Imposing a check constraint between 0 - 20
I am having some trouble imposing a range check constraint on TOTALNOMS, I want for this number to be within 0 - 20. What is the SQL please?
SQL> DESC MOVIE;
Name Null? Type
MOVIEID NOT NULL CHAR(3)
TITLE CHAR(36)
YEAR NUMBER
COMPANY CHAR(50)
TOTALNOMS NUMBER
AWARDSWON NUMBER
DVDPRICE NUMBER(5,2)
DISCOUNTPRICE NUMBER(5,2)
http://www.morganslibrary.org/library.html
Scroll down to "Check Constraints" there are a lot of working demos.
Similar Messages
-
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 PMA 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 -
DB Diagram: Modality Difference between NOT NULL and check constraint
Hi,
I am using jdev 11g (11.1.1.10) I am trying to create a db diagram from two tables. I have a FK that is NOT NULL (defined on the column). When i try to display these two tables modality, it does not show up in the diagram. I noticed that there are two ways NOT null can be defined on a table (right click on the db object to edit it; a) under column definitions there is a check box for not null, b) there is a check constraint that one can add to do not null.
I am confused and was wondering whether I must I have check constraints on the database in order to display modality (optional versus mandatory). Logically speaking it does not make any sense though.Hi Susan,
Thanks for your email. I understand that in order to show modality under
UML notation, one must define a COLUMN being NOT NULL instead of defining a check constraint.
I still do not understand how modality (optional versus mandatory) is shown in ERD notation in JDev. I tried flipping ERD/UML notations and made sure icons for tables were showing, but no MODALITY is shown in ERD notation ( an '0" icon or a "|" icon for optional and mandatory). Is it the solid line versus dotted line in the ERD diagram? I am confused because generally under Crawfoot ERD notation '0" icon or a "|" icon is shown for modality.
Modality gets picked up in jdev diagram when COLUMN not null is specified and UML notation is used
ALTER TABLE DETAILAJ MODIFY EMPID not null;
Modality does not get picked up in jdev db diagram when check constraint is specified and UML notation is used
ALTER TABLE DETAILAJ
ADD CONSTRAINT CK_NN_DETAILAJ__EMPID CHECK(EMPID IS NOT NULL) ;
Another question i have related to the matter mentioned above is as follows. Since I want to see modality in db diagram, it follows that I must define a column as not null instead of a check constraint. I must also use NO VALIDATE on NOT NULL column because i have prior data that does not meet the new restriction. I noticed that if i use the following syntax to define a NOT NULL column, two things happen.
a) A constraint is defined as not null automatically and a system generated name is given to the constraint.
b) DB diagram in Jdev does not show the modality.
My question is whether there is a way to see modality in this case.
alter table DETAILAJ
MODIFY EMPID NOT NULL ENABLE NOVALIDATE ;
Edited by: user11219846 on Nov 19, 2009 11:07 AM -
Regexp_like with check constraint
Hi all,
My requirement is User should not enter the data like ( ½, ¼,...).
I have created table with check constraint with the following syntax:
CREATE TABLE mytest (c1 VARCHAR2(20),
CHECK (REGEXP_LIKE(c1,'^[[:alnum:]+[:digit:]+[!@#]]+$')));
The above means, except alphanumeric, digits, and keyboard characters should allow. But it is not allowing any characters.
Please help me, any mistake in the above syntax.
Thanks
ManoHi, Mano,
user533671 wrote:
Hi all,
My requirement is User should not enter the data like ( ½, ¼,...).
I have created table with check constraint with the following syntax:That's a couple of examples of values that are not allowed. Now give some examples of values that are allowed, and the reasons why each are allowe or not.
For example, is 'GREEN/BLUE', with a slash between letters, allowed? How about '1/' with no number after the slash?
>
CREATE TABLE mytest (c1 VARCHAR2(20),
CHECK (REGEXP_LIKE(c1,'^[[:alnum:]+[:digit:]+[!@#]]+$')));
The above means, except alphanumeric, digits, and keyboard characters should allow. But it is not allowing any characters.
Please help me, any mistake in the above syntax.You're using square brackets inside square brackets. If you really need to do that, then the right ']' must be the first character listed.
