Error in Check Constraint

Good Morning All,
Please rectify following syntax for creating this table:
I need to check d_reg value must be on or after 01-JAN-06.
create table M_REC
(fno varchar2(15) primary key,
d_reg date check(d_reg>=trunc(sysdate,'YY')),
sname varchar2(20))
d_reg date check(d_reg>=trunc(sysdate,'YY')),
ERROR at line 3:
ORA-02436: date or system variable wrongly specified in CHECK constraintMessage was edited by:
Jameel

One more doubt, please clarify.
I have created another table D_REC referencing M_REC:
SQL> desc d_rec
Name                                                 Null?    Type
FNO                                                           VARCHAR2(15)
CRS                                                           VARCHAR2(10)
AMT                                                           NUMBER
P_DATE                                                        DATE
SQL> desc m_rec
Name                                                 Null?    Type
FNO                                                  NOT NULL VARCHAR2(15)
D_REG                                                         DATE
SNAME                                                         VARCHAR2(20)
"Now I have to add ON DELETE SET NULL constraint on FNO of M_REC --- How?"

Similar Messages

Urgent Check Constraint Error

hi
i have a check constraint on a table B mean Nvl(Quantity,0)>=0 but when i update a table from a trigger on insertion of another table A
with :New.Quantity -ive it gives check constraint error.
Please Note it does not turn the balance into negative for table B
second because im inserting in table A then :new.quantity reffers to table A values not the table B
why this constraint error appears.
any body suggest
thanks in advance

tĦ€ §µåдŋ wrote:
i have a check constraint on a table B mean Nvl(Quantity,0)>=0 but when i update a table from a trigger on insertion of another table A
with :New.Quantity -ive it gives check constraint error.
Please Note it does not turn the balance into negative for table B
second because im inserting in table A then :new.quantity reffers to table A values not the table B
why this constraint error appears.Not urgent at all.
So you have a constraint on table B and then a trigger on table A attempts to update table B with a negative quantity which violates the constraint and it throws a constraint error.
That sounds right to me. What's the problem?

Displaying an error message coused by check constraint

Hi,
I'm trying to replace oracle error message by my own message.
Form report is throwing an expected error like :
'Error in mru internal routine: ORA-20001: Error in MRU: row= 1, ORA-02290: check constraint ...'
I used the plsql block to handle with that but it doesnt set the my message. After press a button the check constraint validate a date and if data are unexpected then throwing a error which i want to replace by my own.
The process is listed below:
DECLARE
invalid_sql EXCEPTION;
PRAGMA EXCEPTION_INIT (invalid_sql, -02290);
page_error EXCEPTION;
PRAGMA EXCEPTION_INIT (page_error, -20001);
BEGIN
:p12_error := NULL;
EXCEPTION
WHEN invalid_sql THEN
:p12_error := 'In case of sql injection attack some of the statements were forbidden: INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE, DROP, ALTER, TRUNCATE, EXECUTE';
WHEN page_error THEN
:P12_ERROR := 'Please contact your administrator !!!';
WHEN OTHERS THEN
:p12_error := SQLERRM;
END;
P12_ERROR -- hidden item
Then i set the 'success message ' :
&P12_ERROR.
What is wrong that is not showing my message?It not recognoze Init pragma?.
Please give my some points on it!
Edited by: rafix on 2008-12-16 04:31

I followed Denes Kubick' way on his blog http://htmldb.oracle.com/pls/otn/f?p=31517:185:17139524101939:::RP,::
where he created process on SubmitThe process is a simple example of error handling in ApEx. It does inserting and at the
same time it handels exceptions. If an exception occurs, it will use a hidden item on the
page to store error messages. At the same time, the success message of that process
(which is what you get after pressing the "Save" button) is &P185_ERROR. item.
Returning to my previous post i got tabular form report where constraint makes error in case of writing 'insert, delete...' after save button where have been pressed. Pragma mechenism is trapping like you wrote exceptions.Ok.
So what i need configure to associate that process to trapped error?
Edited by: rafix on 2008-12-17 05:40

Primary key and relevant not null check constraints....

