I get this error when insert a new album:
{System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException:
INSERT statement conflicted with COLUMN FOREIGN KEY
constraint 'FK_ChannelAlbum_Group'.
The conflict occurred in database 'Stamper', table 'Channel', column 'ID'.
I don't know what is going on because sometime I insert the new album to the context the error will occur but Album table has no Channel ID columns only Album_Channel table. This insert does not influence the album_channel and channel table at all. Why is there a conflict.
I realized that after I have created the new album after that i try inserting a album_channel data I have an error so I stop debugger and try to fix the problem. Once i have work that out, I go an insert a new album once more but it gives me this error always. So I close my visual studio and reopen it in order to work.....
I am not sure is it a good way of having singleton style of creating the context e.g.
I have write a context as class and this context only created once, to prevent it to create too many times.
Hard to answer without a diagram. It looks like you have a foreign key in the table you're inserting which is not a valid primary key in the table it is referencing. If you don't believe you have one, then you could try checking your relationships and possibly regenerating your L2S entities. Maybe even try to insert into that table manually and see if you get the same error.
Context wrapped in a singleton is a bad idea for web applications as it isn't thread safe. You could look into the 'unit of work' pattern or try caching the context instance.
Related
I am trying to alter table product to add a constraint of type foreign key for field petCat_ID so that it references table petCategory(ID). I just created table petCat_ID and i am getting a "Cannot add or update a child row" error.
This is the commands I performed to get this error:
Alter table product
-> ADD CONSTRAINT FK_petCatID
-> FOREIGN KEY (petCat_ID)
-> REFERENCES productCategory(ID);
Any help or tips would be greatly appreciated! Note: petCat_ID is in table product and productCategory is a different table.
In my comments I've mentioned that I need a clearer idea of what kind of database structure you have, but I have a series of things that will help you work through the problem you're having.
If an ALTER statement isn't working, and you have good syntax, it is because what you are doing conflicts with an already present rule.
Sometimes, doing a DROP TABLE command, followed by creating the table again can fix problems. This can be problematic if there are dependencies that keep you from dropping the table.
When things get dire, try looking at the script you used to make the DB in the first place. Modify it and see if you can get the properties you want. Once you do, make a new database table structure and migrate your table entries over to the new database from the old one.
I made a github repository here wherein I made a third normal form version of what the customer facing Amtrack database would look like, and even wrote scripts to add data to the tables, with examples. There are images showing the ER structure. I included my creation script, broken into each table's creation in specific order. It should be a good reference for how to assign table relationships, and that will give you a good idea of what you can alter. Disclaimer I wrote it for SSMS, but I don't believe I used anything SSMS specific I THINK that code should work in MySQL.
I have already existing DataBase inside SQL server 2008 around (300 tables) so I faced the following problems when i try to create an entity framework .edmx file:
If I specify to map all the 300 tables at once, the visual Studio will hang.
So I decide to include only the tables which I currently need, then the mapping will work fine. But if after that I add a new table to them, a Foreign key error will occur. So I have to delete the existing models and add them again with the new table. So the FK error will be removed.
So can anyone advice on how to overcomes these problems?
The error I usually got when adding a new table to the .edmx file will look something similar to.
Problem in mapping fragments starting at lines 2186, 2265:Foreign key constraint 'SDOrgPostalAddr_FK2' from table SDOrgPostalAddr (POSTALADDR_ID) to table AaaPostalAddress (POSTALADDR_ID):: Insufficient mapping: Foreign key must be mapped to some AssociationSet or EntitySets participating in a foreign key association on the conceptual side.
while if I added the table from the beginning then no error will be displayed.
Regards
I am using Cayenne to add records to a MySQL database, and I am seeing some strange behavior.
When I run my application, I create a DataContext, perform a series of adds, then close the application. This works out well, because I am using an integer for a primary key, and when I add a record to the database, the key automatically increments. For some reason, it starts at 200 for the first record, then goes to 201 for the second record, etc.
If, however, I stop the application, then run it again, the primary key starts at 200 again! This, of course, causes an exception to be thrown because a new record ends up having a duplicate primary key. It is looking like when I create a new object using the DataContext's newObject() after starting my application, Cayenne does not "remember" how far the primary key was incremented when the application was previously run.
Does anyone know what is causing this reset of the primary key values, and (more importantly) how to stop it from happening??? Or have I found a bug in the current version of Cayenne? I am using Version 3.0.2.
Someone please advise...
The last used PK for a given table is stored in a special table called AUTO_PK_SUPPORT. Please check the contents of this table between the restarts of your app. Also check you application Cayenne logs for reads and writes to AUTO_PK_SUPPORT. This should give you an idea of what's happening.
Aside from that you might switch to auto-increment PK (see "Primary Key Provided by Database" section here). MySQL supports auto-incremented PK columns and if you have an option of altering the schema, this IMO is the cleanest PK generation strategy out of all available. (And it doesn't require AUTO_PK_SUPPORT).
