Alternate DELETE CASCADE

Similar Questions

• delete cascade question

  BANNER
  Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 - 64bi
  PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
  CORE     10.2.0.4.0     Production
  TNS for HPUX: Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
  NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production-

  given the following scenario an array of great grandparent, grandparent table/s, parent table/s, children table/s
  with deletions cascade.
  so something like.

  CREATE TABLE T1
  (
     T1_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     CONSTRAINT T1_pk PRIMARY KEY (T1_id)
  );
  
  CREATE TABLE T2
  (
     T2_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     T1_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     CONSTRAINT T2_pk PRIMARY KEY (T1_id, T2_id),
     CONSTRAINT fk_T1 FOREIGN KEY
        (T1_id)
         REFERENCES T1 (T1_id) ON DELETE CASCADE
  );
  
  CREATE TABLE T3
  (
     T3_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     T2_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     T1_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     CONSTRAINT T3_pk PRIMARY KEY (T1_id, T2_id, T3_id),
     CONSTRAINT fk_T2 FOREIGN KEY
        (T1_id, T2_id)
         REFERENCES T2 (T1_id, T2_id) ON DELETE CASCADE
  );
  
  CREATE TABLE T4
  (
     T4_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     T3_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     T2_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     T1_id   NUMERIC (10) NOT NULL,
     CONSTRAINT T4_pk PRIMARY KEY (T1_id, T2_id, T3_id, T4_id),
     CONSTRAINT fk_T3 FOREIGN KEY
        (T1_id, T2_id, T3_id)
         REFERENCES T3 (T1_id, T2_id, T3_id) ON DELETE CASCADE
  );

  now every night runs a delete statement, where some T1 lines are deleted
  delete from T1 where blah blah blah
  so all the cascading deletes are performed.
  
  It is faster to remove from the table below / (s) in the case of T4, then delete the T3, then T2 and T1 finally
  or leaving the cascade deletes do their thing results in the same amount of time?
  
  If it's faster to remove from the table below / (s) is first of all a few querry which gave a table I can find all the
  its deletion tables cascading? so, in my particular case T1 he would show as the weaker then T3 and T2 T4.
  
  Thanks for any input.

  Hello

  Pollywog wrote:
  ... It is faster to remove from the table below / (s) in the case of T4, then delete the T3, then T2 and T1 finally
  or leaving the cascade deletes do their thing results in the same amount of time?

  Interesting question. Try (using tables) and see.

  My guess is that it would be faster to just delete T1. Say you delete T2 and T1. When you delete T1, it will check if there are children in T2, so the effort you put into the search for the children in T2 is redundant.

  If it's faster to remove from the table below / (s) is first of all a few querry which gave a table I can find all the
  its deletion tables cascading? so, in my particular case T1 he would show as the weaker then T3 and T2 T4.

  Data dictionary views all_constraints and all_cons_columns (as well as their counterparts from user_ and dba_) have this information.

• Add ON DELETE CASCADE

  Hello world.
  
  I want to add the "ON DELETE CASCADE" constraint on the foreign key value in the child table as.
  
  ALTER table employees
  Add CONSTRAINT cscade_dept_no ON DELETE CASCADE (Deptno)
  
  but it displays the error message, so please help me in this matter.
  
  
  Thank you
  
  Published by: BilalKhan on February 7, 2011 23:53

  In general, will be useful look the displayed error.

  Example:

  ALTER table employee Add CONSTRAINT cscade_dept_no ON DELETE CASCADE (Deptno);
  
  Error SQL: ORA-00904: :
  00904. 00000 -  "%s: invalid identifier"
  *Cause:
  *Action:
  

  Then we can tell you... Your syntaxis is incorrect, you must use

  ALTER TABLE table_name
  Add CONSTRAINT constraint_name
  FOREIGN KEY (column1, column2,... column_n)
  REFERENCES parent_table (column1, column2,... column_n)
  WE DELETE CASCADE;

  example of

  ALTER TABLE employee
  add CONSTRAINT cscade_dept_no
    FOREIGN KEY (Deptno)
    REFERENCES Department (Deptno)
    ON DELETE CASCADE;
  

• Cannot delete the Parent folder - On Delete Cascade is set

  Hi all
  I have a table parent and child, and when I try to delete the parent record, I get the following error:
  
  ORA-02292: integrity constraint (WFSTEADMAN. INCIDENT_NOTES_TBL_FK) violated - book of the foundling
  Error failed to process row in the MYTEST_INCIDENTS table.
  
