Checking primary key or unique in while entry

Hi,
I want to check primary key or unique key while entry the record, without any loop.
Suppose like these
ac_code ac_desc
A1 ASSET
A2 LIABLITY
A3 EXPENESS
If I enter in A2 It will give error already exists( Don't want any when validate record )
Pls help.
Thanks
Reena

See my answer in this thread
Re: duplicate records in a multi record block

Similar Messages

Diff b/w primary key and unique key?

what is the diff b/w primary key and unique key?

Hi,
With respect to functionality both are same.
But in ABAP we only have Primary key for the Database tables declared in the Data Dictionary.
Unique is generally is the term used with declaring key's for internal tables.
Both primary and Unique keys can identify one record of a table.
Regards,
Sesh

Access path difference between Primary Key and Unique Index

Hi All,
Is there any specific way the oracle optimizer treats Primary key and Unique index differently?
Oracle Version
SQL> select * from v$version;
BANNER
Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.2.0.3.0 - 64bit Production
PL/SQL Release 11.2.0.3.0 - Production
CORE    11.2.0.3.0      Production
TNS for IBM/AIX RISC System/6000: Version 11.2.0.3.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 11.2.0.3.0 - Production
SQL> Sample test data for Normal Index
SQL> create table t_test_tab(col1 number, col2 number, col3 varchar2(12));
Table created.
SQL> create sequence seq_t_test_tab start with 1 increment by 1 ;
Sequence created.
SQL> insert into t_test_tab select seq_t_test_tab.nextval, round(dbms_random.value(1,999)) , 'B'||round(dbms_random.value(1,50))||'A' from dual connect by level < 100000;
99999 rows created.
SQL> commit;
Commit complete.
SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(USER_OWNER','T_TEST_TAB',cascade => true);
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> select col1 from t_test_tab;
99999 rows selected.
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 1565504962
| Id | Operation         | Name       | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |            | 99999 |   488K|    74   (3)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T_TEST_TAB | 99999 |   488K|    74   (3)| 00:00:01 |
Statistics
          1 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
       6915 consistent gets
        259 physical reads
          0 redo size
    1829388 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      73850 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       6668 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
      99999 rows processed
SQL> create index idx_t_test_tab on t_test_tab(col1);
Index created.
SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('USER_OWNER','T_TEST_TAB',cascade => true);
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> select col1 from t_test_tab;
99999 rows selected.
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 1565504962
| Id | Operation         | Name       | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |            | 99999 |   488K|    74   (3)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T_TEST_TAB | 99999 |   488K|    74   (3)| 00:00:01 |
Statistics
          1 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
       6915 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
    1829388 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      73850 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       6668 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
      99999 rows processed
SQL> Sample test data when using Primary Key
SQL> create table t_test_tab1(col1 number, col2 number, col3 varchar2(12));
Table created.
SQL> create sequence seq_t_test_tab1 start with 1 increment by 1 ;
Sequence created.
SQL> insert into t_test_tab1 select seq_t_test_tab1.nextval, round(dbms_random.value(1,999)) , 'B'||round(dbms_random.value(1,50))||'A' from dual connect by level < 100000;
99999 rows created.
SQL> commit;
Commit complete.
SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('USER_OWNER','T_TEST_TAB1',cascade => true);
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> select col1 from t_test_tab1;
99999 rows selected.
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 1727568366
| Id | Operation         | Name        | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |             | 99999 |   488K|    74   (3)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T_TEST_TAB1 | 99999 |   488K|    74   (3)| 00:00:01 |
Statistics
          1 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
       6915 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
    1829388 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      73850 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       6668 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
      99999 rows processed
SQL> alter table t_test_tab1 add constraint pk_t_test_tab1 primary key (col1);
Table altered.
SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('USER_OWNER','T_TEST_TAB1',cascade => true);
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> select col1 from t_test_tab1;
99999 rows selected.
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 2995826579
| Id | Operation            | Name           | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |                | 99999 |   488K|    59   (2)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| PK_T_TEST_TAB1 | 99999 |   488K|    59   (2)| 00:00:01 |
Statistics
          1 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
       6867 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
    1829388 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      73850 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       6668 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
      99999 rows processed
SQL> If you see here the even though statistics were gathered,
     * In the 1st table T_TEST_TAB, the table is still using FULL table access after creation of index.
     * And in the 2nd table T_TEST_TAB1, table is using PRIMARY KEY as expected.
Any comments ??
Regards,
BPat

