Optimize the foreign key for the removal of the cascade constraint.

Similar Questions

• 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.

• Exclude foreign keys from the relational model comparison

  Hello!

  Is it possible to exclude foreign keys for comparison when comparing relational models?

  It's the same and when inporting dictionary of data in the relational model.

  Thank you very much for the help!

  Kind regards

  Dimitar Angelov

  Hi Dimitar,

  Yes it is possible to do using "generate DDL' flag - there is an option in the dialog box"compare models"- tab" Options > compare Options '-C' is a checkbox "use generate DDL settings to filter objects.

  You must make a DDL generation with open physical model that will be used - in the DDL generation options you can deselect items you don't want to have in comparison. You can save as a configuration of generation of DDL or simply do it before the comparison.

  After comparing models of dialog, you can check "Use generate DDL settings to filter objects" box to check (and probably to load a configuration of generation of DDL) and use the buton "refresh trees."

  You can use this method to filter the tables, constraints PK and UK, index, constraints FK and the views.

  Philippe

• foreign key referencing the table in different schema

  I create a foreign key for the table in the schema A a table to diagram B.
  
  I do that by grant references (column name) on the name of the table to username;
  
  
  is there any drawback/disadvantage in the creation of foreign keys referencing tables in another schema?

  Not as such, no.

  Generally, you want to check a second time when you are in this kind of situation that the two tables really belong in different schemas. It should be relatively rare to find a child table that belongs to a different schema than the parent. Sometimes, but it should be an exception, not the rule.

  Justin

• logical foreign key

  Hi all
  
  I'm sorry to bring the similar question. .
  I am able to create the logical foreign key for table logic with A new (A.2 = B.2) (2 is calculated logical column).
  However there are still some physical join foreign key with the old constitution (A1 = B. 1). When I deploy this RPD, it generates sql with (A1 = B. 1) join condition.
  
  Then, I removed this RPD physical foreign key join and received a warning "logical dimension B has a source which don't happen with any fact table" in the consistency check.
  
  Always after the deployment of the Dre, I get the error message [nQSError: 14025] indeed no table exists at the level of detail requested: in the report.
  
  I'm missing something. The logical foreign key has join condition correct that he is still not on the physical join of riding.
  
  Thank you for going through this question,
  
  http://Tinypic.com/r/2qiwmrr/6

  Based on your comments, I am looking at the documentation:
  I found a Note: a logical key to a fact table should consist of key columns that join the tables of attribute. Logical foreign key joins may be necessary if the Oracle's BI server should be used as an ODBC data source for some queries and third party reporting tools.

  I need to see why ODBC, and unlike the foreign logic key join is not the substitution of the physical layer to join.

  BTW: Since you want to go with a join defined using logical column, you can use the same expression in physical join using the expression builder?

  It should work.

  EX: T43770. Department_id = case when T43764. Department_id > 10 then T43764. Department_id 0 otherwise end

  Published by: Srini VIEREN on 18 January 2013 16:52

• Foreign keys of a logical Table

  Hi all
  
  I want to know in what scenarios, we create the foreign key of a logical Table. Once we have create the foreign key for the logical table, this means he automatically substitute if joins are here.
  
  
  Physical table A, B (without physical joins)
  
  Logic table A, B (B (Sun)--> (Fact) A logical join)
  
  created the foreign key in the logical table A with b. (A.1 = B.1)
  
  The RPD will generate sql with A.1 = B.1 join condition for the reports.
  
  I tried to create the logical foreign key for table logical, I couldn't see any option from the table. Here is his
  http://Tinypic.com/r/jq1gkz/6
  
  
  Thank you
  
  Virat

  In general when we go to the complex joins in the physical layer, we opt for logical foreign key joins in layer MDB, best examples is SCD Type II.

  Physical table A, B (without physical joins)
  --> You must have a physical join so that it can be override by layer MDB

  created the foreign key in the logical table A with b. (A.1 = B.1) the RPD will generate sql with A.1 = B.1 join condition for the reports.
  --> Yes, you can see this join in the physical BI query.

  I tried to create the logical foreign key for table logical, I couldn't see any option from the table. Here is his
  --> 2 cases: 1) you must remove existing logical joins 2) you could not have involved physical layer.

