unique or constraint validation?

Similar Questions

• Disable the unique key constraint

  Hello
  
  Is it possible to disable a unique key constraint?
  I tried the following code:
  
  ALTER TABLE table_name
  DISABLE the CONSTRAINT uk_constraint_name
  
  that seems to work fine, but when I try to insert or update a record that the unique constraint is still on. However, Toad in the United Kingdom is marked as disabled.
  
  What do I need to drop the UK and re-create it after my updates?
  
  Thank you

  The behavior that I have demonstrated that during
  a. you have an existing UNIQUE Index
  b. you add a Unique key constraint (with the same or another name, any - except that the error message contains the name of the index is different, if the constraint is disabled)

  OTOH, if you set the Unique key on the table without pre-existing index constraint, Oracle creates an Index. If you disable this constraint, Oracle removes the Index.
  So, if it is a small table and you can afford to recreate the Index each time, you can follow this method.

  SQL> create table t_2 (col_1 number, col_2 varchar2(5));
  
  Table created.
  
  SQL> alter table t_2 add constraint t_2_uk unique (col_1);
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> select index_name, uniqueness, status from user_indexes where table_name = 'T_2';
  
  INDEX_NAME                     UNIQUENES STATUS
  ------------------------------ --------- --------
  T_2_UK                         UNIQUE    VALID
  
  SQL> insert into t_2 values (1,'a');
  
  1 row created.
  
  SQL> commit;
  
  Commit complete.
  
  SQL> alter table t_2 disable constraint t_2_uk;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> insert into t_2 values (1,'b');
  
  1 row created.
  
  SQL> select index_name, uniqueness, status from user_indexes where table_name = 'T_2';
  
  no rows selected
  
  SQL>SQL> select constraint_name, constraint_type, status from user_constraints where table_name = 'T_2';
  
  CONSTRAINT_NAME                C STATUS
  ------------------------------ - --------
  T_2_UK                         U DISABLED
  
  SQL> alter table t_2 enable constraint t_2_uk;
  alter table t_2 enable constraint t_2_uk
  *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-02299: cannot validate (AWRADMIN.T_2_UK) - duplicate keys found
  
  SQL> delete t_2 where col_2 = 'b';
  
  1 row deleted.
  
  SQL> alter table t_2 enable constraint t_2_uk;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> select index_name, uniqueness, status from user_indexes where table_name = 'T_2';
  
  INDEX_NAME                     UNIQUENES STATUS
  ------------------------------ --------- --------
  T_2_UK                         UNIQUE    VALID
  
  SQL>
  

  Hemant K Collette

• ODI is recovering not Unique key constraint

  I created a table with script below and reverse engineering it.

  create table test
  (primary_id number,
   unique_not_null_ID number not null,
    col3 number,
   col4 varchar2(200),
   col5 varchar2(2000),
  primary key (primary_id),
  unique (unique_not_null_ID) 
  )
  

  But all looking in the constraint of the data store only the primary key is here

  Also, within the quick edit tab Interface is show

  (1) Primary_id: = UK and CN of check

  (2) Unique_not_null_id: = CN is the Coachman

  
  

  So, why there no Unique constraint picked up?

  
  

  I think then it will only mark it too fast Edition.
  

  Hi spear,

  Please note that during standard reverse engineering unique keys are not reverse engineering. Then you need to either do reverse engineering on measurement or add a unique touch to the ODI level.

  https://docs.Oracle.com/CD/E28280_01/integrate.1111/e12643/create_rev_model.htm#ODIDG225

• Unique index constraint Vs Unique

  Dear all,

  I just want to understand what is the difference between a Unique Index and uniqueness constraint

  I can create indexes like that, it duplicates will be blocked

  create table abhi_1 
  ( l_number number 
  )
  CREATE UNIQUE INDEX abhi_1_UK ON abhi_1
  (l_number);
  

  I can also use below syntax for duplicates blocking (index will be created internally)

  create table abhi_1 
  ( l_number number, 
  constraint abhi_1_UK UNIQUE (L_number)
  )
  

  Please specify,

  Hello

  I would use a unique constraint.  Allows you to create foreign key constraints referencing the single column.