  I have the FK is defined on the ON DELETE CASCADE, so I'm not sure of what could be the issue.
  
  Here are the structures of my parent and child tables:
  
  I use apex.oracle.com for the version is: Application Express 4.0.2.00.06
  
  Any help would be appreciated.
  Wally
  
  PARENT TABLE:
  =============================================================
  
  CREATE TABLE 'MYTEST_INCIDENTS '.
  (ACTIVATE THE "INCIDENTID" NUMBER NOT NULL,)
  "INCIDENTCREATED" DATE NOT NULL ACTIVATE.
  ACTIVATE THE "INCIDENT_OWNER" VARCHAR2 (200) NOT NULL,
  "DTGSTART" DATE NOT NULL ACTIVATE.
  DATE OF THE "DTGEND."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "INCIDENT_SERVICES."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "INCIDENT_CUSTOMERS."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "INCIDENT_DESCRIPTION."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "INCIDENT_TIMELINE."
  VARCHAR2 (500) "INCIDENT_TRACKING."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "INCIDENT_RESTORE."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "INCIDENT_FOLLOWUP."
  NUMBER OF "INCIDENT_LEVEL."
  VARCHAR2 (500) "INCIDENT_TITLE."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "EMAIL_NOTIFY."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "TEXT_NOTIFY."
  VARCHAR2 (25) "LEVEL_TYPE."
  ENABLE 'MYTEST_INCIDENTS_PK' CONSTRAINT PRIMARY KEY ('INCIDENTID')
  ) ;
  
  
  CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER "BI_MYTEST_INCIDENTS".
  Before Insert on 'MYTEST_INCIDENTS '.
  for each line
  Start
  If: NEW. "' INCIDENTID ' is null then
  Select 'MYTEST_INCIDENTS_SEQ'.nextval in: NEW. "' INCIDENTID ' from dual;
  end if;
  end;
  /
  ALTER TRIGGER 'BI_MYTEST_INCIDENTS' ENABLE;
  
  
  CHILD TABLE
  =============================================================
  
  CREATE TABLE 'MYTEST_INC_NOTES '.
  (ENABLE THE "NOTEID" NUMBER NOT NULL,)
  ACTIVATE THE "INCIDENT_ID" NUMBER NOT NULL,
  DATE OF THE "NOTE_DTG."
  VARCHAR2 (200) "NOTE_OWNER."
  VARCHAR2 (4000) "NOTE_COMMENTS."
  ENABLE 'MYTEST_INC_NOTES_PK' CONSTRAINT PRIMARY KEY ('NOTEID")
  ) ; ALTER TABLE 'MYTEST_INC_NOTES' ADD 'MYTEST_INC_NOTES_CON' OF CONSTRAINT FOREIGN KEY ('INCIDENT_ID')
  REFERENCES "MYTEST_INCIDENTS" ("INCIDENTID") ON DELETE CASCADE ACTIVE;
  
  
  CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER "BI_MYTEST_INC_NOTES".
  Before Insert on 'MYTEST_INC_NOTES '.
  for each line
  Start
  If: NEW. "" NOTEID ' is null then
  Select 'MYTEST_INC_NOTES_SEQ'.nextval in: NEW. "" NOTEID ' from dual;
  end if;
  end;
  /
  ALTER TRIGGER 'BI_MYTEST_INC_NOTES' ENABLE;
  
  
  CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER "MYTEST_INC_NOTES_T1".
  FRONT
  Insert or update on 'MYTEST_INC_NOTES' REFERENCING NEW AS NEW OLD AS OLD
  for each line
  Start
  : NEW. NOTE_DTG: = SYSDATE;
  end;
  /
  ALTER TRIGGER 'MYTEST_INC_NOTES_T1' ACTIVE;