Thanks.
Yes, ignored the NOT NULL part.Did a test and now it is working as expected
SQL> create table t_test_tab(col1 number not null, col2 number, col3 varchar2(12));
Table created.
SQL>
create sequence seq_t_test_tab start with 1 increment by 1 ;SQL>
Sequence created.
SQL> insert into t_test_tab select seq_t_test_tab.nextval, round(dbms_random.value(1,999)) , 'B'||round(dbms_random.value(1,50))||'A' from dual connect by level < 100000;
99999 rows created.
SQL> commit;
Commit complete.
SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('GREP_OWNER','T_TEST_TAB',cascade => true);
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> set autotrace traceonly
SQL> select col1 from t_test_tab;
99999 rows selected.
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 1565504962
| Id | Operation         | Name       | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |            | 99999 |   488K|    74   (3)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T_TEST_TAB | 99999 |   488K|    74   (3)| 00:00:01 |
Statistics
          1 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
       6912 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
    1829388 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      73850 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       6668 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
      99999 rows processed
SQL> create index idx_t_test_tab on t_test_tab(col1);
Index created.
SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('GREP_OWNER','T_TEST_TAB',cascade => true);
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> select col1 from t_test_tab;
99999 rows selected.
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 4115006285
| Id | Operation            | Name           | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |                | 99999 |   488K|    63   (2)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| IDX_T_TEST_TAB | 99999 |   488K|    63   (2)| 00:00:01 |
Statistics
          1 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
       6881 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
    1829388 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      73850 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       6668 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
      99999 rows processed
SQL>

Difference between PRIMARY KEY and UNIQUE KEY with NOT NULL

What is the difference between PRIMARY KEY and UNIQUE KEY with NOT NULL constraint?
Message was edited by:
Nilesh Hole

Answer for the master!!!
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:8743855576462
Thanks,
Karthick

Difference between Primary Key and Unique+Not NUll

Hi Guys,
Is there any difference the column being declared as primary key or unique+NOT NULL.
Please let me know the internal and application point of view.
Thanks in advance!
Ranjan

957590 wrote:
Ok,Thanks however I donot think Primary key uses unique indexPK uses whatever index you specify - unique or not (as long as index is on proper column(s)). However, if you do not specify any index, PK creates unique index:
SQL> create table tbl(
2                   id number,
3                   name varchar2(10)
4                  )
5 /
Table created.
SQL> alter table tbl
2    add constraint tbl_pk
3      primary key(
4                  id
5                 )
6 /
Table altered.
SQL> select index_name,
2          uniqueness
3    from user_indexes
4    where table_name = 'TBL'
5 /
INDEX_NAME                     UNIQUENES
TBL_PK                         UNIQUE
SQL> select constraint_name,
2          index_name
3    from user_constraints
4    where table_name = 'TBL'
5 /
CONSTRAINT_NAME                INDEX_NAME
TBL_PK                         TBL_PK
SQL> alter table tbl
2    drop primary key
3 /
Table altered.
SQL> create index tbl_non_unique_pk_index
2    on tbl(
3           id
4          )
5 /
Index created.
SQL> alter table tbl
2    add constraint tbl_pk
3      primary key(
4                  id
5                 )
6        using index tbl_non_unique_pk_index
7 /
Table altered.
SQL> select index_name,
2          uniqueness
3    from user_indexes
4    where table_name = 'TBL'
5 /
INDEX_NAME                     UNIQUENES
TBL_NON_UNIQUE_PK_INDEX        NONUNIQUE
SQL> select constraint_name,
2          index_name
3    from user_constraints
4    where table_name = 'TBL'
5 /
CONSTRAINT_NAME                INDEX_NAME
TBL_PK                         TBL_NON_UNIQUE_PK_INDEX
SQL> insert
2    into tbl
3    values(
4           1,
5           'A'
6          )
7 /
1 row created.
SQL> insert
2    into tbl
3    values(
4           2,
5           'B'
6          )
7 /
1 row created.
SQL> insert
2    into tbl
3    values(
4           1,
5           'C'
6          )
7 /
insert
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00001: unique constraint (SCOTT.TBL_PK) violated
SQL> SY.

