Hi All, Can anyone tell me how to create a reference for composite key. For ex, I have created tblEmp table successfully. create tblEmp( empId varchar(100), RegId varchar(100), empname varchar(100),constraint pk_addprimary key(empId, RegId) ) And now, I am going to create another table which references the composite key.create table tblAccount( acctId varchar(100) primary key, empId varchar(100) references tblEmp(empId), RegId varchar(100) references tblEmp(RegId) ) But it gives error like Server: Msg 1776, Level 16, State 1, Line 1There are no primary or candidate keys in the referenced table 'tblEmp' that match the referencing column list in the foreign key 'FK__tbl'.Server: Msg 1750, Level 16, State 1, Line 1Could not create constraint. See previous errors. Could anyone please let me know how to create reference for composite key. Thanks in advance,Arun.
I have a table which has a composite primary key consisting of four columns, one of them being a datetime called Day.
The nice thing afaik with this composite key is that it prevents duplicate entries in the table for any given day. But the problem is probably two-fold
1. multiple columns need to be used for joins and I think this might degrade performance? 2. in client applications such as asp.net these primary keys must be sent in the query string and the query string becomes long and a little bit unmanagable.
A possible solutions I'm thinking of is dropping the existing primary key and creating a new identity column and a composite unique index on the columns from the existing composite key.
I would like to have some tips, recommendations and alternatives for what I should do in this case.
The table above is my users table. It allows for a user to be at multiple sites or multiple locations within a single site or multiple sites. Would it be wise to use a auto incrementing primary key instead of the 3 column composite key? The reason I ask is because if I am referencing this SU table (which I will be a lot), a lot more data would be replicated to the tables which have the foreign key to this table, right? But if I used a single incrementing column as the primary key, only a small integer would be used as the foreign key, saving space?Does this make sense?
I have three tables that are important here, a 'Plant' table a 'Spindle' table and a 'PlantSpindle' table. The 'PlantSpindle' is comprised of a PlantID and a SpindleID acting as the Primary Key for the table with no other fields.
I have an aspx page that captures the appropriate data to create an entry in the Spindle table. Depending on the user, I will know which plantID they are associated with via a querystring. In my storedproc I insert the data from the webform into the Spindle table but get stuck when I try to also insert the record into the PlantSpindle table with the PlantID I have retrieved via the querystring and the SpindleID of the spindle record the user just created. Basically, I am having trouble retrieving that SpindleID.
Here is what I have in my storedProc (truncated for brevity).
AS SET NOCOUNT ON INSERT INTO Spindle (plantHWG, spindleNumber, spindleDateInstalled, spindleDateRemoved, spindleDurationMonths, spindleBearingDesignNumber, spindleArbor, spindleFrontSealDesign, spindleFrontBearing, spindleRearBearing, spindleRearSealDesign, spindleNotes) VALUES (@plantHWG, @spindleNumber, @spindleDateInstalled, @spindleDateRemoved, @spindleDurationMonths, @spindleBearingDesignNumber, @spindleArbor, @spindleFrontSealDesign, @spindleFrontBearing, @spindleRearBearing, @spindleRearSealDesign, @spindleNotes)
SET @spindleID = (SELECT @@Identity FROM Spindle)
INSERT INTO PlantSpindle (plantID, SpindleID)
VALUES (@plantID, @SpindleID)
I have guessed at a few different solutions but still come up with Procedure 'InsertSpindle' expects parameter '@spindleID', which was not supplied when I execute the procedure.
I am trying to add indexes to my table data types and have realized that I can only add primary keys. So, I am hoping there is a way to add a composite primary key, but I am not having any success. I have tried the following:
NOTE: I am not interested in any responses that want to argue the use of a unique ID field and autonumbering as the PK. It is quite clear from the forums that this subject is a polarizing one. This question is for those who follow text-book design practices and believe that a composite primary key should be used when it is available. I want to be one of them for the time being.
SYNOPSIS: I have three tables, TestSummary, TestDetails, and Steps.
The TestSummary table looks like this:
Create table TestSummary ( TestSummaryID int identity primary key, ... SequenceID int not null )
It contains the date and time of the test, the serial number, the part number, the test operator's name, and the ID of the sequence of steps used during the test. It uses a unique ID field for the primary key.
The TestDetails table looks like this:
Create table TestDetails ( TestDetailsID int identity primary key, TestSummaryID int not null, StepID int not null, ... )
It contains the details of the test like voltage readings, current readings, temperature, etc., one record per reading. It also contains the step number of the test sequence specified in the TestSummary table.