  I suppose that you use the provided script to create your tables:
  the error message indicates that the FK INCIDENT_NOTES_TBL_FK is vioalated
  And your script creates a cascade of delete on FK MYTEST_INC_NOTES_CON

• Problems with the database, on delete cascade

  Hello

  I am in a project with the Flahs CS4 with air and as3. I create a database by code, everything is ok. I have 2 tables,
  a main table with a code field as primary key and other details of the table, named e.g. DetailTable, with 3 fields as the primary key. What I want to do, this is a deletion of a row in MainTable, all lines of DetailTable, where the field code is the same as the field in MainTable code should be deleted also.

  Here's the SQL code to create the tables.

  var sql2:String = "CREATE TABLE If NOT EXISTS MainTable ('+ '.
  "code INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT, ' +.
  "quote," +
  'date ' +.
  "  " +
  ")";

  var sql3:String = "CREATE TABLE If NOT EXISTS DetailTable ('+ '.
  "code INTEGER, INTEGER position, type INTEGER, ' +.
  "path of TEXT, TEXT document, ' +.
  'PRIMARY KEY (code, position, type) +.
  'FOREIGN KEY (code) REFERENCES Detallesecuencia (code) ON DELETE CASCADE ' +.
  ")";

  
  Thus, when the tables are created, insert data. I connect without a problem, remove a line in MainTable (see code), to remove the line with the example code = 4, but in the DetailTable, all with code = 4 lines are NOT deleted, why?

  [CODE]
  Inside of a class

  private var conn: SQLConnection;

  public void constructorClass() {}
  Conn = new SqlConnection ();
  ConexionBD();
  }

  function ConexionBD() {}

  conn.addEventListener (SQLEvent.OPEN, openHandler);
  conn.addEventListener (SQLErrorEvent.ERROR, errorHandler);
  var dbFile:File = File.applicationDirectory.resolvePath ("mydatabase.db");
  conn.openAsync (dbFile, SQLMode.UPDATE);
  }

  function deleteRow() {}
  selectData:SQLStatement = new SQLStatement();
  selectData.sqlConnection = conn;
  selectData.text = "" DELETE FROM MainTable WHERE code =: param1 ";"
  selectData.addEventListener (SQLEvent.RESULT, resultHandler);
  selectData.addEventListener (SQLErrorEvent.ERROR, errorHandler);

  Delete line in MainTable code = 4, but not to delete all the rows in DetailTable with code = 4
  selectData.parameters [": param1"] = 4;
  
  selectData.execute ();
  }
  [/ CODE]

  Thanks in advance

  Hmmm, well then maybe it's you must go down the road of the old school and delete individual tables as needed, rather than rely on the cascade delete.

• Foreign keys without ON DELETE CASCADE; Database design question

  It's the 3rd company, while I work, where I see that created foreign keys

  ON DELETE CASCADE

  clause.
  My colleague said that it is created without the ON DELETE CASCADE clause in order to complicate the deletion of data (records of children). Thus, for codes of the Purge and archive, before we delete the parent table we must remove from the child table first.
  
  Occasinaly, something is wrong and we will end up disabling FKs make them all and then purging, archiving, etc...
  
  So, is it not better to create foreign keys with the clause ON DELETE CASCADE, rather than having all these hassles?
  
  Experience, no matter what you think?

  Personally, I am firmly in the removal of the brand of hard data camp. In the vast majority of cases, trying to remove an active parent is an error if the user must be informed of what they are trying to do and must make a conscious effort to do so (in other words, remove first the children).

  John

• ON DELETE CASCADE and the CASCADE CONSTRAINTS - what are the difference?

  I know that CASCADE CONSTRAINTS would allow me to remove the parent key and the reference of the following children will be freed from the constraints. However, the child columns will remain and will be set to NULL.
  