Post 5 or 10 INSERT statements. Tell which INSERTs should work, and which ones should fail because of the CHECK constraint, and explain why in each case. -
How to check similarity between two Databases 9i & 10g after imp in 10g
Dear all,
Source
=======
OS server ==> HP-UX
Oracle version ==> Oracle 9.2.0.8
DB Name ==> MSST
DB total users ==> 320
Full export in ==> /u02/export/Jan09.dmp
Tablespaces ==> SC, SC_I, SA, SA_I, PP, PP_I, AC, AC_I, SD
Destination
============
OS server ==> HP-UX
DB Name ==> CHDB
Existg DB users ==> 20
Oracle version ==> Oracle 10.2.0.4
copied 9i dump file in ==> /u03/export
Tablespaces created same as Oracle 9i i.e;
Tablespaces ==> SC, SC_I, SA, SA_I, PP, PP_I, AC, AC_I, SD
I had run full import on Destination server i.e; Oracle 10g & following is the command i used:
imp system/pwd@conn_string file=/u03/export/Jan09.dmp log=/u03/export/Jan09_imp.log full=y ignore=y statistics=none
*=== Imported successfully with few errors like ====*
IMP-00017: following statement failed with ORACLE error 2299:
"ALTER TABLE "EMP_PROMOTIONS_ORD" ADD CONSTRAINT "EMP_PROMOTIONS_ORD_UK" UN"
"IQUE ("EMP_NO", "RANK_NO_FOLLOW") USING INDEX PCTFREE 10 INITRANS 2 MAXTRAN"
"S 255 STORAGE(INITIAL 65536 FREELISTS 1 FREELIST GROUPS 1) TABLESPACE "PP" "
"LOGGING ENABLE "
IMP-00003: ORACLE error 2299 encountered
ORA-02299: cannot validate (PP.EMP_PROMOTIONS_ORD_UK) - duplicate keys found
ORA-02299: cannot validate (PP.EMP_PROMOTIONS_ORD_UK) - duplicate keys found
. . importing table "EMP_PROMOTION_DETAILS" 13333 rows imported
. . importing table "EMP_PROMOTION_MAST" 725 rows imported
. . importing table "EMP_PUNISHMENT" 271 rows imported
. . importing table "EMP_REPORT_BOOKS" 60528 rows imported
. . importing table "EMP_SALARY_HISTORIES" 120871 rows imported
. . importing table "EMP_SALARY_HISTORIES_TEMP" 77044 rows imported
. . importing table "EMP_TRANSACTIONS" 96536 rows imported
IMP-00017: following statement failed with ORACLE error 2299:
"ALTER TABLE "EMP_TRANSACTIONS" ADD CONSTRAINT "TRANS_UK" UNIQUE ("EMP_NO","
" "DIR_NO", "DIR_DATE", "TRN_CODE") USING INDEX PCTFREE 10 INITRANS 2 MAXTRA"
"NS 255 STORAGE(INITIAL 65536 FREELISTS 1 FREELIST GROUPS 1) TABLESPACE "PP_"
"I" NOLOGGING ENABLE "
IMP-00003: ORACLE error 2299 encountered
ORA-02299: cannot validate (PP.TRANS_UK) - duplicate keys found
Now my question is
===================
How to check everything is same/similar like Oracle 9i database ( source ), for example ( i used this technique ):
Can anyone tell me how to check similarity between two Databases 9i & 10g after import in 10g.
MSST_DB>SHOW USER
MSST_DB>SA
MSST_DB>select object_type, count(*) from user_objects group by objects;
OBJECT_TYPE COUNT(*)
DATABASE LINK 2
FUNCTION 23
INDEX 1795
LOB 6
PACKAGE 8
PACKAGE BODY 8
PROCEDURE 30
SEQUENCE 67
SYNONYM 60
TABLE 644
TRIGGER 3
VIEW 20
CHDB_DB>SHOW USER
CHDB_DB>SA
CHDB_DB>select object_type, count(*) from user_objects group by objects;
OBJECT_TYPE COUNT(*)
INDEX 1794
PROCEDURE 30
TABLE 644
TRIGGER 3
VIEW 20
FUNCTION 23
SYNONYM 60
PACKAGE BODY 8
SEQUENCE 67
PACKAGE 8
LOB 6
Edited by: VIKHARAHMED on Jan 10, 2012 3:02 AM[url http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14215/dp_export.htm#sthref67]Guide.
-
How can i modify the check constraint in the table
How can i modify the check constraint in the table. This table containts check constraint, condition is code_value between 1 and 4. codevalue is column name.
Please suggest me.Go to tahiti.oracle.com, pick version browse reference manual and see the alter table statement
Also read the goal of this forum.
Your question is more appropriate to Database general forum
General Database Discussions
Gints Plivna
http://www.gplivna.eu -
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...
SimHi,
>>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 -
Sometimes, while playing back my software instrument songs, I get an intermittent pop-up error message, saying "Error while trying to synchronize audio and MIDI. Sample rate 42804 recognized. Check conflict between Garageband and external device."
(Sometimes the five digit number is different, but remains a five-digit number beginning with "4".)