Hi ,
There are some constraints of primary key type and not null check constraints on columns which constitute each primary key....
Should I/Do I have to drop them....????
Do they burden the db at the time of data validation....????
Thanks...
Sim

Hi,
>>There are some constraints of primary key type and not null check constraints on columns which constitute each primary key..
In fact, a column that constitutes a primary key, by default cannot accept NULL values. In this case, defines a PK column as NOT NULL would not be necessary.
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> create table x (id number constraint pk_x primary key);
Table created.
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> desc x
Name                  Null?    Type
ID                    NOT NULL NUMBER
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> select constraint_name,constraint_type,table_name,search_condition from user_constraints where table_name='X';
CONSTRAINT_NAME                C TABLE_NAME      SEARCH_CONDITION
PK_X                           P X
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> create table y (id number not null constraint pk_y primary key);
Table created.
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> desc y
Name                  Null?    Type
ID                   NOT NULL NUMBER
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> select constraint_name,constraint_type,table_name,search_condition from user_constraints where table_name='Y';
CONSTRAINT_NAME                C TABLE_NAME      SEARCH_CONDITION
SYS_C006327381 C Y "ID" IS NOT NULL
PK_Y                           P Y
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> alter table y drop constraint SYS_C006327381;
Table altered.
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> desc y
Name                                      Null?    Type
ID                                        NOT NULL NUMBER
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> insert into y values (NULL);
insert into y values (NULL)
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01400: cannot insert NULL into ("LEGATTI"."Y"."ID")
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> insert into y values (1);
1 row created.
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> insert into y values (1);
insert into y values (1)
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00001: unique constraint (LEGATTI.PK_Y) violated
>>Should I/Do I have to drop them....????
I don't see any problem, otherwise, drop the NOT NULL constraint is the same with alter the column table like below:
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> create table z (id number not null constraint pk_z primary key);
Table created.
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> select constraint_name,constraint_type,table_name,search_condition from user_constraints where table_name='Z';
CONSTRAINT_NAME                C TABLE_NAME                     SEARCH_CONDITION
SYS_C006328420 C Z "ID" IS NOT NULL
PK_Z                           P Z
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> desc z
Name                                      Null?    Type
ID                                        NOT NULL NUMBER
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> alter table z modify id NULL;
Table altered.
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> select constraint_name,constraint_type,table_name,search_condition from user_constraints where table_name='Z';
CONSTRAINT_NAME                C TABLE_NAME                     SEARCH_CONDITION
PK_Z                           P Z
LEGATTI@ORACLE10> desc z
Name                                      Null?    Type
ID                                        NOT NULL NUMBERCheers
Legatti

Is it possible to create a dynamic(with a select) check constraint?

create table a (col_to_be_coded_fora number);
create table b (col_to_be_coded_forb number);
create table c (col_name varchar2(20), col_code number, col_desc varchar2(20));
insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_fora', 1, 'active');
insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_fora', 2, 'de-active');
insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_fora', 3, 'pending');
insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_forb', 10, 'school');
insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_forb', 20, 'hospital');
insert into a values ( 1); -- meaning 'active' for table a, column col_to_be_coded_fora, can go in
insert into a values (10); -- meaning nothing for table a, column col_to_be_coded_fora, must give error
insert into b values ( 1); -- meaning nothing for table b, column col_to_be_coded_forb, must give error
insert into b values (10); -- meaning 'school' for table b, column col_to_be_coded_fora, can go in
I know i can handle this problem with dividing table c into to tables and creating foreign key relationship.
in this demo case i have only a and b, 2 tables but i want to encode thousands of tables with a table like c.
İs it possible to create a dynamic check constraint on a table which selects c table for the inputs that have permision?
Or do i have to use after insert, update triggers on table a and b to ensure this functionality?
Is there a smarter implementation for this need, may be a design change?
Thank you,
Kind regards.
Tonguç