  As you said, when you create a unique constraint, Oracle automatically creates an index for it if necessary.  You can explicitly set the attributes of that index (for example, the name and tablespace) If you wish.

• Unique name for a page element validation.

  Hello. I have 2 items on the page: P2_DNAME and P2_LOCATION. Both are text fields. What I want to do, is that I need to create a validation. The P2_DNAME field must be unique. When entered a value in this field, he must check with the DEPT table and make sure there unique name.

  To achieve this, I created a name Unique service name validation. Who checks with the query "select 1 of the Department where dname =: P2_DNAME' and throws an error message." This validation is also executed when the user clicks the submit button. But I want that it will be executed when the user moves to the next field.

  
  

  My validation also does not work. I reproduced it in oracle apex.com

  WORKSPACE: XXKIRAN

  USER name: kiran28. [email protected]

  PWD:kiran123

  App.No:94949

  Page no.: 2

  
  

  Can someone please review and tell me what I'm missing?

  Hello

  Please, take this as a guideline how do it, not as a solution. You can for example create another 'helper' and return the result of your posting in routine (instead of the actual input box), and then you can create appropriate dynamic actions that handle the change event of the article that you return your result of validation. To be more precise...

  Create an element of P1_DEPT_VALIDATION_RESULT, in your PL/SQL code, assign a value to it according to the DEPT_COUNT as

  if dept_count = 0 then
       :p1_dept_validation_result := 'valid';
  else
       :p1_dept_validation_result := 'invalid';
  end if;
  

  and add this in the field "Article (s) to return". Then manage its change event (just change event cannot be removed, so don't forget to switch the button to "Suppress the event" non).

  Pavel

• "The constraints of validation" do not seem to import correctly.  Is this a bug?

  I boned my schema tables (file-> import-> data dictionary) and I noticed that "validation constraints" do not seem to import correctly.  While I peut see them perform a preview of the DDL, I can't understand how to modify them in the model.

  If you use the table in the example below, you will notice when you double-click on TEST_DEMO , which transports you to the properties of the Table, there is no place to view or change the constraints validation.  I guess that they are subject to constraints of Table-level but they are no where.

  Here is the example:

  CREATE THE TABLE APEX_DEMO. TEST_DEMO

  (ID NUMBER CONSTRAINT TEST_DEMO_ID_NN NOT NULL,)

  APPLICATION_TYPE VARCHAR2 (30) TEST_DEMO_APP_TYPE_NN DEFAULT 'APEX' CONSTRAINT NOT NULL,.

  LOG_SEVERITY VARCHAR2 (20) DEFAULT 'INFO' CONSTRAINT TEST_DEMO_LOG_SEVERITY_NN NOT NULL,

  APP_USERNAME VARCHAR2 (32) TEST_DEMO_APP_USER_NN DEFAULT "S/O" CONSTRAINT NOT NULL

  );

  ALTER TABLE APEX_DEMO. (ADD) TEST_DEMO

  CONSTRAINT TEST_DEMO_APP_TYPE_CC

  CHECK (APPLICATION_TYPE ("APEX", "DATABASE", 'WEB_SERVICE'))

  ENABLE VALIDATE);

  ALTER TABLE APEX_DEMO. (ADD) TEST_DEMO

  CONSTRAINT TEST_DEMO_LOG_SEVERITY_CC

  CHECK (LOG_SEVERITY IN ("INFO", "DEBUG", "WARNING", "ERROR", "CRITICAL"))

  ENABLE VALIDATE);

  For column-level constraints, double-click the column name in the table properties dialog box. Detailed properties appears. Are there constraints and default values.

  For the table level validation constraints, open the physical model (under relational node) and open the node of the table. Then you will see a Table Check Constraint level node. You can't go to the diagram.