  Hope this helps
  Let me know for questions

  Published by: Srini VIEREN on 18 January 2013 13:29

  BTW: You got a very good reputation, why don't update you your profile to see your name instead of a number

  Published by: Srini VIEREN on 18 January 2013 13:29

• Entity Association depends on foreign key constraint?

  Hello
  
  I use JDeveloper 10.1.3.4 and have a question, as shown in the subject of this announcement. By a design flaw, I added a foreign key on a table constraint at the level of the database for any purpose other than to achieve a relationship between master/detail your. Now the foreign key constraint fell to remedy the irregularity, but I don't know if the application is not a problem on the road.
  
  The application in question has a table named BILL and another table called VALIDATIONS, both with the same primary key composite (LDAP_UID, TERM), where we hear per semester.
  
  BILL is on students, the balance they have, etc. VALIDATION records the commitment, students make:
  

  BILL
  ------------------------------------------------
  LDAP_UID       TERM      BALANCE
  -------------  --------  --------
  john.miller    200902       1500
  
  
  VALIDATIONS
  ------------------------------------------------
  LDAP_UID       TERM      CONFIRM_NUMBER
  -------------  --------  --------------
  john.miller    200902    0901100005

  The foreign key constraint has been added on the table of VALIDATION, validations (LDAP_UID, TERM) reference (LDAP_UID, TERM) BILL. When the data model is accumulated in the application, an entity association was created automatically for this foreign key constraint, and then a link has been created on the association of the entity to achieve the effect mater-detail of the application:
  

  Table:               BILL
  Table:               VALIDATIONS
  Foreign Key:         VALIDATIONS(LDAP_UID, TERM) references BILL(LDAP_UID, TERM)
  Entity object:       Bill
  Entity object:       Vallidations
  Entity Association:  ValidationsBillFkAssoc (based on the foreign key)
  View object:         LoggedInStudent (from Bill)
  View object:         OneValidation (from Validations)
  View link:           ValidationByOneStudent (based on ValidationsBillFkAssoc.  This achieves master/detail
                                               between LoggedInStudent and OneValidation)

  This foreign key is now asking problem and should be deleted: Bill table contains the data from more than three semesters, whereas student commitments cumulatively saved in the table of VALIDATIONS must be maintained permanently. When data from older semesters are unloaded from the table of BILL, the lines stored in the table of VALIDATION are orphaned.
  
  I thought that the link of the view and the association of the entity dependent on the foreign key, so I removed before dropping the foreign key in the order listed here:
  

  Removed usage of of the VO (OneValidation) from the application module
  Deleted the view link (ValidationByOneStudent)
  Deleted the entity association (ValidationsBillFkAssoc)
  Dropped the foreign key in the database

  The master/detail relationship between the two your is still necessary. I added the link display, which now is based on common attributes (LdapUid, term) between the two, rather than based on the association of the entity. The modified application works very well with the database has changed and now the rows in the table of VALIDATION will not be an orphan.
  
  What is interesting and also troubling is that when I run a copy of the application which has been registered before these amendments, on the basis of data which dropped the foreign key constraint, the application still works, with the master-detail and everything. And the dependencies do not seem to matter. But isn't it?
  
  My question is: an entity association requires a corresponding foreign key in the database? If I use the copy of the application before the changes, it will be OK or it will cause unforeseen problems on the road?
  
  Thank you!
  
  Newman
  
  Edited by: J. Newman, October 6, 2009 10:31

  Hello

  If you've proven yourself that in fact there is no dependency between the association and the foreign key constraint. in fact you can create everything that (the primary keys, foreign keys, other constraints) only for your same features if you have nothing
  defined in database tables, which is obviously not right approach. and JDeveloper tells you only about the dependence of its use (if you want to delete something that is used some part... e. g VL in AM, EO in VO, VO in AM...)
  just to note - it is important to synchronize your OA if you change the definition of the data table. for example if you remove the foreign key of the table then right-click on EO and chose to sync - JDeveloper should acknowledge and ask you
  If you want to remove this constraint of EO.

  Kind regards

  Branislav

• How to make a primary foreign key?

  I'm working on my data model and I can't understand how a foreign key to be a primary foreign key... I'll make a primary foreign key for this specific table 2...
  I tried to do the foreign key checked as the primary_UID... but this isn't the solution... I want to show in the relational model indicated as "PF" or the primary foreign key
  
  Anyone know? Thanks in advance

  Hi Delos,

  What version of SQL Developer Data Modeler do you use?
  For me, it works in 3.1.1.703 and 3.1.2.704.
  Can you provide more details.
  For the logic model you can use the Unique identifier dialog box and add links to the list of used objects.