Hi Tonguç,
A small design change makes it possible to do this with simple foreign key constraints.
I would do something like:
ual303@ORKDEV01> CREATE TABLE c (
2    col_name VARCHAR2(20),
3     col_code NUMBER,
4     col_desc VARCHAR2(20),
5     PRIMARY KEY (col_name, col_code)
6 );
Tabel is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> CREATE TABLE a (
2    col_to_be_coded_fora NUMBER PRIMARY KEY,
3     col_name VARCHAR2(20) DEFAULT 'col_to_be_coded_fora' CHECK (col_name = 'col_to_be_coded_fora'),
4     FOREIGN KEY (col_name, col_to_be_coded_fora) REFERENCES c
5 );
Tabel is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> CREATE TABLE b (
2    col_to_be_coded_forb NUMBER PRIMARY KEY,
3     col_name VARCHAR2(20) DEFAULT 'col_to_be_coded_forb' CHECK (col_name = 'col_to_be_coded_forb'),
4     FOREIGN KEY (col_name, col_to_be_coded_forb) REFERENCES c
5 );
Tabel is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_fora', 1, 'active');
1 rij is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_fora', 2, 'de-active');
1 rij is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_fora', 3, 'pending');
1 rij is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_forb', 10, 'school');
1 rij is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into c values ('col_to_be_coded_forb', 20, 'hospital');
1 rij is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> -- meaning 'active' for table a, column col_to_be_coded_fora, can go in
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into a(col_to_be_coded_fora) values ( 1);
1 rij is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01> -- meaning nothing for table a, column col_to_be_coded_fora, must give error
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into a(col_to_be_coded_fora) values (10);
insert into a(col_to_be_coded_fora) values (10)
FOUT in regel 1:
.ORA-02291: integrity constraint (UAL303.SYS_C0033537) violated - parent key not found
ual303@ORKDEV01> -- meaning nothing for table b, column col_to_be_coded_forb, must give error
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into b(col_to_be_coded_forb) values ( 1);
insert into b(col_to_be_coded_forb) values ( 1)
FOUT in regel 1:
.ORA-02291: integrity constraint (UAL303.SYS_C0033540) violated - parent key not found
ual303@ORKDEV01> -- meaning 'school' for table b, column col_to_be_coded_fora, can go in
ual303@ORKDEV01> insert into b(col_to_be_coded_forb) values (10);
1 rij is aangemaakt.
ual303@ORKDEV01>Cheers,
Colin

Using a function in a check constraint

Hi,
I created a domain table(id, code, domain_code, description) and foreign keys to this table. To ensure that a valid domain is put in the column I created a function that returns a boolean and has two parameters (id and domain_code). It returns true if the id and domain belong together.
I want to know if it is possible to create a check constraint which validates the data in the refering table with the data in the domain table.
Does anyone know if this is possible? Or do I have to use a db-trigger?
Regards,
Romano

It still sounds like all you need is a foreign key constraint. Please see the example below, based on your revised criteria.
scott@ORA92> create table domain
2    (id         number,
3      code         number,
4      domain_code number,
5      constraint domain_pk primary key (id),
6      constraint domain_uk unique (code, domain_code))
7 /
Table created.
scott@ORA92> insert into domain values (1, 10, 2)
2 /
1 row created.
scott@ORA92> create table domain_values_table
2    (id         number,
3      domain_code number,
4      constraint domain_values_table_uk unique (id, domain_code))
5 /
Table created.
scott@ORA92> insert into domain_values_table values (1, 2)
2 /
1 row created.
scott@ORA92> commit
2 /
Commit complete.
scott@ORA92> create table referring
2    (id         number,
3      domain_code number,
4      status         number,
5      constraint referring_fk foreign key (status)
6               references domain (id),
7      constraint referring_fk2 foreign key (id, domain_code)
8               references domain_values_table (id, domain_code))
9 /
Table created.
scott@ORA92> insert into referring values (1, 2, null)
2 /
1 row created.
scott@ORA92> insert into referring values (3, 4, null)
2 /
insert into referring values (3, 4, null)
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-02291: integrity constraint (SCOTT.REFERRING_FK2) violated - parent key not found

How to create this check constraint

create table emplt
( emplt_pk number,
indvl_pk number,
start_dt date,
end_dt date,
lct_fl char(1),
sup_fl char(1),
br_pk number,
nro_pk number,
default_fl char(1) default 'N' );
INSERT INTO emplt
values(
1001, 101, to_date('01-01-2005', 'MM-DD-YYYY' ), NULL, 'Y','N',123,NULL,NULL );
INSERT INTO emplt
values(
1002, 101, to_date('02-01-2005', 'MM-DD-YYYY' ), NULL, 'Y','N',NULL,0001,NULL );
INSERT INTO emplt
values(
1003, 102, to_date('02-01-2005', 'MM-DD-YYYY' ), NULL, 'Y','N',NULL,0001,NULL );
Is it possible to create a check constraint on this table that enforces that for a given indvl_pk, br_pk and nro_pk
there is only one row with dflt_fl = 'Y'?
Thanks in advance!