• Question of design on unique constraints while moving to multi-tenant

  Hi all
  
  Please see the definition of this simple table:

  CREATE TABLE emp 
      ( 
       id INTEGER  NOT NULL , 
       name VARCHAR2 (30 CHAR)  NOT NULL , 
       birthdate DATE  NOT NULL , 
       username VARCHAR2 (10 CHAR) ,
       CONSTRAINT PK_ PRIMARY KEY ( id ) ,
       CONSTRAINT UC_emp_username UNIQUE ( username )
      );

  In this framework, each user can (not essential, authorized NULL) have a user name. A user name can only be used once. An application that uses this type of table is not multi-tenant capable.
  
  Now if I run the application of several tenants, I add a column tenant_id like this:

  CREATE TABLE emp 
      ( 
       id INTEGER  NOT NULL , 
       name VARCHAR2 (30 CHAR)  NOT NULL , 
       birthdate DATE  NOT NULL , 
       username VARCHAR2 (10 CHAR) ,
       tenant_id INTEGER  NOT NULL ,
       CONSTRAINT PK_ PRIMARY KEY ( id ) ,
       CONSTRAINT UC_emp_tenant_username UNIQUE ( tenant_id, username )
      );

  I have archived almost my goal:
  However, a user can (not essential, authorized NULL) have a user name. A user name cannot be used once BY the TENANT (see changed CPU). Of course, each tenant must be provided with an account named 'administrator', so the CPU must include the tenant_id. But what does not work:
  
  As soon as I add a 2nd employee for a tenant and this user doesn't have a login name (and therefore no user name), the UC has banned the addition of this user.
  It was no problem in the 1st case, because the CPU included a single column and a row in the base table with a NULL value in this column is simply ignored in the index.
  In the 2nd case, each row in the base table is included in the CPU, because the tenant_id column is NOT NULL. If the combination {tenant_id:1, username: NULL} cannot exist only once. This means that almost all employees must have a user name.
  
  What is the solution here?
  Drop the CPU is not a solution.
  Is it really necessary to move the user name column to a new table, as in the following? It just doesn't feel good to introduce a table of relationship for a 1:1 relationship.

  CREATE TABLE emp 
      ( 
       id INTEGER  NOT NULL , 
       name VARCHAR2 (30 CHAR)  NOT NULL , 
       birthdate DATE  NOT NULL , 
       tenant_id INTEGER  NOT NULL ,
       CONSTRAINT PK_emp PRIMARY KEY ( id )
      ) ;
  
  CREATE TABLE username 
      ( 
       id INTEGER  NOT NULL , 
       emp_id INTEGER  NOT NULL , 
       username VARCHAR2 (30 CHAR)  NOT NULL , 
       tenant_id INTEGER  NOT NULL ,
       CONSTRAINT PK_username PRIMARY KEY ( id ) ,
       CONSTRAINT UC_username_emp UNIQUE ( emp_id ) ,
       CONSTRAINT UC_username_username_tenant UNIQUE ( username , tenant_id ) ,
       CONSTRAINT FK_username_emp FOREIGN KEY ( emp_id ) REFERENCES emp ( id ) 
      ) 
  ;

  Any ideas or links to books that are greatly appreciated.
  
  Thank you
  Blama

  Hi, Lawrence.

  Sorry, I'm not sure you understand the problem. It would be useful that you posted some INSERT statements that should be allowed, and some that must fail because they violate the rule of oneness. Or by post at least a scneario of business that you might neeed to model. For example "tenant 1 has 3 employees: 11, 12 and 13." Employee 11A username "FFL". 12 has no username. 13 should be able to choose any username except "Elf", or not having a (just like the 12). 2 a 2 employees... »

  You can create an index based on a single function. For example, if the user name is optional:

  CREATE UNIQUE INDEX emp_name_unique ON
  username ( NVL2 (username, tenant_id, NULL)
           , username
           );
  

  If username is NULL, then the two expressions of the index will be NULL and no index entry will be. So there may be a number any lines with the same tenant_id, but no user name, but only one line for each (tenant_id, username) combination when there is a user name.