Simultaneously, the song stops until I press the "Okay" button in the pop-up window.
When I continue to play the song, the sound is jerky and clipped, and the playhead doesn't keep up with the song, and then suddenly jumps to the part of the song currently being played.
There's also a sound of static.
The issue seems to occur whether or not I have my MIDI controller turned on and plugged into my desktop Imac.
TonyHello,
open your Audio MIDI Setup utility and set the input to 44100
https://discussions.apple.com/message/12710638#12710638 -
Peculiar problem in oracle 10g on AIX 5.3.0 With Check constraints
Hi Every One,
I am facing peculiar problem in oracle 10.2.0.1.0,AIX 5.3.0. I created table with check constraints like this
create table test1 (name nvarchar2(1),check (name in('Y','N')));
SQL> create table test1 (name nvarchar2(1),check (name in('Y','N')));
Table created.
SQL> insert into test1 values ('Y');
1 row created.
SQL> COMMIT;
SQL> select from test1 where name = 'Y';* Why this statement is n't working
no rows selected
SQL> select * from test1;
N
Y
ANOTHER INTERSTING ONE IS
SQL> select * from test1 where name in('Y'); Why this statement is n't working
no rows selected
SQL> select * from test1 where name in('Y','Y'); it's working
N
Y
SQL> select * from test1 where name in('','Y'); it's working
N
Y
SQL> select * from test1 where name in('7','Y'); it's working
N
Y
Like
SQL> select * from test1 where name like 'Y'; it's not working
no rows selected
I created a table without check constraints
SQL> create table test2 (name nvarchar2(1));
Table created.
SQL> insert into test2 values ('Y');
1 row created.
SQL> select * from test2;
N
Y
SQL> select * from test2 where name ='Y'; it's working
N
Y
SQL> select * from test2 where name like 'Y'; it's working
N
Y
Database Details
NLS_LANGUAGE AMERICAN
NLS_TERRITORY AMERICA
NLS_CURRENCY $
NLS_ISO_CURRENCY AMERICA
NLS_NUMERIC_CHARACTERS .,
NLS_CHARACTERSET WE8MSWIN1252
NLS_CALENDAR GREGORIAN
NLS_DATE_FORMAT DD-MON-RR
NLS_DATE_LANGUAGE AMERICAN
NLS_SORT BINARY
NLS_TIME_FORMAT HH.MI.SSXFF AM
PARAMETER VALUE
NLS_TIMESTAMP_FORMAT DD-MON-RR HH.MI.SSXFF AM
NLS_TIME_TZ_FORMAT HH.MI.SSXFF AM TZR
NLS_TIMESTAMP_TZ_FORMAT DD-MON-RR HH.MI.SSXFF AM TZR
NLS_DUAL_CURRENCY $
NLS_COMP BINARY
NLS_LENGTH_SEMANTICS BYTE
NLS_NCHAR_CONV_EXCP FALSE
NLS_NCHAR_CHARACTERSET AL16UTF16
NLS_RDBMS_VERSION 10.2.0.1.0
Why it's happening. Whehter check constraint is valid or not in Equallity operator and like and in .
Whereever we using single character column with check constraint,it's working with Equality operator and like and in.
IT'S WORKING FINE WITHOUT CHECK CONSTRAINTS.WE HAVE TWO AIX MACHINES WITH ORACLE10G.THE SAME PROBLEM OCCURING IN TWO MACHINES
PLEASE HELP ME .
THANK YOU,
WITH REGARDS,
N.VINODHh
Edited by: user3266490 on Dec 3, 2008 2:30 AM -
How to use external functions in check constraints
I created my own function:
create or replace
function if_num_get_num (inval in varchar2)
return number
is
dummy number;
Begin
dummy := to_number(inval);
return dummy;
exception
when others then return null;
end;Can I use it in table check constraint?
When I use standard function INSTR everything is OK.
ALTER TABLE A_S
ADD CONSTRAINT A_S_CHK1 CHECK
(INSTR(NAZWA_ZA, ':') > 0)
ENABLE;but when I try to create it with my function:
ALTER TABLE A_S
ADD CONSTRAINT A_S_CHK1 CHECK
(IF_NUM_GET_NUM(INSTR(NAZWA_ZA, ':')) > 0)
ENABLE;I get a message "Invalid column IF_NUM_GET_NUM"Read the restrictions.
>
Restrictions on CHECK Constraints
A CHECK constraint requires that a condition be true or unknown for every row of the table. If a statement causes the condition to evaluate to false, then the statement is rolled back. The condition of a CHECK constraint has these limitations:
* The condition must be a boolean expression that can be evaluated using the values in the row being inserted or updated.