Say,
SQL> create unique index empli_ui on emplt(case default_fl when 'Y' then indvl_pk end,
2 case default_fl when 'Y' then br_pk end,
3 case default_fl when 'Y' then nro_pk end
4 )
5 /
&nbsp
Index created.
&nbsp
SQL> insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
2 values(1,2,3,'J');
&nbsp
1 row created.
&nbsp
SQL> insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
2 values(1,2,3,'J');
&nbsp
1 row created.
&nbsp
SQL> insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
2 values(3,2,1,'A');
&nbsp
1 row created.
&nbsp
SQL>
SQL> insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
2 values(3,2,1,'A');
&nbsp
1 row created.
&nbsp
SQL> insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
2 values(3,2,1,'Y');
&nbsp
1 row created.
&nbsp
SQL>
SQL> insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
2 values(3,2,1,'Y');
insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00001: unique constraint (SCOTT.EMPLI_UI) violated
&nbsp
SQL> insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
2 values(1,2,3,'Y');
&nbsp
1 row created.
&nbsp
SQL> insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
2 values(1,2,3,'Y');
insert into emplt (indvl_pk,br_pk,nro_pk,default_fl)
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00001: unique constraint (SCOTT.EMPLI_UI) violatedRgds.

Oracle check constraint bug ?

Hi,
This is an 'interesting' bug:
create table mytable (
id number,
status number,
constraint mytable_pk primary key (id)
insert into mytable (id, status) values (1, 0);
insert into mytable (id, status) values (2, -1);
On XE (10.2.0.1) and 10.2.0.4:
Following command gives the expected ORA-02293 error (using string values instead of numbers): alter table mytable add constraint mytable_status_chk check (status in ('0', '1'));
BUT no error with the following command: alter table mytable add constraint mytable_status_chk check (status in ('-1', '0', '1'));
On XE:
The query select * from mytable where status=0 returns no records until the constraint is dropped again !
Best regards,
Serge
Edited by: sergeko on Nov 19, 2010 11:19 AM
Edited by: sergeko on Nov 19, 2010 11:21 AM

I don't have access to any 10.x or XE currently and cannot reproduce on EE 9.2.0.9 or 11.1.0.6.
It's possible that you're running into an optimizer issue with the constraint.
This might be visible if you run an explain plan on the statement, get the execution plan via dbms_xplan.display and check the predicates section both with and without the constraint.
I take it that you don't get the problem if you use a check constraint with numbers not strings.
I wonder also whether it makes a difference if you declare status as not null.
Edited by: DomBrooks on Nov 19, 2010 10:44 AM

How to Disable check constraint in cronacle

Hi All,
We found that one job failed in cronacle with the following error
*ORA-20800: JCS-02138: problem with parameter "PRINT_BANNERPAGE"
SAP recommended the soultion saying
Disable the "Check Constraints" that are being used in the scripts currently in Cronacle or apply some patch.So we want to explore the first option i.e check constraint
Can any one help me in Regarding the check constraints.
Thanks in advance
shylaja

Hi,
Scripts can have check constraints and reference contraints, you will find these under the script properties when you edit the script.
I would set the constraint to optional, meaning that you still have the dropdown available but it no longer complains if it does not like the chosen value.
Regards,
Anton.

Problem in creating CHECK constraint

While creating a table, i want to apply a CHECK constraint, that pension_amount should be in accordance of pension_code, i am getting error mentioned below.
CREATE TABLE pension_amount_check
   pension_amount         NUMBER (4),
   pension_code   NUMBER (1),
   CONSTRAINT amount_chk CHECK
      (CASE
          WHEN pension_code = 1 THEN (pension_amount = 3000 OR pension_amount > 3000)
          WHEN pension_code = 2 THEN pension_amount = 1500
       end)
ORA-00907: missing right parenthesisHow i can resolve this.

CREATE TABLE pension_amount_check
   pension_amount         NUMBER (4),
   pension_code   NUMBER (1),
   CONSTRAINT amount_chk CHECK
         (pension_code = 1 AND pension_amount >= 3000)
          OR
         (pension_code = 2 AND pension_amount = 1500)
)http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/appdev.112/e17125/adfns_constraints.htm#ADFNS282

Column check constraint cannot reference other columns !????