The Steps table looks like this:
Create table Steps ( SequenceID int not null, StepID int not null, Function int not null Primary key (SequenceID, StepID) )
It contains a list of all of the functions to be performed on the device under test by sequence number and the step number within the sequence.
When I try to establish a relation between TestSummary.SequenceID and Steps.SequenceID, SQL Server flags an error because TestSummary.SequenceID and Steps.SequenceID:Steps.StepID do not match.
Is is possible to create a composite primary key on a table variable?Neither of these two statements are successful:DECLARE @opmcjf TABLE (jobdetailid INT NOT NULL,cjfid INT NOT NULL,cjfvalue VARCHAR(100) NULL)ALTER TABLE @opmcjf ADD CONSTRAINT [PK_opmcjf] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED([jobdetailid],[cjfid])andDECLARE @opmcjf TABLE (jobdetailid INT PRIMARY KEY,cjfid INT PRIMARY KEY,cjfvalue VARCHAR(100) NULL)Thanks,Shaun
I have a text file which needs to be created into a table (let's call it DataFile table). For now I'm just doing the manual DTS to import the txt into SQL server to create the table, which works. But here's my problem....
I need to extract data from DataFile table, here's my query:
select * from dbo.DataFile where DF_SC_Case_Nbr not like '0000%';
Then I need to create a new table for the extracted data, let's call it ExtractedDataFile. But I don't know how to create a new table and insert the data I selected above into the new one.
Also, can the extraction and the creation of new table be done in just one stored procedure? or is there any other way of doing all this (including the importation of the text file)?
I'm trying to create a proc for granting permission for developer, but I tried many times, still couldn't get successful, someone can help me? The original statement is:
Can I dynamically (from a stored procedure) generatea create table script of all tables in a given database (with defaults etc)a create view script of all viewsa create function script of all functionsa create index script of all indexes.(The result will be 4 scripts)Arno de Jong,The Netherlands.
I have some code that dynamically creates a database (name is @FullName) andthen creates a table within that database. Is it possible to wrap thesethings into a transaction such that if any one of the following fails, thedatabase "creation" is rolledback. Otherwise, I would try deleting on errordetection, but it could get messy.IF @Error = 0BEGINSET @ExecString = 'CREATE DATABASE ' + @FullNameEXEC sp_executesql @ExecStringSET @Error = @@ErrorENDIF @Error = 0BEGINSET @ExecString = 'CREATE TABLE ' + @FullName + '.[dbo].[Image] ( [ID][int] IDENTITY (1, 1) NOT NULL, [Blob] [image] NULL , [DateAdded] [datetime]NULL ) ON [PRIMARY] TEXTIMAGE_ON [PRIMARY]'EXEC sp_executesql @ExecStringSET @Error = @@ErrorENDIF @Error = 0BEGINSET @ExecString = 'ALTER TABLE ' + @FullName + '.[dbo].[Image] WITHNOCHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [PK_Image] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [ID] ) ON[PRIMARY]'EXEC sp_executesql @ExecStringSET @Error = @@ErrorEND
For reasons that are not relevant (though I explain them below *), Iwant, for all my users whatever privelige level, an SP which createsand inserts into a temporary table and then another SP which reads anddrops the same temporary table.My users are not able to create dbo tables (eg dbo.tblTest), but arepermitted to create tables under their own user (eg MyUser.tblTest). Ihave found that I can achieve my aim by using code like this . . .SET @SQL = 'CREATE TABLE ' + @MyUserName + '.' + 'tblTest(tstIDDATETIME)'EXEC (@SQL)SET @SQL = 'INSERT INTO ' + @MyUserName + '.' + 'tblTest(tstID) VALUES(GETDATE())'EXEC (@SQL)This becomes exceptionally cumbersome for the complex INSERT & SELECTcode. I'm looking for a simpler way.Simplified down, I am looking for something like this . . .CREATE PROCEDURE dbo.TestInsert ASCREATE TABLE tblTest(tstID DATETIME)INSERT INTO tblTest(tstID) VALUES(GETDATE())GOCREATE PROCEDURE dbo.TestSelect ASSELECT * FROM tblTestDROP TABLE tblTestIn the above example, if the SPs are owned by dbo (as above), CREATETABLE & DROP TABLE use MyUser.tblTest while INSERT & SELECT usedbo.tblTest.If the SPs are owned by the user (eg MyUser.TestInsert), it workscorrectly (MyUser.tblTest is used throughout) but I would have to havea pair of SPs for each user.* I have MS Access ADP front end linked to a SQL Server database. Forreports with complex datasets, it times out. Therefore it suit mypurposes to create a temporary table first and then to open the reportbased on that temporary table.