  Philippe

• I entered the product key: / * removed product key * / for window 7 but it shows oxc004e003 error code

  I entered the product key: / * removed product key * / for window 7 but it displays oxc004e003 error code how can I fix this problem and it is easier to install

  Activation error: 0XC004E003 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/938450

  Have you tried to restart by phone?

  How to activate Windows 7 manually (activate by phone)
   
  1) click Start and in the search for box type: slui.exe 4
   
  (2) press the ENTER"" key.
   
  (3) select your "country" in the list.
   
  (4) choose the option "activate phone".
   
  (5) stay on the phone (do not select/press all options) and wait for a person to help you with the activation.
   
  (6) explain your problem clearly to the support person.
   
  http://support.Microsoft.com/kb/950929/en-us

  Please run the Microsoft Genuine Diagnostics Tool then copy and paste the results into an answer here for further analysis:
  http://go.Microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=52012

• Can I remove Logical columns that I will not use in the layer of presentation as the id or foreign key columns?

  Hello

  Can I remove Logical columns at the level of the business layer that I'm not going to use the layer of presentation as the ID or foreign key columns? It will not affect the relations to the business layer?

  Kind regards

  Nestor

  Hi Nestor,.

  It won't unless they are used as keys, columns sort order, the ID column or the likes. But you can leave them in the MDB layer and expose just in the presentation layer - just in case you need it later. It is not use all the resources or generate overhead. More: Developer of the RPD should be used to work with loads of columns

• Insert a line containing the same data but repeated for each foreign key availabl

  So I use Jdeveloper11g.
  
  I have a question where I have 2 tables, shops and rooms. Rooms now has a foreign key StoreId, which corresponds to the primary ID of stores and they are connected in a relationship 1 to many. Now I have over 600 stores. And only 2 have all the pieces that were (the building which is not even a main store in most of the rooms). The rest are not, but what I need is to assign to each store with the same name room1 1 room.
  
  So the name would be the same, the primary key could get it I hope some sequences, but the foreign key ID, that StoreID field would have to change and insert for each store.
  
  Is there a way to query sql for this type? Any means which is not manually create a 1 room, then assign to 1 store and repeating the process 600 times?
  
  Thanks in advance

  Hello

  It looks like you want

  INSERT INTO rooms (roomid, roomname, storeid)
  SELECT  roomidseq.NEXTVAL
  ,     'room1'
  ,     storeid
  FROM     stores
  ;
  

  I hope that answers your question.
  If not, post a small example of data (CREATE TABLE and only relevant columns, INSERT statements) for all of the tables involved and the results desired from these data.
  In the case of a DML (such as INSERT) operation the sample data should show what look like the paintings before the DML, and results will be the content of the or a modified tables after the DML.
  Explain, using specific examples, how you get these results from these data.
  Always say what version of Oracle you are using (for example, 11.2.0.2.0).
  See the FAQ forum {message identifier: = 9360002}

• Delete records based on the foreign keys of oracle 11 g

  I have a requirement to remove the records from the tables in the order according to

  the existing foreign keys.

  I for example, the following tables and the pk, fk constraints:

  create table one

  (aa number (1),)

  descr varchar2 (20));

  ALTER table one

  Add constraint a_pk key (aa) primary;

  create table b

  (aa number (1),)

  descr varchar2 (20));

  ALTER table b

  Add constraint b_pk key (aa) primary;

  create table c

  (aa number (1),)

  descr varchar2 (20));

  ALTER table c

  Add constraint c_pk key (aa) primary;

  create table a2

  (aa number (2),)

  id_aa number (1).

  descr varchar2 (20));

  ALTER table a2

  Add constraint a2_pk key (aa) primary;

  ALTER table a2

  Add constraint a2_fk foreign key (id_aa)

  references a (aa);

  create table b2

  (aa number (2),)

  id_aa number (1).

  descr varchar2 (20));

  ALTER table b2

  Add constraint b2_pk key (aa) primary;

  ALTER table b2

  Add constraint b2_fk foreign key (id_aa)

  references b (aa);

  create table z

  (aa number (3),)

  id_aa number (1).

  id_bb number (1).

  descr varchar (20));

  ALTER table z

  Add constraint z_pk key (aa) primary;

  ALTER table z

  Add constraint z_fk1 foreign key (id_aa)

  references a (aa);

  ALTER table z

  Add constraint z_fk2 foreign key (id_bb)

  references b (aa);

  So, I want to choose the names of the tables in such an order so as

  deleting records will succeed...