Hello,
why it don't work?
I have read that Check Constraint must work with other columns. What is the Problem here (KK_ID)?
DROP TABLE Pat CASCADE CONSTRAINTS;
CREATE TABLE Pat
PAT_ID           NUMBER(12) NOT NULL
          CONSTRAINT pat_id PRIMARY KEY initially immediate,
NAME           VARCHAR2(50)NOT NULL initially immediate,
date_b          DATE NOT NULL initially immediate,
PRIVAT_KNZ VARCHAR2(20)
          CONSTRAINT PRIVAT_KNZ_ CHECK (UPPER(PRIVAT_KNZ) in ('Y','N')) initially deferred,
KK_ID           NUMBER(10)
          CONSTRAINT KK_ID CHECK      ((UPPER(PRIVAT_KNZ) in ('N')) AND KK_ID is NOT NULL) OR ((UPPER(PRIVAT_KNZ) in ('Y')),
          CONSTRAINT REF_KEY_KK FOREIGN KEY (KK_ID)
          REFERENCES Tab2 (KK_ID) initially deferred
The field KK_ID must became a value if PRIVAT_KNZ has a 'N'. If PRIVAT_KNZ has a value 'Y' then can KK_ID have a NULL or a value.
ERROR__________________________________________________________________
DROP TABLE Patient CASCADE CONSTRAINTS
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00942: table or view does not exist
          CONSTRAINT KK_ID CHECK      ((UPPER(PRIVAT_KNZ) in ('N')) AND KK_ID is NOT NULL) OR ((UPPER(PRIVAT_KNZ) in ('J')),
ERROR at line 12:
ORA-02438: Column check constraint cannot reference other columns
Thank you in advance!!!!
Andrej

Thank You very much!
It works great!
But i don't understand why i must put coma, after
KK_ID                NUMBER(10) NUll REFERENCES KRANKENKASSE ,
And then follows the contstraint? How can i see, that constraint KK_ID belongs to column KK_ID?
How can i make,than the constrain belongs to definition of Columns KK_ID?
Thank you in advance!
DROP TABLE Krankenkasse CASCADE CONSTRAINTS;
CREATE TABLE Krankenkasse
KK_ID                NUMBER(10)
                    CONSTRAINT KK_id_PR PRIMARY KEY,
BEZEICHNUNG          VARCHAR2(20)
INSERT INTO Krankenkasse VALUES(1, 'AOK');
INSERT INTO Krankenkasse VALUES(2, 'Techniker');
INSERT INTO Krankenkasse VALUES(3, 'Barmer');
DROP TABLE Patient CASCADE CONSTRAINTS;
CREATE TABLE Patient
PATIENTEN_ID           NUMBER(12) NOT NULL
     CONSTRAINT pat_id PRIMARY KEY initially immediate,
NACHNAME           VARCHAR2(50)NOT NULL initially immediate,
VORNAME           VARCHAR2(20)NOT NULL initially immediate,
ADRESSE           VARCHAR2(100)Null,
GEB_DATUM           DATE NOT NULL initially immediate,
PRIVAT_KNZ           VARCHAR2(20)
               CONSTRAINT PRIVAT_KNZ CHECK (UPPER(PRIVAT_KNZ) in ('J','N'))
               initially deferred,
KK_ID                NUMBER(10) NUll REFERENCES KRANKENKASSE,
               CONSTRAINT KK_ID CHECK
               ((Upper(PRIVAT_KNZ) in ('N') AND KK_ID is NOT Null) OR (UPPER(PRIVAT_KNZ)in ('J')))
INSERT INTO PATIENT VALUES(1,'Schmidt','Bernd','Adresse1', TO_DATE('01101965', 'DDMMRRRR'),'N',1);
INSERT INTO PATIENT VALUES(2,'Mueller','Heiko','Adresse2', TO_DATE('15061955', 'DDMMRRRR'),'N',1);
INSERT INTO PATIENT VALUES(3,'Becker','Josef','Adresse3', TO_DATE('03101947', 'DDMMRRRR'),'J',2);
INSERT INTO PATIENT VALUES(4,'Winter','Paul','Adresse4', TO_DATE('01051933', 'DDMMRRRR'),'J',Null);
INSERT INTO PATIENT VALUES(5,'Winter','Paul','Adresse4', TO_DATE('01051933', 'DDMMRRRR'),'N',Null);
commit;
__________________________________________________________________________