  Laurent wrote:
  ... Is it really necessary to move the user name column to a new table, as in the following? It just doesn't feel good to introduce a table of relationship for a 1:1 relationship.

  Good instinct; It's weird (but not necessarily bad) to have a one-to-one relationship between the tables, but do you? When you say things like

  ... A user name cannot be used once a TENANT...

  or

  ... As soon as I add a 2nd employee for a tenant...

  Looks like you have a one-to-many relationship, or maybe a many-to-many relationship, or maybe even two relationships, neither of which is unequivocal.

  Published by: Frank Kulash, October 26, 2012 09:15

• Constraint unique but allows null values

  Hello
  
  I have a table in Oracle XE (10g) with four matching columns:
  
  PrimaryKey
  Book_FKEY
  Subject_FKEY
  Author_FKEY
  
  The rules for this table are:
  A line can contain Book_FKEY and Subject_FKEY (Author_FKEY is Null)
  A line can contain Book_FKEY and Author_FKEY (Subject_FKEY is Null)
  
  A line cannot contain only Book_FKEY, but a line must ALWAYS be Book_FKEY
  A line cannot contain, Book_FKEY and Subject_FKEY and Author_FKEY
  
  I tried to use the Unique key constraint in Oracle SQL Developer (v2.1.1) but it failed.
  Can you help me please?
  
  Thanks a lot for your help.

  I would use only triggers after exhausting all other possibilities of constraint. You already have the constraints of primary key and foreign key in place, which is good. Technically, I believe that what you need is an extra check constraint to accomplish what you want to do, I think your best bet is to add a Unique combination of Not Null constraints and check on this Board.

  First of all, Book_FKEY must always have a value, so make sure not Null column, if not already...

  alter table  modify Book_FKEY not null;
  

  Second, I guess that your primary key is a substitute (number generated automatically), then you'll want a unique constraint to enforce a single author of book/object instance...

  alter table  add constraint  unique (Book_FKEY, Subject_FKEY, Author_FKEY);
  

  And finally, you will need a check constraint to apply other rules...

  alter table  add constraint  check
  (
    (Book_FKEY is not null and Subject_FKEY is not null and Author_FKEY is     null) or
    (Book_FKEY is not null and Subject_FKEY is     null and Author_FKEY is not null)
  )
  

  I hope it works for you,
  Mark

• Appeal of UI entity-level validation

  Hello

  I use jdev 12.1.3.0

  I have a feature object where I set the unique key constraint and this added to the entity-level validation.

  In my page user interface, I have af:table where I have the button to create a new line. Unique key validation is triggered when I click on validate.

  My requirement is to run this validation on strip off text field.

  Need your help to achieve this.

  Thank you

  Mozakkir

  What is the ChangeEventPolicy iterator in pageDef. ?

  If ChangeEventPolicy = "none" change for ChangeEventPolicy = "ppr" and try.

• How to change the user interface of the entity object indicators / Validation msg when running?

  Hello

  I use JDeveloper with version 11.1.1.6.3. Given my requirment details below.

  Suppose I have a (say 'EMPLOYEE_RATING') table in DB with the following structure.

  Columns:

  1 EmployeeId (Employee Id)

  2 RatingType (values can be in Stock or Bonus)

  3 RatingLevel (values can be 1, 2, and 3)

  Constraint:

  EmployeeId, RatingType and RatingLevel all together must be unique.

  Requirement:

  The customer's requirement is to have two screens of rating (one for Bonus another stock) and display different user interface boards and validations as follows.

  1 RatingType is a hidden field, are defined with the default (Bonus or Stock) based on the screen that the user opens.

  1. for the Stock screen, RatingLevel label should be "Stock note.

  2. for the Bonus screen, the label should be 'Bonus Rating'.

  3. for validation, the message must be 'Bonus note level must be unique' or 'Level of Stock of notes must be unique' ADB on the user screen opens.

