. Now thought using triggers which I was not asked to. Do you have any other suggestions? Many thanks!
If your using tsql /SQL server and you can't use triggers, which is the only sure way to get every change, maybe use a stored procedure that is scheduled in job to run every x amount of time, the stored procedure using a MERGE statement with the two tables to get new records or changes. I would not suggest this if you need every single change without question.
CREATE TABLE dbo.TableA (id INT, Column1 nvarchar(30))
CREATE TABLE dbo.TableA_History (id INT, Column1 nvarchar(30), TimeStamp DateTime)
(this code isn't production, just the general idea)
Put the following code inside a stored procedure and use a Sql Server Job with a schedule on it.
MERGE INTO dbo.TableA_History
USING dbo.TableA
ON TableA_History.id = TableA.id AND TableA_History.Column1 = TableA.Column1
WHEN NOT MATCHED BY TARGET THEN
INSERT (id,Column1,TimeStamp) VALUES (TableA.id,TableA.Column1,GETDATE())
So basically if the record either doesn't exist or doesn't match meaning a column changed, insert the record into the history table.
It is possible to create history without triggers in some case, even if you are not using SQL Server 2016 and system-versioned table are not available.
In some cases, when you can identify for sure which routines are modifying your table, you can create history using OUTPUT INTO clause.
For example,
INSERT INTO [dbo].[MainTable]
OUTPUT inserted.[]
,...
,'I'
,GETUTCDATE()
,#CurrentUserID
INTO [dbo].[HistoryTable]
SELECT *
FROM ... ;
In routines, when you are using MERGE I like that we can use $action:
Is available only for the MERGE statement. Specifies a column of type
nvarchar(10) in the OUTPUT clause in a MERGE statement that returns
one of three values for each row: 'INSERT', 'UPDATE', or 'DELETE',
according to the action that was performed on that row.
It's very handy that we can add the user which is modifying the table. Using triggers you need to use session context or session variable to pass the user. In versioning table you need to add additional column to the main table in order to log the user as it only logs the current table columns (at least for now).
So, basically it depends on your data and application. If you have many sources of CRUD over the table, the trigger is the most secure way. If your table is very big and heavily used, using MERGE is not good as it my cause blocking and harm performance.
In our databases we are using all of the methods depending on the situation:
triggers for legacy
system-versioning for new development
direct OUTPUT in the history, when sure that data is modified only by given set of routines
Is it possible to only alter a table to make an existing column a serial auto generated key, without adding a new column? Sorry if this question is a bit newbie-ish for PostgreSQL, I'm more a SQL Server person but moving to PostgreSQL..
In a nut shell the program will copying an existing SQL Server database into PostgreSQL. With the desire to have a mirrored DB in PostgreSQL as the source from SQL Server with the only caveat one may selectively include/exclude any table or column as desired, or do everything...
Given the process copies all values, thought one should be able create the keys after the copy has finished just as one may do in SQL Server. Thought PostgreSQL would have a comparable methods as SQL Server's SET INSERT_IDENTITY [ON|OFF] so one may override the auto generated key with a desired value. Not seeing an equivalent in PostgreSQL. So my fallback is to create the mirrored records in Postgres without keys any keys and then alter the tables. But it seems to fix up the table as desired one has create a new column, but doing this break or cause a headache fixing up the RI for PK/FK relationships.
Any suggestions? Thanks in advance.
In PostgreSQL, the auto-generated key is always overridden if you insert an explicit value for it. If you don't specify a value (omit the column), or specify the keyword DEFAULT, a generated key is used.
Given table
CREATE TABLE t1 (id serial primary key, dat text);
then both these will get a generated key from sequence t1_id_seq:
INSERT INTO t1 (dat) VALUES ('fred');
INSERT INTO t1 (id, dat) VALUES (DEFAULT, 'bob');
This will instead provide its own value:
INSERT INTO t1 (id, dat) VALUES (42, 'joe');
You are responsible for ensuring that the provided value doesn't conflict with existing data, or with future values the identity sequence will generate. PostgreSQL will not notice that you manually inserted a row with id 42 and skip when its own sequence counter gets to that point.
Usually what you do is load with provided values, then reset the sequence to the max of all keys already in the table, so it keeps counting from there for new local inserts.
I have a table of orders with orderID. I want when I create a new row in orders, and automatically have it add the same orderID to a new row in orderDetails. I got the auto incrementing to work, however whenever I try to link the two, adding cascade delete, it gives me an error.
'order' table saved successfully
'orderDetail' table
- Unable to create relationship 'FK_orderDetail_order'.
Cascading foreign key 'FK_orderDetail_order' cannot be created where the referencing column 'orderDetail.orderID' is an identity column.
Could not create constraint. See previous errors.
Which seems to be because of the fact there is no orderID at row creation. Without these two linked it's pretty hard to link an order to its information.
I am using Microsoft SQL server mgt studio. I learned via command-line MySQL, not SQL, so this whole GUI stuff is throwing me off (and I'm a tad rusty).
Your problem is that 'orderDetail.orderID' should not be an identity column (auto-incrementing). It should be based on the orderId in the Order table. You can do that in a variety of ways. If you are using stored procedures, and making separate calls to the database for the orderDetail records, have the code save the order row first, and return the newly created OrderId value, then use that value on the calls to save orderdetails. If you are making one call to a stored proc that saves the order header record and all order detail records in one call, then in the stored procd, insert the ordfer record forst, use Scope_identity() to extract the newly created orderId into a T-SQL variable,
Declare #orderId Integer
Insert Orders([Order table columns])
Values([Order table column values])
Set #orderId = scope_Identity()
and then use the value in #orderId for all inserts into the OrderDetails table...