Tabular Form Validation: Comparing Two Columns vs Check Constraint

What is the best approach for validating that one column needs to be greater than another column in a tabular form when attempting to save. (E.g. An effective date and expirey date column. The expirey date column >= effective date column)
At the moment I have a check constraint on the two columns at the database level which is fine but it returns and passes up a pretty cryptic (from a business user perspective) unfriendly message to the user as follows:
Error in mru internal routine: ORA-20001: Error in MRU: row= 1, ORA-02290: check constraint (IDMTC.ADDRESS_TYPE_CON) violated, update "IDMTC"."ADDRESS_TYPE" set "ID" = :b1, "CODE" = :b2, "NAME" = :b3, "LOV_SORT_ORDER" = :b4, "DESCRIPTION" = :b5, "EFFECTIVE_DATE" = :b6, "EXPIRY_DATE" = :b7 where "ID" = :p_pk_col
Unable to process update.
Is there a way to inject, detect and/or replace this with a friendlier business user message? I have confirmed that the "Unable to process update." text at the bottom below the MRU Internal routine error raised from my check constraint is the process error message for my Apply MRU process.
I was hesitating going down a larger page level validation where I loop through the tabular form array and/or inject some client side Javascript.
Any advice? Have I simply overlooked some tabular form options for validating using cross column values?
Thanks,
Jeff

Jeff..Thanks for the response.
However because I am working in a tabular form at design time I don't know which controls I can reference in a dynamic action, or custom Javascript routine other than selecting all elements in a column using JQuery, etc.
I have decided to go with for the time being an approach I found here: doing validation on tabular form
My code ended up looking something like and was entered into a page level validation as a PL/SQL function body returning error text.:
DECLARE
l_error VARCHAR2 (4000);
BEGIN
FOR i IN 1 .. apex_application.g_f02.COUNT
LOOP
--If Expiry date is older then effective date
IF nvl(apex_application.g_f08 (i), to_date('31-DEC-9999', 'dd-mon-yyyy')) < apex_application.g_f07 (i) THEN
l_error :=
l_error
|| '</br>'
|| 'Row '
|| i
|| ': Expiry date must be greater than effective date '
|| ' for maintenance item name: '
|| apex_application.g_f03 (i);
END IF;
END LOOP;
RETURN LTRIM (l_error, '</br>');
END;
I had been hoping with Apex 4+ that there was additional native functionality to do this type of validation or somehow be able to reference a column or control name instead of a generic array column so that my code was better self documenting.
It works for now...but would love to revisit with maybe a cleaner client side solution that does the validation and highlights the invalid element since I still maintain data integrity at the db with the check constraint.
Thanks,
Jeff

Crash of Oracle XE when check constraint uses in-operator with desc. values

ORA-03113 and other errors in conjunction with lost of connection occur in Oracle XE under the following conditions:
/* Crash (values of check constraint in descending order) */
DROP TABLE CRASHTEST CASCADE CONSTRAINTS;
CREATE TABLE CRASHTEST
CRASHTEST_ID NUMBER(9),
CRASHTEST_OK NUMBER(1) DEFAULT 0
ALTER TABLE CRASHTEST ADD (CONSTRAINT CRASHTEST_CK CHECK (CRASHTEST_OK IN (0,-1)));
INSERT INTO CRASHTEST (CRASHTEST_ID, CRASHTEST_OK) VALUES (1, 0);
INSERT INTO CRASHTEST (CRASHTEST_ID, CRASHTEST_OK) VALUES (2, -1);
COMMIT;
SELECT * FROM CRASHTEST WHERE CRASHTEST_OK = 0;
If all values of the in-clause within the check constraint are entered in ascending order, no error occurs:
/* No Crash (values of check constraint in ascending order) */
DROP TABLE CRASHTEST CASCADE CONSTRAINTS;
CREATE TABLE CRASHTEST
CRASHTEST_ID NUMBER(9),
CRASHTEST_OK NUMBER(1) DEFAULT 0
ALTER TABLE CRASHTEST ADD (CONSTRAINT CRASHTEST_CK CHECK (CRASHTEST_OK IN (-1,0)));
INSERT INTO CRASHTEST (CRASHTEST_ID, CRASHTEST_OK) VALUES (1, 0);
INSERT INTO CRASHTEST (CRASHTEST_ID, CRASHTEST_OK) VALUES (2, -1);
COMMIT;
SELECT * FROM CRASHTEST WHERE CRASHTEST_OK = 0;
Especially interesting is the fact, that the error is caused by a check constraint in conjunction with a select statement!
Hopefully, there are no other hidden bombs stealing my time...
Have a nice day,
Sven

It might be interesting to post that in the XE forum to notify Oracle developers and XE users.
Oracle Database Express Edition (XE)
C.