  Implementation:

  I have a def EO (for example "RatingEO") and VO (for example ' RatingVO') def. Tips UI (Label) are given at the level of the OS. Also the unique constraint validation is made to EO with the message ' {0} and {1} must be unique, where {0} is source.hints.EmployeeId.label "and {1} is source.hints.RatingLevel.label.  I also did the shuttle two different instances of the VO (EmployeeRatingBonusVO and EmployeeRatingStockVO) in the request form (although BonusTaskFlow and StockTaskFlow are set to open with the new transaction, Intension of the two shuttle different named instances is to have the common code in VO. impl class but can run different business logic code by checking the name of the instance of VO)

  Question:

  Since I have two different pages, I can define two different labels in the jsff, but I can't change the commit message defined at the level of object entity based on open display. At the opening of the screen, depending on the type of screen, I should be able to change the label specified at the level of the entity object. (It should not affect the definition but only the instance). As this entity object cannot be distinguished (if it belongs to Bonus or Stock), I have problem on how to change the indicators of UI during execution.

  Any help on this would be appreciated! Thank you.

  Rami

  Post edited by: rami

  I tried your script.

  I created the secondary key with EmployId and rating level. I added validation of Unique key. In failure handling handling section of the validator, I gave the error message like: {0} must be unique. For token 0: I gave RatingType (here RatingType is the name of the attribute in OT).

  We give the default for RatingType as Stock Bonus in VO. kind RatingType get its value or Stock Bonus based on the original Version that we use.

  I hope this helps.

• How to upgrade an ordered list with a constraint

  Hi friends,
  
  
  I need to update a column for all records in the table with a unique constraint
  
  ex - select rec_no in tablename;
  9
  8
  7
  6
  5
  
  now I have to update this as
  Select rec_no in tablename;
  8
  7
  6
  5
  4
  but when I do update tablename set rec_no = rec_no-1
  I get unique constraint error
  
  
  
  Please help me

  DJ wrote:
  but when I do update tablename set rec_no = rec_no-1
  I get unique constraint error

  No, you don't. Show us.

  Oracle ensures consistency of 'duress of education. " If you perform an update statement (which is what you say above), then the Oracle will not give you a constraint error.

  Because if she did, then we are all would have a serious problem: whether or not the update succeeds then depend on the order in which Oracle (ie. the implementation plan) happens to be updated lines. And we cannot have such behavior "undeterministic" (similar to what we would have if Oracle has not provided us with the error table mutation...).

  Just so try, or show us:

  create table uk_test
  (i number not null unique)
  /
  
  insert into uk_test values(4);
  insert into uk_test values(3);
  insert into uk_test values(2);
  
  commit;
  

  Now try these two:

  update (select * from uk_Test order by i desc) set i=i-1;
  
  update (select * from uk_Test order by i) set i=i-1;
  

  They both succeed. Oracle allows temporary constraint violations during at the execution of a statement inside. There is no need to define this constraint postponed here.

  I'm talking about consistency of statement here also-level constraint:

  http://rulegen.blogspot.nl/2012/01/statement-level-constraint-validation.html

• Questions about NOVALIDATE ALLOW a constraint

  I have run the command on Oracle 11.2.0.1 on Redhat 5.2

  SQL> alter table agency add constraint agency_agcy_ori unique (agcy_ori) ENABLE NOVALIDATE;
  alter table agency add constraint agency_agcy_ori unique (agcy_ori) ENABLE NOVALIDATE
                                    *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-02299: cannot validate (DEVPF.AGENCY_AGCY_ORI) - duplicate keys found

  I knew that the table has two copies and null in the column in which I want to add a unique constraint. Using NOVALIDATE, I expected tolarates exist it in double and valid new data added to the uniqueness. Because it says in Oracle DOc B28286 (page 8-15)

  ENABLE NOVALIDATE ensures that all new DML operations on the constrained
  data comply with the constraint. This clause does not ensure that existing data in
  the table complies with the constraint

  However, my database is inconsistent with that. I misunderstood the doc?
  