  I built the following sql query (using the recursive subquery factoring):

  [p]

  with q (r_constraint_name, table_name, constraint_name, lvl) as

  (select table_name, constraint_name, r_constraint_name 1 lvl

  from user_constraints one

  where a.constraint_type = 'P '.

  Union of all the

  Select b.table_name b.constraint_name, b.r_constraint_name, q.lvl + 1 lvl

  from user_constraints b

  Join q

  on (q.constraint_name = b.r_constraint_name)

  where b.constraint_type = 'R '.

  )

  Select f.table_name, f.constraint_name, f.r_constraint_name, f.lvl

  q f

  [/ p]

  I want the results as the following list:

  Table-name

  ----------------

  B2

  A2

  Z

  A

  B

  C

  The table - B2, A2, Z - (in any order) must first referred in the list

  because they are based on the other three tables - A, B, C. Thus, in order to remove the

  A, B, C table records the B2, A2, table Z records must be beleted first.

  The query I posted above has the problem that it displays tables A2, B2 twice

  (1 because they have a pk and 2 because they have fk referring A, B relatively tables).

  Is there a solution for this problem?

  Note: I use db11g v2

  I wrote not all relationships of tables user_constraints (only argument constraint_name = r_constraint_name)

  Thank you

  SIM

  I have a requirement to remove the records from the tables in the order according to

  the existing foreign keys.

  . . .

  The table - B2, A2, Z - (in any order) must first referred in the list

  because they are based on the other three tables - A, B, C. Thus, in order to remove the

  A, B, C table records the B2, A2, table Z records must be beleted first.

  Is there a solution for this problem?

  Yes - the 'solution' is to use ON DELETE CASCADE, as appropriate or write a procedure that removes tables in the proper order.

  The solution is NOT to try to use dynamic sql statements to do so.

  You already know the good parent/child relationships. Simply create a procedure that uses the correct order.

  Analyses are necessary in any case to determine the proper order AND press the appropriate values to use to remove the appropriate lines

  Your DDL for tables and constraints must be in a version control system

  Update the procedure when / if new constraints or tables are added to the application

  IMHO, you must use dynamic SQL NOT to try to adjust automatically if a new constraint appears. New constraints should not appear by accident - they appear ONLY as part of a well planned release.

• Identify the foreign key table

  I have a table that has a few constraints that are foreign keys to other tables (see column FK_ETHNIC below). My naming conventions are consistent so they all start with 'FK_ ". In SQL, how can I find the table that the foreign key column references? I have a process that must find this table and then get all of its columns.
  Thank you!
  
  CREATE TABLE STU_BASE
  (PK_ID VARCHAR2 (32), sys_guid() by default)
  CONSTRAINT pk_stu_base
  KEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
  With the HELP of INDEX TABLESPACE sis_express_index
  STORAGE (INITIAL 524288
  NEXT 524288
  PCTINCREASE 0),.
  STUDENT_ID VARCHAR2 (15).
  Fk_stu_base_ethnic FK_ETHNIC VARCHAR2 (32) CONSTRAINT
  REFERENCES
  Ethnic (PK_ID)
  REMOVE THE NULL VALUE;
  
  CREATE TABLE ETHNIC
  (PK_ID VARCHAR2 (32), sys_guid() by default)
  CONSTRAINT pk_ethnic
  KEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
  With the HELP of INDEX TABLESPACE sis_express_index
  STORAGE (4096 INITIAL
  NEXT 4096
  PCTINCREASE 0),.
  VARCHAR2 (2) ETHNIC,.
  ETHNIC_DESC VARCHAR2 (30),
  STATE_CODE VARCHAR2 (2),
  FEDERAL_CODE VARCHAR2 (2))

  You could do a self-join with CONSTRAINTS (USER, ALL, s/n) views. You can search a constrainttype of 'R' and you can attach it to itself based on the R_OWNER and R_CONSTRAINT_NAME columns.

