I have two tables,
diary with columns
id primary key
Narrative text
and
master with columns
id primary key
Diaryid int
EventDate date
Location int
I want to ensure that master(Diaryid) is always a valid diary(id)
Can I use foreign key to achieve this? Bearing in mind that one key is a primary key and the other int.
Any advice would be apprecaited.
Yes you cqan achieve this by using a FOREIGN KEY.
Also you should define it as NOT NULL, so that only exiasting diary keys are allowed
CREATE TABLE master(Diaryid BIGINT NOT NULL
, FOREIGN KEY (Diaryid)
REFERENCES diary(id)
);
You cqan add
ON DELETE CASCADE
So that the Master row will be deleted also when the diary rows gets removed
Don't know what is different but problem is solved.
CREATE TABLE diary(id int AUTO_INCREMENT, Narrative text, PRIMARY KEY(id))
CREATE TABLE master(id int AUTO_INCREMENT, Diaryid int,datemade date, FOREIGN KEY(Diaryid) REFERENCES diary(id), primary key (id))
So am now adding diary records and can have multiple master records so long as the Diaryid is valid
Thanks
Related
Got an odd problem I cant solve after browsing dozens of forum posts, and my local SQL Books.
I've got two tables, and want to add a foreign key to one of them. The foreign key and primary key share the same datatype and charset and yet I cannot add the Foreign Key at all.
addon_account
name
type
comments
id
int(11)
Primary Key
name
varchar(60)
Primary Key
label
varchar(255)
shared
int(11)
addon_account_data
name
type
comments
id
int(11)
Primary Key
account_name
varchar(60)
Primary Key
money
double
owner
varchar()
The query I ran:
ALTER TABLE `addon_account_data` ADD FOREIGN KEY (`account_name`) REFERENCES `addon_account`(`name`) ON DELETE RESTRICT ON UPDATE RESTRICT;
Can't get it to work. Tosses out the same issue the entire time.
You are creating a foreign key on addon_account_data(account_name) that references addon_account(name). You have a composite primary the referred table : addon_account(id, name).
This is not allowed in MySQL, as explained in the documentation:
MySQL requires indexes on foreign keys and referenced keys so that foreign key checks can be fast and not require a table scan. In the referencing table, there must be an index where the foreign key columns are listed as the first columns in the same order.
Possible solutions:
add an additional column in the referring table: addon_account_data(account_id, account_name) and create a composite primary key to the corresponding columns in addon_account
create an index on addon_account(name) (probably the simplest solution)
change the order of the columns in the primary key of the referred table, like: addon_account(name, id) (you might want to first consider the impacts this may have in terms of performance)
I am not exactly a MySQL guy, but:
I believe the problem is that you are referencing only part of the primary key:
Your table addon_account has a composite key PK(id, name).
So, to put your relationship to work, you will need to add 'account_id' as part of the foreign key as well:
ALTER TABLE addon_account_data ADD FOREIGN KEY (account_id, account_name) REFERENCES addon_account(id, name)
This thread deals with something similar.
I hope this helps.
EDITED
I have installed a MySQL server instance on my local machine... (MySQL 8).
I have run the script below, and it worked (giving warnings about integer display being a deprecated feature, so I would recommend ommitting it):
CREATE TABLE addon_account(
id INT(11) NOT NULL,
`name` VARCHAR(60) NOT NULL,
label VARCHAR(255),
shared INT(11),
CONSTRAINT pk_addon_account PRIMARY KEY(id, `name`));
CREATE TABLE addon_account_data (
id INT(11) NOT NULL,
account_name VARCHAR(60) NOT NULL,
account_id INT(11),
money DOUBLE,
`owner` VARCHAR(255),
CONSTRAINT pk_addon_account_data PRIMARY KEY(id, account_name),
CONSTRAINT fk_addon_account_account_data FOREIGN KEY(account_id, account_name)
REFERENCES addon_account(id, `name`));
Could you try it and see if this works for you?