  SO:
  
  If the CASCADE CONSTRAINTS could do the job, why do we need on REMOVE CONSTRAINTS?
  
  Unnecessary extra Note:
  
  I know that YOU DELETE CONSTRAINT is defined with the child. When I tried to delete the parent key without having the CONSTRAINTS of the WATERFALL, I got an error message indicates that the parent key has childs! So ON DELETE CASCADE was not up to what I had to mention the CASCADE CONSTRAINTS when deleting the parent key while the CASCADE CONSTRAINTS worked fine without ON DELETE CASCADE on the side of the child.
  
  I hope that my question is simple...

  A foreign key with a delete cascade means that if a record in the parent table is deleted, then the corresponding records in the child table with automatically deleted. This is a deletion of the waterfall.

  Forced to cascade deletes all foreign keys that reference the table to remove, and then deletes the table.

• logical delete cascade

  Hello
  
  I need to implement the logic cascade delete (defining a column instead of remove value)
  
  Simple logical deletion, I made by substituting the EntityImpl remove() method.
  

      public void remove() {
          setAttribute("Status","1");
      }

  but with this stunt declarative removal does not work.
  
  So I'm looking for some advice how to solve this problem.

  I don't know if it's the best way, but it works :)

      /**Add entity remove logic in this method.
       */
      public void remove() {
  
          setCountryName(getCountryName() + "Remove-Deleted");
          super.remove();
      }
  
      /**Custom DML update/insert/delete logic here.
       */
      protected void doDML(int operation, TransactionEvent e) {
          if (operation != DML_DELETE)
              super.doDML(operation, e);
          else {
              super.doDML(DML_UPDATE, e);
          }
  
      }
  

• On DELETE CASCADE

  Y at - it a syntax that will allow me to change a constraint to be a sur-supprimer-cascade, without having to drop and re-create me?
  
  10.2.0.4 on Windows 64-bit.
  
  I don't expect that there is, but it would be nice to be surprised!
  
  If not, does anyone have a pure piece of PL/SQL that would do the deed to an entire schema programmatically?

  Kamran Agayev A. wrote:
  Run this code

  SELECT    'select DBMS_METADATA.get_dependent_ddl (''REF_CONSTRAINT'','''
  || table_name
  || ''') code
  FROM DUAL
  UNION ALL
  SELECT DBMS_METADATA.get_dependent_ddl (''CONSTRAINT'','''
  || table_name
  || ''')
  FROM DUAL;
  ' code
  FROM dba_tables
  

  Keita,

  Why is there a colon, semi with FROM DUAL ? That ends the statement and the next line is throwing the error I think!

  Catfive,

  I have run that had no oracle db here, but try this.

  SELECT 'select DBMS_METADATA.get_dependent_ddl (''REF_CONSTRAINT'','''|| table_name|| ''') code
    FROM DUAL
  UNION ALL
  SELECT DBMS_METADATA.get_dependent_ddl (''CONSTRAINT'','''|| table_name|| ''')  FROM DUAL' code
    FROM dba_tables
  

  Aman...

• A locked E-Mail, then I hit control, alternate, delete that turned my 90 degrees counter clockwise__now window is to the left and down is right

  How can I move windows back 90 degrees to the right for a normal installation?

  Try to press Ctrl + Alt + up ARROW, or try Ctrl + Alt + and a different key to the arrow.

  If this does not work: right click on the empty desk > graphics > Rotation.

  See you soon.

  Mick Murphy - Microsoft partner

• Cascading deletes

  Hello

  We used alter table to change the cascading delete constraint. There are two options. What is different between the two of them.

  Example:

  (1) Alter table t3 add constraint t2_F foreign key (id) makes reference to t2 (id, column2, column3) on delete cascade.

  or

  (2) Alter table t3 add constraint t2_F foreign key (id) makes reference t2 on delete cascade.

  I know that this column special first will set delete cascade.