  For example:

  SELECT r1.owner      AS child_owner
       , r1.table_name AS child_table
       , r2.owner      AS parent_owner
       , r2.table_name AS parent_table
  FROM   all_constraints r1
  JOIN   all_constraints r2 ON  r2.owner           = r1.r_owner
                            AND r2.constraint_name = r1.r_constraint_name
  WHERE  r1.constraint_type = 'R'
  ;
  

  Published by: Centinul on February 16, 2012 15:36

• Lost after activation of the version foreign key relationship tables

  I created 2 tables to test this: approach the table and the Customer table that has a column AddressId referencing the Id primary key column in the Address table.
  
  So I ran the following statement in pl/sql developer:
  
  Start
  dbms_wm. EnableVersioning (' address, customer ', 'VIEW_WO_OVERWRITE');
  end;
  
  Then I couldn't find the foreign key in the table customer_lt or. What's not here?
  
  Thanks for any clue.
  
  -Nico-

  Hello!

  which is expected. OWM manages foreign in their own country keys when you encounter tables enabled version, that's why you don't see them anymore.
  Please see Chapter 1.9 ('constraint with Workspace Manager support') in the documentation for more information.
  When you open a DDL session on a version-enabled table, you can see the foreign keys on the temporary table _LTS. It is also the only way later on Add/Remove foreign key constraints.
  Apart from this, you can use the views ALL_WM_RIC_INFO or USER_WM_RIC_INFO to display foreign key metadata.

  hope that helps.

  Kind regards

  Andreas

• How do I change or add constr. foreign key to the table whose children or data lines

  Hello
  
  I have a table with the name of Department in which the DEPTNO column is a column of data and primary key in it for all columns. Now, I have a table EMP where DEPTNO column is not having any constraints, including constraint foreign key also. I now have data in the EMP table for all columns. I would now add the DEPTNO column foreign key constraint in the EMP table that references the column DEPTNO in DEPT table. Both the table have not all null values.
  
  I need to add the foreign key without removing the data in the EMP table.
  
  
  Please advice.
  
  Kind regards
  Alriq

  In addition, if you have pre-existing data that will never have a parent record but you want to ensure that any NEW data is consistent with the FK constraint you can always create it with the NOVALIDATE option:

  SQL> CREATE TABLE EMP_BKP AS SELECT * FROM SCOTT.EMP;
  
  Table created.
  
  SQL> CREATE TABLE DEPT_BKP AS SELECT * FROM SCOTT.DEPT;
  
  Table created.
  
  SQL> DELETE FROM DEPT_BKP WHERE DEPTNO=10;
  
  1 row deleted.
  
  SQL> ALTER TABLE DEPT_BKP ADD CONSTRAINT DEPT_BKP_PK PRIMARY KEY(DEPTNO);
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> ALTER TABLE EMP_BKP ADD CONSTRAINT DEPT_FK FOREIGN KEY(DEPTNO) REFERENCES DEPT_BKP(DEPTNO);
  ALTER TABLE EMP_BKP ADD CONSTRAINT DEPT_FK FOREIGN KEY(DEPTNO) REFERENCES DEPT_BKP(DEPTNO)
                                     *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-02298: cannot validate (TEST_USER.DEPT_FK) - parent keys not found
  
  SQL> ALTER TABLE EMP_BKP ADD CONSTRAINT DEPT_FK FOREIGN KEY(DEPTNO) REFERENCES DEPT_BKP(DEPTNO) NOVALIDATE;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> INSERT INTO EMP_BKP(EMPNO,ENAME,DEPTNO) VALUES(9999,'Test Emp',10);
  INSERT INTO EMP_BKP(EMPNO,ENAME,DEPTNO) VALUES(9999,'Test Emp',10)
  *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-02291: integrity constraint (TEST_USER.DEPT_FK) violated - parent key not found
  
  SQL> SELECT * FROM EMP_BKP WHERE DEPTNO = 10 ORDER BY EMPNO;
  
       EMPNO ENAME      JOB              MGR HIREDATE                   SAL       COMM     DEPTNO
  ---------- ---------- --------- ---------- ------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------
        7782 CLARK      MANAGER         7839 06/09/1981 00:00:00       2450                    10
        7839 KING       PRESIDENT            11/17/1981 00:00:00       5000                    10
        7934 MILLER     CLERK           7782 01/23/1982 00:00:00       1300                    10