Problems Engineering Surrogate Primary Key with Unique Key

SDDM 3.3.0.747 with 2 problems (at least so far). I am hoping that the problem is with this SDDM rookie and I have overlooked some setting. PROBLEM 1 I don’t want to start a religious debate about surrogate vs. natural keys but I am having a problem engineering both correctly from the logical model. I am a rookie when it comes to SDDM but have many years of experience with Designer. By default I like to have both a natural UID (UK) and a surrogate key based primary UID (PK) which is used for foreign keys. The problem I am having with engineering is I can successfully engineer the surrogate PK’s, engineer the FK’s using the PK’s but cannot get the unique key to contain the surrogate keys in the child table. If I check the identifying property in the relations, the PK columns and the UK columns are included in the child PK and the UK contains no columns. The Setup I have defined two reference entities, PROBABILITY and SEVERITY with natural unique keys defined. I also have a child entity RISK_ASSESMENT with relationships back to the PROBABILITY and SEVERITY entities and both have the “Use surrogate keys:”: check box checked. The unique key for the RISK_ASSESMENT entity includes the relationships back to PROBILITY and SEVERITY. None of the entities have a PK or surrogate key defined and they all have the “Create Surrogate Key” check box checked. In addition the following preferences are set: Data Modeler/Model/Logical NOT Checked - Use And Set First Unique Key As Primary Key NOT Checked – Name – Keep as the name of the Originating attribute Checked – Entity Create Surrogate Key Checked – Relationship Use Surrogate Key PROBLEM 2 When the foreign key columns are engineered I want the names to have a prefix “FK_” but they don’t. Templates are set as follows: Data Modeler/Naming Standard/Templates Foreign Key: FK_{child}{parent} Column Foreign Key: FK_{ref column} Engineer to Relational Model/General Options Checked - Apply name translation Marcus Bacon

I have been switching between SD 4 EA1 and SDDM 3.3 trying to get things to work and trying out the template table for adding audit columns (really nice!).
Concerning Problem1. No matter what settings I use and whether I use SDDM 3.3 or SDI cannot get the FK columns to be included in the UK even though the relations are included in the UID in the entitty. When I open the properties of the child table and click on the naming standards button and click ok it complains that the UK is not complete. I add the FK columns to the UK and all is well including the naming standards.
Concerning Problem 2. Sometimes it engineers the names for FK's from the template and sometimes it doesn't. Didn't see a pattern. Gave up trying and used Naming Standards button. I still had to change a few.
The good new is, that after make changes needed in UK's and Column names of 18 tables, I know have everything deployed to Test except FK Indexes. I think I have to do those by hand.
Marcus Bacon

Is their a difference between primary key and unique key with not null valu

What is the difference in having a column as primary key and having unique key with not null for the column.
vinodh

SBH wrote:
For quick review, below is the link
http://www.dba-oracle.com/data_warehouse/clustered_index.htm
You appear to have stumbled on a site that is a mine of disinformation about Oracle.
>
It would be helpful, if you explain it too..thnx !!
The site is wrong and makes up its own terminology as it goes along.
If the value for clustering factor approaches the number of blocks in the base table, then the index is said to be clustered. http://www.oracle.com/pls/db112/search?remark=quick_search&word=clustered+index
There is no create clustered index in Oracle.
- Clustering factor affects the efficiency of an index.
- There can be clustered tables that you can create indexes on.
- An Index Organized table is a similar concept to the Microsoft SQL Server clustered index, but it isn't the same thing at all.