  Other related issues
  (1) I have two rows with the agcy_ori column is NULL. Who would consider duplicate and fails to VALIDATE when create a unique constraint.
  (2) the same doc shows also (page 8-16)

  DISABLE VALIDATE disables the constraint and drops the index on the constraint,
  but keeps the constraint valid. This feature is most useful in data warehousing
  situations, because it lets you load large amounts of data while also saving space
  by not having an index. This setting lets you load data from a nonpartitioned table
  into a partitioned table using the exchange_partition_clause of the ALTER
  TABLE statement or using SQL*Loader. All other modifications to the table
  (inserts, updates, and deletes) by other SQL statements are disallowed

  This raises more questions:
  (a) turn OFF VALIDATE a unique constraint drop the unique index but always validate uniqueness. That is to say than the uniqueness of remained you without a unique index. If it is possible, why ALLOW a unique constraint need create a unique index?
  (b) the last setense "all changes to the table by the other SQL statements are not allowed. This makes the table read only with the exception of partition/nonpartition and SQL * LOADER. This can be a useful feature, but I don't see the logic here: cannot update Column2 of the table just because a constraint in column 10 is DISABLE VALIDATE.
  
  Hope that people can help me here. Thank you.

  It won't work if you create a non-unique index for the constraint.

  SQL> create table test (nn number);
  Table created.
  SQL> create index te on test (nn) ;
  Index created.
  SQL> insert into test values (1);
  1 row created.
  SQL> insert into test values (1);
  1 row created.
  SQL> alter table test add constraint ttt unique (nn) using index te enable novalidate;
  Table altered.
  SQL> select * from test;
  
          NN
  ----------
           1
           1
  
  2 rows selected.
  

• Priority of the constraints & keys

  Hello
  
  
  10.2.0.1.0 Oracle
  
  I have the table containing the primary key and check constraints. Now I am entering data in the table (say from a procedure). When I try to handle exceptions as constraint of unuique etc. What is the priority of exceptions that arise and how they are handled and how should I organize my exception block.
  
  
  

  CREATE TABLE tab11(a NUMBER PRIMARY KEY , b NUMBER CHECK (b!=0))
  DESC tab11
  INSERT INTO tab11 VALUES(1,0) --check constraint voilated
  INSERT INTO tab11 VALUES(NULL,0) --can't insert null
  INSERT INTO tab11(b,a) VALUES(0,NULL) --can't insert null
  CREATE TABLE tab12(a NUMBER CHECK (a!=0),b NUMBER PRIMARY KEY)
  INSERT INTO tab12 VALUES(0,NULL) --can't insert null

  Help, please.
  
  Published by: 804282 on January 19, 2011 06:07
  
  Published by: 804282 on January 19, 2011 06:11

  Ideally Oracle would be forced to validation in an order which is a growing scope of data covered by constraints. It is:
  -Dealing with a CHECK constraint involving a single column first.
  -Deal with the constraints of the AUDIT covering more than one column after
  -Treat with primary/unique keys after that.
  -Treat foreign keys after that.

  Let's do a little test:

  create table emp
  (empno     number not null
  ,ename     varchar2(10) not null
  ,job       varchar2(10) not null
  ,sal       number not null
  ,mgr       number
  ,constraint c_ename check(ename = upper(ename))
  ,constraint c_job_sal check(job != 'CLERK' or sal < 5000)
  ,constraint c_emp_pk primary key(empno)
  ,constraint c_emp_emp_fk foreign key(mgr) references emp(empno)
  );
  
  insert into emp values(1,'TOON','MANAGER',10000,null);
  commit;
  

  So now, we have a table emp with four constraints (one for each class above) and a line.
  Let's try and insert a row that violates all four constraints.

  SQL> insert into emp values(1,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42);
  insert into emp values(1,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42)
  *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-02290: check constraint (TOON.C_JOB_SAL) violated
  

  Hmm. apparently the logical order described above is not what is happening behind the scenes when dealing with a CHECK constraint. Personally, I suspect that they are posted in the order that some internal (recursive) queries on the data dictionary returns them.