* The condition cannot contain subqueries or sequences.
* The condition cannot include the SYSDATE, UID, USER, or USERENV SQL functions.
* The condition cannot contain the pseudocolumns LEVEL or ROWNUM.
* The condition cannot contain the PRIOR operator.
** The condition cannot contain a user-defined function.*
>
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/appdev.112/e17125/adfns_constraints.htm#ADFNS282 -
How to add a check constraint to a column to accept values in the following format: "L214"?
All I could come up with is this:
check (column_name like '____');
But That doesn't enforce the first character to be a letter and the other three to be numbers.Hi,
"PS: Why the f***you have so many subforums here?"
Because it is much easier to seperate and let experts answer to specific details of SQL Server. SQL Server is not a small product as many people think ;-)
Here is the solution:
CREATe table SampleA (A INT, B VARCHAR(MAX) CHECK (B LIKE '[A-Z][0-9][0-9][0-9]'))
INSERT INTO SampleA VALUES (1,'0000')
Msg 547, Level 16, State 0, Line 2
The INSERT statement conflicted with the CHECK constraint "CK__SampleA__B__38B96646". The conflict occurred in database "master", table "dbo.SampleA", column 'B'.
The statement has been terminated.
INSERT INTO SampleA VALUES (1,'L000')
--(1 row(s) affected)
INSERT INTO SampleA VALUES (1,'L0001')
Msg 547, Level 16, State 0, Line 2
The INSERT statement conflicted with the CHECK constraint "CK__SampleA__B__38B96646". The conflict occurred in database "master", table "dbo.SampleA", column 'B'.
The statement has been terminated.
-Jens
Jens K. Suessmeyer http://blogs.msdn.com/Jenss -
How to modify a CHECK constraint.
We need to modify a check constraint to allow new values. Is there a way we can modify the existing constraint or should we drop and recreate including new values.
Example:
We have a table SLOG and SNO is a column accepting numeric values. Currently there is a constraint on this column so that it accepts values of 1,2,3,4. Now I want to insert a value of 5 to this column. Since there is a CHECK constraint on this column it prevents the value of 5.
So the constraint needs to be modified. Is there a way we can modify the constraint using a DDL command (like ALTER TABLE) or should I drop and re create the constraint.
Thanks in advance.
BalajiHello,
Is there a way we can modify the constraint using a DDL command You can just MODIFY the state of your constraint ( constraint_state ).
So, if you want to modify the definition of your constraint you have to drop and create the CHECK constraint with its new definition.
Sorry, when I was writing my post, I didn't see the question was already answered.
Best regards,
Jean-Valentin
Edited by: Lubiez Jean-Valentin on Jul 11, 2010 11:04 AM -
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.
TonguçHi 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 -
EA2: Code is generated for only one column with Domain check constraint.
I created a Domain with a Value List (Y or N - Yes or No) and used that domain for two columns in the same table. But for only one column (the last one) the check appears in the generated DDL.
After I enabled the "Use Domain Constraints" both checks appear in the DDL, but one as an inline check constraint and one as an "Alter table add contraint.."
Once I changed the naming Template for the check constraint, both constraints are generated as an Alter table clause. The inline check constraint is only generated when the name of the constraint (according to the template) is too long. It would be nice if I could choose if I want an inline or a separate check constraint definition.
Edited by: Roel on Nov 23, 2010 11:55 AM
Edited by: Roel on Nov 23, 2010 12:02 PMI logged ER for that
Philip -
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,
RomanoIt 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
Maybe you are looking for
-
Item Master Data Best Practice
hello all we are now using SBO for more than a year, and yet we still always add new items in our item master data. what is the best practice on maintaining the item master data. for you to understand this is the scenario. since in the Factory/Mill t
-
Hi, we have a G5 Blade server running OS X 10.5.8 with adual Fibre Channel card. The OS does not read the card and cannot establishconnection to the RAID controller. I have tried to move the card to another port with no luck.Ran all the updated softw
-
Can't uninstall Reader 9 after installing Reader X
Installed Reader X on my PC running Vista with Reader 9.4.x already on my system. I thought that the Reader X install would upgrade my Reader 9 install, but it didn't. I don't have a need for 9 any more, and want to remove it. However, Reader 9 doe
-
Model NMH305 Is possible to write in attached storage on front USB?
-
N95 Ovi fears - will my lifeblog data be safe?
Hi, I'm a newbie, so I apologise if this has already been asked. I have a Nokia N95 on which I upgraded the firmware a few months ago. I have a year's worth of Lifeblog data on my PC. I'm currently having problems transferring all my data to Lifeblog