Difference between Primary Key and Unique Key with NOT NULL constraint

As both can be referred to another table.
Apart from the difference that Primary Key can be only 1 and Unique keys can be multiple,
is there any difference?
Like in terms of type of Index?

PARAG_C wrote:
As both can be referred to another table.
Apart from the difference that Primary Key can be only 1 and Unique keys can be multiple,
is there any difference?
Like in terms of type of Index?Technically there is almost no difference. Logically the two are often used for slightly different concepts.
The PK (and with it the index) is often an ID column filled by a seqeunce. This key can then be refenced by foreign key constraints on other tables. it is very useful to have this as a meaningless technical construct. Because then the chance that such a ID needs to be changed is extremly slim.
The UK (and with it the index) is often one or several columns that represent the logical key for the entity. Foreign key constriants should not point to this. THe chance that this attribute will be changed at some point in time is way higher then for a meaningless number (ID).

Composite Primary Key needs Unique ID column or no?

Hello Dears ,
I have a table that it's primary key is composite key of two columns , and there are like 5 info columns . You think I shall use the two columns as primary key of this table or create unique ID column .
Example :
Table Employees :
Table Departments :
The problem table is Department Managers :
Now I'll be adding employee id and department id in this table plus manager info etc..( info doesnt exist in employee table) , shall i use them as primary or create id column in this table ??
Thanks alot.

Hi
I would use employe_id and department_id to define the PK. I see no reason for adding a meaningless key in such a case.
HTH
Chris Antognini
Troubleshooting Oracle Performance, Apress 2008
http://top.antognini.ch

Primary Key rule Violation error while Insert Record in Compact DB

Hi All,
I have One Table in Server Name "Student" when i Synchronize this with the help of Microsoft Synchronization Framework
same Table schema with Data has been create in CompactDataBase.
When i insert data in CompactDataDase it give me Primary Key Violation error.
Please Suggest
Example
Table Structure is as Follows:-
Create Table Student(
[Emp_id] int IDENTITY(1,1) NotNull,[Emp_Name] int NOTNULL );insert into Student Values('John');insert into Student Values('Joe');Thanks & RegardsNamit Jain

try this and see if it solves,
also, Emp_name data type is int. it should be varchar.
I suspect the reason is because you already have some data in student table but you identity seeds were not updated and hence it is trying to insert a row with emp_id value that already exists.and hence the primary key violation. also, your table DDL did
not really have an primary key but it would still error since you are inserting duplicate row in the identity column.
so, try resetting the identity seed value to the max(emp_id) in the table.
select max(Emp_ID) from student
--use the output of the above statement
DBCC CHECKIDENT ('Student', RESEED,<<--use the output of the above statement-->>)
--your max(emp_id) should match with last_value column in the below( do not if this query would run in compact DB though)
select seed_value,increment_value,last_value from sys.identity_columns where object_id=object_id('Student')
now, try your insert.
Hope it Helps!!

SQL Server - primary key constraint modify

Hi,
I have a table with many records. I wanted to modify the primary key constraint. The only way to alter the primary key constraint is to drop and create again. Please let me if it is right.
Can we create primary key constraint with NoCheck. Since we have lots of records in our table, creating primary key constraint takes more time because it is checking the existing data. Please provide your comments.
Thanks.

>>I have a table with many records. I wanted to modify the primary key constraint. The only way to alter the primary key constraint is to drop and create again. Please let me if it is right.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms181043(v=sql.105).aspx
Note
To modify a PRIMARY KEY constraint, you must first delete the existing PRIMARY KEY constraint and then re-create it with the new definition.
>>Can we create primary key constraint with NoCheck. Since we have lots of records in our table, creating primary key constraint takes more time because it is checking the existing data. Please provide your comments.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-IN/library/ms188066.aspx
When FOREIGN KEY or CHECK constraints are added, all existing data is verified for constraint violations unless the WITH
NOCHECK option is specified. If any violations occur, ALTER TABLE fails and an error is returned. When a new PRIMARY KEY or UNIQUE constraint is added to an existing column, the data in the column or columns must be unique. If duplicate values are found, ALTER
TABLE fails. The WITH NOCHECK option has no effect when PRIMARY KEY or UNIQUE constraints are added.
Satheesh
My Blog |
How to ask questions in technical forum