I am not that familiar with MySQL.
make sure that the 2 tables have the same collation
like
COLLATE='utf8_general_ci'
I've first table name "mustahik_perorangan" and the second name "data_mustahik"
mustahik perorangan have 4 primary key and foreign key in another table
like this condition
PRIMARY KEY (`mustahik_nik`,`ins_provinces_code`,`ins_cities_code`,`ins_institution_types_code`,`ins_institution_serial_no`),
KEY `fk_reference_6` (`ins_provinces_code`,`ins_cities_code`,`ins_institution_types_code`,`ins_institution_serial_no`),
CONSTRAINT `FK_ins_musper` FOREIGN KEY (`ins_provinces_code`, `ins_cities_code`, `ins_institution_types_code`, `ins_institution_serial_no`) REFERENCES `baznasgo_s_organization`.`institutions` (`provinces_code`, `cities_code`, `institution_types_code`, `institution_serial_no`) ON UPDATE CASCADE
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1
and i want to add primary to table mustahik_perorangan, so mustahik perorangan have 5 primary key ?
but i can't do it because it condition..
ALTER TABLE mustahik_perorangan ADD idc INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,ADD PRIMARY KEY (`idc`);
May you know to do it ?
A table can have at most one primary key constraint.
The primary key constraint can contain multiple columns. We refer to that as a composite key.
It is possible to add a new column.
It's also possible to add a UNIQUE constraint on the column and specify AUTO_INCREMENT attribute on the column.
As an example:
ALTER TABLE mustahik_perorangan
ADD idc INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT
, ADD UNIQUE KEY (`idc`)
It's also possible to a sixth column to the existing composite primary key. But I don't think this is what you really want.
As a demonstration of how to add a column to an existing composite primary key, I'll provide an example.
Note that the primary key must be dropped and re-added. And a UNIQUE key must be added for the AUTO_INCREMENT column.
Assuming there are no foreign keys referencing the primary key of this table.
ALTER TABLE mustahik_perorangan
DROP PRIMARY KEY
, ADD idc INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT
, ADD UNIQUE KEY (`idc`)
, ADD PRIMARY KEY
(`mustahik_nik`
,`ins_provinces_code`
,`ins_cities_code`
,`ins_institution_types_code`
,`ins_institution_serial_no`
,`idc`
)
If there are foreign keys referencing the table, the change is a little more involved. (Did you want an additional column added to the foreign keys in the referencing tables?)
It's not entirely clear what you are attempting to achieve.
Yes, you can add the primary key, but in your case, you need to drop pk and then add new pk, otherwise the engine interpretes as you are trying to add multiple pks, the multiple pks are different from composite pk, you can add composite pk, but you can't add multiple pks
alter table xx drop primary key, add primary key(k1, k2, k3);
I have 3 tables:
class_a
CREATE TABLE class_a (
id INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT,
std_id INT NOT NULL UNIQUE,
name varchar(225) NOT NULL)
class_b
CREATE TABLE class_b (
id INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT,
std_id INT NOT NULL UNIQUE,
name varchar(225) NOT NULL)
sn_number
CREATE TABLE sn_number (
id INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY AUTO_INCREMENT,
pin INT NOT NULL UNIQUE,
serial VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL UNIQUE,
std_id INT NULL DEFAULT NULL,
FOREIGN KEY(std_id) REFERENCES class_a(std_id)
)
How can I reference unique std_id in class_a and class_b table as a foreign key in sn_number table.
I want to achieve something like ALTER TABLE sn_number ADD FOREIGN KEY(std_id) REFERENCES class_a(std_id), class_b(std_id)
I have tried doing this ALTER TABLE sn_number ADD FOREIGN KEY(std_id) REFERENCES class_a(std_id)
followed by
ALTER TABLE sn_number ADD FOREIGN KEY(std_id) REFERENCES class_b(std_id) on sn_number table but will keep overwriting each other.
I have read these:
Foreign Key Referencing Multiple Tables and
Composite key as foreign key (sql)
But I can't find the solution to the problem am having.
Foreign key must reference only one parent table. This is fundamental to both SQL syntax, and relational theory.
What you can do, is add another table classes or students that contain all std_id , then just reference the FK to it.
Since you haven't explicitly given a constraint name in your FOREIGN KEY declarations, the DBMS makes one up from the table name sn_number. Your problem is that you are thus implicitly declaring the same constraint name each time, so the old info for the name is lost. Just use different explicit constraint names for different cases of table & column list REFERENCES table & column list.
CONSTRAINT fk_sn_number_a FOREIGN KEY(std_id) REFERENCES class_a(std_id)
CONSTRAINT fk_sn_number_b FOREIGN KEY(std_id) REFERENCES class_b(std_id)
Just learn about the basics of Using FOREIGN KEY Constraints.