  Now let's disable this constraint and raise the insert.

  SQL> alter table emp disable constraint c_job_sal;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> insert into emp values(1,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42);
  insert into emp values(1,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42)
  *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-02290: check constraint (TOON.C_ENAME) violated
  

  It was the another CHECK constraint. We will disable this one too and try again.

  SQL> alter table emp disable constraint c_ename;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> insert into emp values(1,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42);
  insert into emp values(1,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42)
  *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-00001: unique constraint (TOON.C_EMP_PK) violated
  

  Okay, all right. Primary/unique keys are probably always validated before moving on to foreign keys.
  Disable the key obviously fails in this case...

  SQL> alter table emp disable constraint c_emp_pk;
  alter table emp disable constraint c_emp_pk
  *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-02297: cannot disable constraint (TOON.C_EMP_PK) - dependencies exist
  

  So, let's fix the violation of primary key:

  SQL> insert into emp values(2,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42)
    2  /
  insert into emp values(2,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42)
  *
  ERROR at line 1:
  ORA-02291: integrity constraint (TOON.C_EMP_EMP_FK) violated - parent key not found
  

  Disable the fk, finally will allow us to make the insertion.

  SQL> alter table emp disable constraint c_emp_emp_fk;
  
  Table altered.
  
  SQL> insert into emp values(2,'Tom','CLERK',7000,42);
  
  1 row created.
  

  So in summary, I would go the next order being wired into the kernel:
  -CHECK the constraints are first validated (in some order).
  -Primary and unique keys are validated after that.
  -Foreign keys are validated at the last.

  It is of course not at all conclusive research. It is just a bit of fun at the end of a day filled.

  Oh, and of course that postponed any changes whenever certain constraints are declared as may be delayed initially...

  :-)

• Unique key violation - the DB adapter

  Hello

  I have a composite SOA (deployed in clusters of 4 nodes) who questions database and calls a stored procedure (which invokes the records in multiple tables). Now, when I'll be large amount of data in the source database, the composite is mark and tries to insert the records in the target database. But sometimes error cases dating violation of unique key constraint while inserting records into the target database.

  Is locks of adapter DB table before inserting the records so that others may not violate the constraints and they will be able to see changes made by other SOA forums?

  Thank you!

  Yes, certainly not DbAdapter... the problem is the way you do your check and the lack of a facility of mutex in BPEL... Assuming you are using BPEL...

  Ideal scenario...

  1 check key has... There is no instance

  example 1 - insert the key... was ok

  example 2 - check button has exist......

  instance 2 - updates of key has... ok

  Parallel scenario...

  1 check key has... There is no instance

  2 check key has... There is no instance

  example 1 - insert the key... was ok

  example 2 - Insert key a... failure... duplicate a key...

  Hope you get what I'm trying to show here... There is nothing there to prevent another instance to check the existence of the key even before the first instance commits the transaction that inserted the key...

  BPEL is not a mutex AFAIK... something like the statement "synchronized" in Java for example...

  https://docs.Oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/locksync.html

  Thus, you must use a different approach, for example, try and introduce first always, if the insertion fails try and update... It's 'thread safe' than the approach that you use...

  Much better is to is to abandon controls at all and always insert using the key substitution, such as sequences or guid... If you insert an Oracle database, simply use a sequence, or use the function generate GUIDs BPEL...

  https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrogate_key

  See you soon,.

  Vlad

• Inline Y field check constraint. N

  I created a domain with a list of values (Y or N) and used this area of a column in a table.

  Helped the 'use area Constraints' and tick appears in the DOF as a 'Alter table add constraint without name.

  I'd rather have this constraint as an inline constraint.  How can I say DM to do this?

  With the help of the DM Version 4.0.3.853

  Select Preferences from the Tools menu.

  In the left panel of the Preferences dialog box, select Data Modeler > DDL and select the option 'generate Inline column constraints validation.

  David