Primary Key Migration - Hierarchical Structures

Hi,
I'm involved in looking at a migration of a hierarchical database to ORACLE. For some table types the primary keys at the top of the hierarchy are compound ones and these need to be migrated to the next level of hierarchy. At the
next level of hierarchy there are further columns that need to become part of the primary key at that level.
Where the hierarchies get deep I'm looking at a pretty large primary key if this method is used.
Table A
Columns A1,A2
Primary Key A1,A2
Table B
Columns A1,A2,B1,B2
Primary Key A1,A2,B1,B2
Foreign Key referencing table A columns A1,A2
Table C
Columns A1,A2,B1,B2,C1,C2
Primary Key A1,A2,B1,B2,C1,C2
Foreign Key referencing table B columns A1,A2,B1,B2
To me this looks quite unwieldy so I was strongly considering giving tables A,B an C a new primary key 'ID'
column generated from a sequence and using that to maintain the relationships thus:
Table A
Columns ID,A1,A2
Primary Key ID
Unique Constraint A1,A2
Table B
Columns ID,A_ID,B1,B2
Primary Key ID
Unique Constraint A_ID,B1,B2
Foreign Key A references A column ID
Table C
Columns ID,B_ID,C1,C2
Primary Key ID
Unique Constraint B_ID,C1,C2
Foreign Key B_ID references B column ID
This involves another index for the ID column on each table I know, but it stops replication of data and would enable changes to the key values without losing the entire hierarchical relationship.
Does anyone have any experience with either of these two approaches who could shed some light on the pitfalls of each approach?
Thanks in advance
Mike

This seems to affect migrations from MS Access as well, so I guess it applies to all source db types. If it helps, PK's are created with SD 1.2.0 / 28.54, but not with 1.2.0 / 29.98.
As a related point it would be useful to show the constraint metadata in the captured and converted model info, rather than only see it as part of the gen script ?
Cheers
Jules

USE ROWID AS PRIMARY KEY OF ENTITY ON EJB3

When we launch the Create Entities from Tables wizard, and create JPA (Java Persistence API) entities from existing database tables, if the table has no primary key and unique key field, you will get a warning. When you run, you will get the following information:
Caused by: Exception [TOPLINK-7161] (Oracle TopLink Essentials - 2006.8 (Build 060829)): oracle.toplink.essentials.exceptions.ValidationException
Exception Description: Entity class [class model.Test] has no primary key specified. It should define either an @Id, @EmbeddedId or an @IdClass.
Actually, every row of oracle table has a ROWID field , I think it is a good “primary key field”. Add it into Entity Java bean file as following:
@Id
private ROWID rowid;
And generate accessors, ok, run……
GOOD, No problem.
But when you insert a new row, got an exception:
Exception [TOPLINK-4002] (Oracle TopLink Essentials - 2006.8 (Build 060829)): oracle.toplink.essentials.exceptions.DatabaseException
Internal Exception: java.sql.SQLException: ORA-00928: missing SELECT keyword
Error Code: 928
Call:INSERT INTO TEST (ROWID, B, A) VALUES (?, ?, ?)
bind => [null, 555, 555]
Query:InsertObjectQuery(model.Test@40979b)
555~~~, what happened?! Somebody builds a wrong SQL …
Don’t worry! I know (…) where is the “bug”.
Find out the class
oracle.toplink.essentials.internal.expressions. SQLInsertStatement
which is included in the toplink-essentials.jar,
decompile… , fix…, compile, and jar it back.
Fix
if(field.getTable().equals(getTable()) || !field.hasTableName())
to
if((field.getTable().equals(getTable()) || !field.hasTableName()) && !field.getName().equalsIgnoreCase("ROWID"))
OK, it is running well.
I suggest ORACLE fix it into his next version. Do you think it is a good idea?