I am working with Hibernate 3.6.4 and MySQL.
I have a table with unique constraints on four columns and 3 other columns. When the UI application create new instances of the corresponding Object it may create it with those four properties with values already in the table. the result, upon save, is, of course JDBC Exception of duplicate entry.
Is there a way to tell Hibernate to not insert new entry but update the rest of the three columns or upon each save I need to manually query the DB to see if exist and update accordingly?
Thanks.
The clean and database independent approach for this problem is to first check if such an instance exists and depending on that do an insert or update in your application logic.
That said, there might be a way to take advantage of the MySQL INSERT ... ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE feature documented here. In this case you must specify a custom SQL INSERT statement for your entity like described in this related question. But if this works depends on the way your entity IDs are generated to begin with. Take a look at this blog article concerning this issue.
Generally, you must deal with every aspect of the problem that Hibernate thinks a transient instance is persisted, when in fact a persistent instance is updated. This might be an issue with generated entity IDs, other generated entity values, entity versions, concurrency, expected insert/update row count, 2nd level and query cache, etc.
So, I think while this would be a nice thing to experiment with I would definitely not use this feature in a production application.
You must indeed explicitely get the entity with the four unique values, and then update it if it exists or create a new one if it does not. There is no way around that.
BTW, note that even with such a mechanism, you might end up with exceptions if two transactions get the entity concurrently, find that it doesn't exist, and both try to create a new one.
I am trying to restore a DB using an SQL script, but things foreign key constraints get in the way
I am taking a MySQL DB and bringing it over to PostgreSQL.
Since the MySQL create table syntax ended up being quite different, I took another PostgreSQL DB with the same schema, but different data and restored the schema only, from that.
In other words, I now have a database with tables, constraints, sequences and all that shnaz but no data inside.
So, it's is time to restore data.
I take a backup of the MySQL DB with phpMyAdmin (data only) as an SQL script (pgAdmin does not seem to accept zip or gzip files for some reason) and run the SQL script.
Now, this is where the problems start to happen, it's only natural, I am going from MySQL to PostgreSQL, so syntax errors are bound to happen.
But, there are other non syntax related problems to, like this one:
ERROR: insert or update on table "_account" violates foreign key constraint "fk_1_account"
DETAIL: Key (accountid)=(2) is not present in table "_entity".
So, yeah, basically, a foreign constraint exists, the query is trying to insert data into the _account table, but the corresponding data has not been inserted into the _entity table yet.
How do I get around that? Is there a way to make pgAdmin3/PostgreSQL disable ALL OF the constraints, insert the data, and then re-enable the constraints?
A syntax related error I encountered, was this one:
INSERT INTO _accounttype_seq (id) VALUES (11);
The PostgreSQL equivalent of that statement (if I am correct) is
ALTER SEQUENCE _accounttype_seq INCREMENT BY 11;
But, it's a bit of a pain to run through the whole script and change all 200+ Sequence insert statements. So, I am being lazy here, but is there an easier way to deal with the sequences as well?
Or, do you guys have any suggestions for a different set of tools to make this easier?
Thanks for your time, have a good day.
Do not try to get around the foreign key constraints. That is the way to make sure the data is bad.
First look at the constraints and make sure you are inserting to the tables in the correct order. If _entity is parent of "_account, then it should be populated first.
Next you need to have the script move any failing records to an exception table. Then you can look at them and see what the data integrity issues is and if you need to throw the records away permanently or try to figure out what the missing parent value should be. If it is critical data such as orders where the customer no longer exists (possible in any system that didn't have correct fks to begin with) and you must keep the record and cannot determine what the parent value should have been, you can create an 'Unknown" record in the customer table and assign all bad orders to that customer id.
And manually changing the alter sequences shouldn't take long even if it is boring. There wil be plently of other things you need to handle manually in a conversion of this type.
I would try to find a data import tool for PostgreSQL - I live in SQL server world where I would use SSIS but you need the equivalent of SSIS for the PostgreSQL world.
Aparently the foreign keys weren't actually enforced in MySQL (maybe because of using MyISAM) or the generated SQL just does it in the wrong order.
If it's "only" the wrong order, I see two possible solutions:
edit the generated script and either move all FK definitions to the end of the script
Edit the definition of each FK constraint and set them all to initially deferred. Then run the script as one single transaction with only on commit at the very end.
Edit (because this is too much to be put as a comment)
Using SET CONSTRAINTS ALL DEFERRED will only work if the constraints have been created with the option DEFERRABLE.
To run everything in one single transaction, you have to make sure you have turned autocommit off. Then simply run the INSERTs and at the very end issue a COMMIT. A ; will only commit if you have autocommit on.
If you want to be independent of the autocommit setting, then start your script with [BEGIN][1] and make sure there is only a single COMMIT at the very end.
BEGIN DEFERRABLE
INSERT INTO table_one ... ;
INSERT INTO table_two ... ;
.....
COMMIT;