Insert OrderDetails(OrderId, [Other OrderDetail table columns])
Values(#orderId , [Other OrderDetail table column values])
You want a AFTER INSERT trigger on the order table - in this, the newly given ID is available as NEW.orderID and can now easily be inserted into orderDetails.
Just do this via the command line. I certainly do.
I am by no means a sql programmer and I am trying to accomplish something that I am pretty sure has been done a million times before.
I am trying to auto generate a customer number in sql every time a new customer is inserted, but the trigger (or sp?) will only work if at least the first name, last name and another value called case number is entered. If any of these fields are missing, the system generates an error. If the criteria is met, the system generates and assigns a unique id to that customer that begins with letters GL- and then uses 5 digit number so a customer John Doe would be GL-00001 and Jane Doe would be GL-00002.
I am sorry if I am asking too much but I am basically a select insert update guy and nothing more so thanks in advance for any help.
If I were in this situation, I would:
--Alter the table(s) so that first name, last name and case number are required (NOT NULL) columns. Handle your checks for required fields on the application side before submitting the record to the database.
--If it doesn't already exist, add an identity column to the customer table.
--Add a persisted computed column to the customer table that will format the identity column into the desired GL-00000 format.
/* Demo computed column for customer number */
create table #test (
id int identity,
customer_number as 'GL-' + left('00000', 5-len(cast(id as varchar(5)))) + cast(id as varchar(5)) persisted,
name char(20)
)
insert into #test (name) values ('Joe')
insert into #test (name) values ('BobbyS')
select * from #test
drop table #test
This should satisfy your requirements without the need to introduce the overhead of a trigger.
So what do you want to do? generate a customer number even when these fields arn't populated?
Have you looked at the SQL for the trigger? You can do this in SSMS (SQL Server Managment Studio) by going to the table in question in the Object Explorer, expanding the table and then expanding triggers.
If you open up the trigger you'll see what it does to generate the customer number. If you are unsure on how this code works, then post the code for the trigger up.
If you are making changes to an existing system i'd advise you to find out any implications that changing the way data is inputted works.
For example, others parts of the application may depend on all of the initial values being populated, so after changing the trigger to allow incomplete data to be added, you may inturn break something else.
You have probably a unique constraint and/or NOT NULL constraints set on the table.
Remove/Disable these (for example with the SQL-Server Management Console in Design Mode) and then try again to insert the data. Keep in mind, that you will probably not be able to enable the constraints after your insert, since you are violating conditions after the insert. Only disable or reomve the constraints, if you are absolutely sure that they are unecessary.
Here's example syntax (you need to know the constraint names):
--disable
ALTER TABLE customer NOCHECK CONSTRAINT your_constraint_name
--enable
ALTER TABLE customer CHECK CONSTRAINT your_constraint_name
Caution: If I were you, I'd rather try to insert dummy values for the not null columns like this:
insert into customers select afield , 1 as dummyvalue, 2 as dummyvalue from your datasource
A very easy way to do this would be to create a table of this sort of structure:
CustomerID of type in that is a primary key and set it as identity
CustomerIDPrfix of type varchar(3) which stores GL- as a default value.
Then add your other fields and set them to NOT NULL.
If that way is not acceptable and you do need to write a trigger check out these two articles:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa258254(SQL.80).aspx
http://www.kodyaz.com/articles/sql-trigger-example-in-sql-server-2008.aspx
Basiclly it is all about getting the logic right to check if the fields are blank. Experiment with a test database on your local machine. This will help you get it right.
Is there a way to reserve or skip or increment value of identity column?
I Have two tables joined in one-to-one relation ship. First one has IDENTITY PK column, and second one int PK (not IDENTITY). I used to insert in first, get ID and insert in second. And it works ok.
Now I need to insert values in second table without inserting into first.
Now, how to increment IDENTITY seed, so I can insert it into second table, but leave "hole" in ID's of first table?
EDIT: More info
This works:
-- I need new seed number, but not table row
-- so i will insert foo row, get id, and delete it
INSERT INTO TABLE1 (SomeRequiredField) VALUES ('foo');
SET #NewID = SCOPE_IDENTITY();
DELETE FROM TABLE1 WHERE ID=#NewID;
-- Then I can insert in TABLE2
INSERT INTO (ID, Field, Field) VALUES (#NewID, 'Value', 'Value');
Once again - this works.
Question is can I get ID without inserting into table?
DBCC needs owner rights; is there a clean user callable SQL to do that?
This situation will make your overall data structure very hard to understand. If there is not a relationship between the values, then break the relationship.
There are ways to get around this to do what you are looking for, but typically it is in a distributed environment and not done because of what appears to be a data model change.
Then its no more a one-to-one relationship.
Just break the PK constraint.
Use a DBCC CHECKIDENT statement.
This article from SQL Server Books Online discusses the use of the DBCC CHECKIDENT method to update the identity seed of a table.
From that article:
This example forces the current identity value in the jobs table to a value of 30.
USE pubs
GO
DBCC CHECKIDENT (jobs, RESEED, 30)
GO
I would look into the OUTPUT INTO feature if you are using SQL Server 2005 or greater. This would allow you to insert into your primary table, and take the IDs assigned at that time to create rows in the secondary table.
I am assuming that there is a foreign key constraint enforced - because that would be the only reason you would need to do this in the first place.
How do you plan on matching them up later? I would not put records into the second table without a record in the first, that is why it is set up in a foreign key relationship - to stio that sort of action. Just why do you not want to insert records into the first table anyway? If we knew more about the type of application and why this is necessary we might be able to guide you to a solution.
this might help
SET IDENTITY_INSERT [ database_name . [ schema_name ] . ] table { ON | OFF }
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa259221(SQL.80).aspx
It allows explicit values to be inserted into the identity column of a table.