PS As remarked in a comment, this is a poor design. But contrary to the comment & another answer, your need for two foreign keys from the same table & column list is not a symptom of poor design. But notice that the problems that people usually have with "Foreign Key Referencing Multiple Tables" in questionable designs is that they think that their tables as designed need a foreign key from one place to two places when they don't. Such a design doesn't even involve a foreign key, it just involves something reminiscent of a foreign key.
I am not sure about this , but do I need to create foreign key explicitly in the SQL command?
This guy did this:
CREATE TABLE languages (
lang_id TINYINT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
lang VARCHAR(60) NOT NULL,
lang_eng VARCHAR(20) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (lang_id),
UNIQUE (lang)
);
CREATE TABLE threads (
thread_id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
lang_id TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL,
user_id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL,
subject VARCHAR(150) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (thread_id),
INDEX (lang_id),
INDEX (user_id)
);
In this case, does it mean that INDEX(lang_id) becomes FOREIGN KEY automatically? I know INDEX makes search go faster, but I don't understand the part about foreign key
I would really appreciate any answer
No. An index is just that... an index on a field. A foreign key tells MySQL that "this particular field MUST have a matching record in that table over there".
MySQL's internal design requires that all fields used as foreign keys be indexed, but modern versions will automatically create that index for you.
The converse is not true, whoever. Adding an index to a field does not turn it into a foreign key - a foreign key definition must also include what the foreign table/field is, and a simple index declaration has none of that information.
For your sample table, you'd need to have
...
INDEX (lang_id),
FOREIGN KEY (lang_id) REFERENCES languages (lang_id),
...
to produce a foreign key.
A foreign key means that the value(s) must exist in the referenced column(s). It is not automatic - you need to write it explicitly.
FOREIGN KEY lang_id REFERENCES languages (lang_id)
No a foreign key has to be explicitly declared
CREATE TABLE threads (
thread_id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
lang_id TINYINT(3) UNSIGNED NOT NULL FOREIGN KEY FK_1 REFERENCES languages(lang_id),
user_id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL,
subject VARCHAR(150) NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (thread_id),
INDEX (lang_id),
INDEX (user_id)
);
What you now have are two tables with primary keys and indexes on those primary key values.
You could stop here if you want but you won't have declared referential integrity enforcing that relationship between laguage and threads tables.
To do that you would explicitly create a foreign key relationship as explained here - http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/innodb-foreign-key-constraints.html
The differences are as follows :-
The primary key identifies a record uniquely in a table with multiple rows.
An index is a generic term, where by you can create more than one index for a table, in this case the database creates indexes based on the columns that you specified, so that when you query the appropriate index will kick in and give you results faster.
A foreign key on the other hand says that this column in table b, is the primary column in table A, so that whenever you enter rows into table B the databse will check that the specified column/data exists in table A otherwise it will throw an error.
What would be the code for creating a table with two foreign keys?
I have a USER table and a PICTURE table. Since a USER can be in many PICTURE and many PICTURE can be from a USER, I need a third table with both primary keys.
Thank you SO, as usual you are invaluable for a learning novice. :)
I can't speak specifically for mySQL but in most databases I have worked with you can put as many foreign keys as you need on a table. But you can only have one primary key. A third table with both keys is the right choice. Make a foreign key to each of the other two tables and a primary key consisting of both ids in the table.
If I understood correctly, you may need to do something like the following:
CREATE TABLE users (
user_id INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
name VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL
) ENGINE=INNODB;
CREATE TABLE pictures (
picture_id INT NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
filename VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL,
posted_by INT NOT NULL,
FOREIGN KEY (posted_by) REFERENCES users(user_id)
) ENGINE=INNODB;
CREATE TABLE users_in_pictures (
user_id INT NOT NULL,
picture_id INT NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (user_id, picture_id),
FOREIGN KEY (user_id) REFERENCES users(user_id),
FOREIGN KEY (picture_id) REFERENCES pictures(picture_id)
) ENGINE=INNODB;
Note that each picture can be posted by a user. In fact the posted_by field is constrained by a foreign key that references the users table.
In addition, I assume that you want to tag pictures ala-facebook. In this case, you can use the third table, which is using a composite primary key on (user_id, picture_id) and both fields are also constrained to the appropriate table.