Difference between a check constraint and a trigger

Hi, I wanted to know the exact usage of a trigger within a database.
Suppose I want to have a restriction on an insert into a Employees table that provides a check on the time that a particular employee signs in,
I could do that with the help of a before insert trigger that prevents certain values fgrom being inserted.
But cant I do the same thing with the help of a simple check constraint?
Where exactly does the distincton lie between a constraint and a trigger?
Edited by: user8680847 on Sep 24, 2009 11:55 PM

A trigger is fired due to DML operations(Insert,Update,Delete) ot on Database events like startup, shutdown etc. You can write your piece of logic into the trigger to do the necessary operations when the event occurs.
For example, if you want you track the changes made to +(emp)+ table data you can place a before update trigger on the table and place your code inside the triiger to insert the old values into an audit table +(emp_audit)+. Everytime an update is made on the table data the trigger will get fired and will insert the old values of the record into the audit table and the new value in the +(emp)+ table.
A constraint is completely different from a trigger. A constraint is like a validation on the data to be inserted. There are different types of constraints.
I will give you a simple example.
You place the not null constraint on the dept column of the emp table. While you try to insert a new record into the emp table the the dept value cannot be null. Oracle will validate the data you are trying to insert into the table with the constraint and will give you an error if the validation fails.
There are other constraints like:
unique key
foreign key
etc.
Precisely a constraint does not handle a database event as a trigger rather it validates the column data.
Edited by: Priyabrat on Sep 25, 2009 12:27 AM

10g 10.2.0.1.0 - Check Constraint with negative values possibly BUG.

Hello,
Why this doesn't work ?
create table a (b numeric(1));
alter table a
add constraint b CHECK (b in (0, 1, -1)) ENABLE;
select * from a where b = -1;
I get the following error: java.sql.SQLException: No more data to read from socket
- Through the jdbc client. It happens with the Oracle Client too.
When i change my check constraint to this:
alter table a
add constraint b CHECK (b in (-1, 0, 1)) ENABLE;
It works.
It's a (known) bug ?
Regards,
Francisco

hi dear,
I want to upgrade my OMS server 10.2.0.1 to 10.2.0.5
I downloaded the patch 10.2.0.5 and read the README.txt
Part of the README is:
1.2 Enter the following command to extract the installation files:
$ unzip GridControl_10.2.0.5_<platform name>.zip
This command extracts the following files and directory:
|- p3731593_10205_<platform name>.zip
|- 3731596.zip
|- 3822442.zip
|- README.txt
|- doc/
NOTE: <platform name> will be "LINUX" or "Win32" depending on the platform for which you are installing. For installing Enterprise Manager 10g Grid Control Release 5 (10.2.0.5), refer to the Release Notes available in the "doc" directory.
- p3731593_10205_<platform name>.zip is the ZIP file that contains 10.2.0.5 patch set software.
This zip can be used for:
- Upgrading Oracle Management Service Release 2 (10.2.0.x) or higher to Oracle Management Service Release 5 (10.2.0.5)
- Upgrading Oracle Management Repository (sysman schema)
- Upgrading Oracle Management Agent on the host where OMS is running.
NOTE: This will not upgrade the database in which the Management Repository (sysman schema) resides.
- 3731596.zip is for patching Management Agent by staging the patch set. To understand how you can apply the Management Agent 10.2.0.5 patch set, refer to method 2 described in section 4.3.3 "Upgrading Management Agent - Multiple Hosts at a Time" of the Release Notes. The Release Notes can be found in the "doc" directory.
- 3822442.zip is for patching Management Agent by distributing the full patch set. To understand how to apply the Management Agent 10.2.0.5 patch set, refer to method 1 described in section 4.3.3 "Upgrading Management Agent - Multiple Hosts at a Time" of the Release Notes. The Release Notes can be found in the "doc" directory.3731596.zip - by staging
3822442.zip - by distributing
Does the two above have the same function or purpose?
I can not understand the meaning of the two :( . which do you think is the right one for my setup?
Thanks a lot

Error in Check Constraint

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for