  What is the use of a second, in this case we do not use the name of the column in ' foreign key (id) refers to Q2 we delete cascade;

  > 1) Alter table add constraint t2_F foreign key (id) t3 refers to t2(id,column2,column3) on delete cascade.

  http://docs.Oracle.com/CD/E11882_01/server.112/e41084/clauses002.htm
  =====
  Foreign key constraints
  You can designate the same column or combination of columns as a foreign key and a primary or unique key.
  =====

  (> 2) Alter table t3 add constraint t2_F foreign key (id) makes reference t2 on delete cascade.

  http://docs.Oracle.com/CD/E11882_01/server.112/e41084/clauses002.htm

  =====

  Foreign key constraints
  If you have identified only the parent table or view and omit the column name, then the foreign key references the primary key of the parent table or view automatically.

  =====

• Why is not cascade delete works correctly?

  With the help of JDev 11.1.2.1.0.
  
  Error: ORA-02292: integrity constraint (CINDER. QR_DCMR_FK) violated - book of the foundling.
  
  I have a relationship of the master / detail. The association is composite and the operation "Optimize for Cascade Delete" is checked. In my AppModule, I call a function that deletes a master record. ADF automatically deletes the dependent lines.
  
  However, when I submit to the database, I get the message. I don't get this error when I commit new master/detail records, only when I change a pre-existing.
  
  On another note, I always the same error when I put the foreign key in database initially postponed.
  
  What could cause such behavior?

  "Optimize for delete cascade of database" is intended to be used when you have a foreign key (FK) in the database that is defined with the CASCADE DELETE option. ADF What if selected is with 2 EOs joined by a composition association, if the user deletes a record of primary OS, at the time rather sends deletions to registration of primary OA and children associated with EO records separately (which could be much separate DELETE statement), it sends only a simple omission to EO primary record. This is based on the assumption that FK with the CASCADE DELETE option in the database automatically removes the child records, thus saving the separate children removal instructions.

  See the last sentence of article 4.10.13.4 of the merger Guide: http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E24382_01/web.1112/e16182/bcentities.htm#BABHFJFJ

  As these only use this option if your CONCRETE. QR_DCMR_FK has the DELETE CASCADE option in your database.

  If this isn't your use case, please explain what you are trying to reach.

  CM.

• Cascading deletion

  I activated on option delete cascade in a single table. What I want is when I delete a row in the AUDIT_PROCESS table, it deletes the row in the FEEDBACK_PROCESS table and the table MICC_AT_ANALISYS. I think I created the constraints on the table to foreign keys feedback_cod and cod_analysis very well audit_process, but when I delete a row in the audit_process table, it doesn't delete the table feeback_process and micc_at_analysis. I don't know if I have to make another step to trigger what I want. Please help me with this.
  
  Here's the code when I created the tables.
  
  I have this table with cascading delete enabled
  

  CREATE TABLE  "AUDIT_PROCESS" 
     (     "AUDIT_COD" NUMBER(5,0), 
       "COD_ANALYSIS" VARCHAR2(5), 
       "FEEDBACK_COD" NUMBER, 
       "AUD_SR" VARCHAR2(15), 
       "AUD_ERROR" VARCHAR2(5), 
       "AUD_OBSERV" VARCHAR2(300), 
       "AUD_OWNER" NUMBER, 
       "AUD_DATE" VARCHAR2(10), 
       "AUD_STATUS" VARCHAR2(5), 
        CONSTRAINT "AUDIT_PROCESS_PK" PRIMARY KEY ("AUDIT_COD") ENABLE
     ) ;ALTER TABLE  "AUDIT_PROCESS" ADD CONSTRAINT "AUDIT_PROCESS_CON" FOREIGN KEY ("COD_ANALYSIS")
         REFERENCES  "MICC_AT_ANALISYS" ("COD_ANALYSIS") ON DELETE CASCADE ENABLE;ALTER TABLE  "AUDIT_PROCESS" ADD CONSTRAINT "AUDIT_PROCESS_CON_FEEDBACK" FOREIGN KEY ("FEEDBACK_COD")
         REFERENCES  "FEEDBACK_PROCESS" ("FEEDBACK_COD") ON DELETE CASCADE ENABLE;