Do you think it is a good idea? Not really, but that's just my two cents.

Composite Primary key & Primary key questions

Background:
1.5 TB data warehouse. All tables use at least a 3 column composite Primary key. Most use 3. col1||col2||col3 to achieve uniqueness.
col1= very low cardinality. 99% of the values are '0'
col2 = high cardinality. (SSN's, loaded monthly)
col3 = low cardinality. (monthly sequence number used for partitioning)
From what I've read, the first column used in a composite primary key also receives its own index. If that is correct, then the primary key being used is losing its effectiveness by putting a very low cardinality column as the first column of the Primary key. By moving col2 to the first position of the composite key, I would be obtaining an index on SSN which would be much more useful. (Please correct me if I'm wrong) Or since the index would be so large anyway, the CBO would just do full table scans which is what I'm trying to get away from.
This Primary key is used to ensure uniqueness during loads. Other than that, it really has no purpose and is never queried by the user. (WHERE col1||col2||col3 = xxxxxxxxx)
As a DBA, I see this massive tablespace for holding the primary keys now reaching in excess of 157 GB and it seems like such a waste of space. The problem I'm running across is how to ensure uniqueness during the loads w/o having to store the unique values. (the 157 GB) If I drop the PK's, then create unique indexes just for the loads, then the unique index would be generated against the entire table, which would take forever.
If you create a local index (what I want in the end) it still has to create the index for all previous partitions (250+ partitions). You can't create a specific 'local' index on a partition. You create a local index on the table and when a new partition is added, the index is then added as well. That's what I want to do with some of my fields like SSN but for loading purposes, this isn't going to help me.
I need a way to ensure uniqueness during a monthly load of a new partition (col1||col2||col3) but w/o having to store these values for eternity. Right now it's the primary key, so it has to be stored. I hope I'm making sense here. Any ideas?

I think you need some clarification about the index supporting the primary key.
The primary key is unique - the database will enforce this for you.
All of the columns in the primary key are in the index that enforces the key (not just the first column).
Usually this index is a unique index, but you can have a non-unique index supporting a primary key.
I'm a little confused with some of your other statements
how to ensure uniqueness during the loads w/o having to store the unique valuesIf you don't store the value how do you know it is unique?
Did you mean that you don't want to store the key values in both the table and the index?
You may want to consider making col3 (the partition key) the leading column of the index, so you can create a local (instead of global) PK index.
I wouldn't worry too much about col1 (the column full of mostly zeros) - numbers are stored variable length. A NUMBER(38) that holds a zero takes no more space than a NUMBER(1) that holds a zero.

Deployment Tool Problem (J2EE -Composite primary Key Class)

Hi !!
e.g. I have an entiybean which has composite primary key class. So while deploying in J2EE tool u need to specify the Primary key class and the primary key field. well in case of a composite primary key class(if u have more than one field)...how do u declare all the fields for primary key class....
if u r not getting me please tell me... See in J2EE deployment tool there is on section called Entity..in that see the Primary Key class (there u specify the Primary key class) and the Primary Key Field Name (the field name) Here u can just give only one Field name..if you have mulitple fields, then where you will specify... Please let me know..
if anybody wants the code I will give the code...Please try to help..(how to deploy this kind of entity bean in J2EE deployment tool)
-Bhumika

Hi Bhumika,
in case you have more than one field you need to write a Primary key class where the fields you want to be the key are member variables.
your p.key class could look like this (it has to implement hash() and equals() ):
public class PersonPK implements java.io.Serializable
public int person_ID;
public PersonPK()
public PersonPK(int aPersonId)
person_ID = aPersonId;
public int hashCode()
return person_ID;
public boolean equals(Object ob)
if (ob == this) return true;
if (!(ob instanceof PersonPK)) return false;
PersonPK other = (PersonPK) ob;
if (person_ID != other.person_ID) return false;
return true;
-Hope this helps a bit,
Anke

Checking primary key or unique in while entry

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for