  This table below is one of the parents table

  CREATE TABLE  "FEEDBACK_PROCESS" 
     (     "FEEDBACK_COD" NUMBER, 
       "FEEDBK_AGREE" VARCHAR2(2), 
       "FEEDBK_OBSERV" VARCHAR2(250), 
       "FEEDBK_DATE" VARCHAR2(10), 
       "FEEDBK_STATUS" VARCHAR2(5), 
       "SR" VARCHAR2(15), 
       "ERROR" VARCHAR2(5), 
        CONSTRAINT "FEEDBACK_PROCESS_PK" PRIMARY KEY ("FEEDBACK_COD") ENABLE
     ) ;

  It's the other parent table
  

  CREATE TABLE  "MICC_AT_ANALISYS" 
     (     "COD_ANALYSIS" VARCHAR2(5), 
       "ANALISYS_DATE" VARCHAR2(150), 
       "ANALYSIS_OBS" VARCHAR2(150), 
       "ANALYSIS_STATUS" VARCHAR2(4), 
       "ANALYSIS_SOURCE" VARCHAR2(10), 
       "ANALYSIS_ERROR" VARCHAR2(4), 
        CONSTRAINT "MICC_AT_ANALISYS_PK" PRIMARY KEY ("COD_ANALYSIS") ENABLE
     ) ;

  Bernardo,

  This isn't a typical question of APEX.

  Suggested it was an option.

  CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER trg_adr_audit_process
    AFTER DELETE ON audit_process
    FOR EACH ROW
  BEGIN
    DELETE feedback_process WHERE feedback_cod = :old.feedback_cod;
    DELETE micc_at_analisys WHERE cod_analysis = :old.cod_analysis;
  END;
  

  However, if it is in the APEX, you might consider writing a page-process that manages all delete them for you:
  -remove the child
  -remove the parent
  and this process will be triggered by the action of DELETING your page.

  Kind regards
  Richard

• What way to go with cascade delete

  Hello
  I must compose intellegent delete to table with PK - FK constraints (3 tables involved in this relationship), these constraints always without "delete cascade > but it could be fixed as it still in DEV." I'm curious to know how to do, then it will work in the best way.
  I am bit new to Oracle and any option cascade on DELETE is not found, so confused how it works in Oracle, what I need to ALTER first letting fall the constraints and then delete the tables one by one, or...
  I also read that read on www on some problem with < on delete cascade >, while it brings more confusion and attention...
  
  I enjoy info or pointer to any good place to learn or any good sample.
  What is best solution starting with DB at the end DELETE definition.
  
  Thank you all very much.
  Trent

  If you wanted to do a removal of the waterfall, you need to delete and recreate the foreign key constraint to specify that

  http://laurentschneider.com/wordpress/2007/08/on-delete-cascade.html

  In general, however, strongly hate the delete cascade option. I would have much preferred that the procedure that removes data from the company mother (you don't have such a procedure, right?) explicitly delete data by children (by calling another procedure in a different package). This makes it much more obvious for prospective developers what is happening, and what makes it much less likely that a deletion will have a perverse effect.

  Justin

• ADF 11 g: problem with cascade delete

  Hi all
  
  Using JDeveloper 11.1.1.2.0. Have a master entity with the bodies of five children, each association marked as composition and "Implement Cascade Delete" checked (uncontrolled cascade of database optimization). Try to delete the captain get error of FK violation on one of these associations: for example "java.sql.SQLIntegrityConstraintViolationException: ORA-02292: eheysrajoitetta (SESDB.» MAKSUT_HAKEMUKSET_FK) on rikottu; alitietue on loytynyt.
  
  Shouldn't ensure it option "implement Cascade Delete" the correct order for the removal of the DB? What I'm missing here?
  
  Kind regards
  
  Joonas

  2 comments:

  (a) are you sure of the FK that throws the error of constraint is the cascade - delete - would - this another FK?

  (b) have you enabled also optimize for delete cascade of database. No doubt this will only send a master DELETE the DB.

  CM.