Hi Minor and inconsequential but sometimes you just gotta know: Is it possible to define a non-primary key index within a Create Table statement? I can create a constraint and a PK. I can create the table and then add the index. I just wondered if you can do it in one statement. e.g. I have: CREATE TABLE MyT (MyT_ID INT Identity(1, 1) CONSTRAINT MyT_PK PRIMARY KEY Clustered, MyT_Desc Char(40) NOT NULL CONSTRAINT MyT_idx1 UNIQUE NONCLUSTERED ON [DEFAULT])which creates a table with a PK and unique constraint. I would like (pseudo SQL):CREATE TABLE MyT (MyT_ID INT Identity(1, 1) CONSTRAINT MyT_PK PRIMARY KEY Clustered, MyT_Desc Char(40) NOT NULL CONSTRAINT MyT_idx1 UNIQUE INDEX NONCLUSTERED ON [DEFAULT]) No big deal - just curious :D Once I know I can stop scouring BOL for clues. Tks in advance
I'm just now learning both SQL and ASP.NET, and I cannot seem to figure out how to build my data structure. I believe the answer to my problem is a composite key, but I cannot seem to get it to work. Here is an example. My database is of recorded dances, with exact locations within a ballroom. I believe I need 2 tablesTable #1 - DanceTableColumns: DanceID, Name, Description, TagsTable #2 - StepsTableColumns DanceID, StepID, longLocation, latLocation, Action, DescriptionWithin my ASP.NET application I want to be able to enter data about a dance, including metadata and a series of steps. The Dance and metadata content to be stored in DanceTable, and the series of moves stored in the StepsTable. I want the steps to be IDed as 1, 2, 3, 4...x with the first step being labled 1. and I want each dance to have it's own unique ID (DanceID). Right now I'm using "ExecuteNonQuery()" to add my data to my SQL database, and when I add new steps to the StepsTable SQL just finds the largest ID within StepID and increments it by one. So my steps are labeled as:Dance1:Step1, Step2, Step3, Step4Dance2:Step5, Step 6, Step7What I really want is (or I think what I want is) is a composite primary key.Dance1:Step1, Step2, Step3, Step4Dance2:Step1, Step2, Step3That way the StepID is used as both a primary key and it indicates the position within the dance. I guess I could just use a standard SQL table, let SQL auto generate StepID's and then add a new column called something like "StepNumber", but it just seems goofy to be generating a stepID and never using it. With composite keys (If I understand them) each step would have a unique key as a combination of the DanceID+StepID (AKA Dance 345, steps 1-10). I pull up data by searching for dances, and then sort by StepNumber, and those should all be unique...if I can figure out how to build them.
i am inserting something into the temp table even without creating it before. But this does not give any compilation error. Only when I want to execute the stored procedure I get the error message that there is an invalid temp table. Should this not result in a compilation error rather during the execution time.?
--create the procedure and insert into the temp table without creating it. --no compilation error. CREATE PROC testTemp AS BEGIN INSERT INTO #tmp(dt) SELECT GETDATE() END
only on calling the proc does this give an execution error
I have SQL Server Management Studio Express (SSMS Express) and SQL Server 2005 Express (SS Express) installed in my Windows XP Pro PC that is on Microsoft Windows NT 4 LAN System. My Computer Administrator grants me the Administror Privilege to use my PC. I tried to use SQLQuery.sql (see the code below) to create a table "LabResults" and insert 20 data (values) into the table. I got Error Messages 102 and 156 when I did "Parse" or "Execute". This is my first time to apply the data type 'decimal' and the "VALUES" into the table. I do not know what is wrong with the 'decimal' and how to add the "VALUES": (1) Do I put the precision and scale of the decimal wrong? (2) Do I have to use "GO" after each "VALUES"? Please help and advise.
Thanks in advance,
Scott Chang
///////////--SQLQueryCroomLabData.sql--/////////////////////////// USE MyDatabase GO CREATE TABLE dbo.LabResults (SampleID int PRIMARY KEY NOT NULL, SampleName varchar(25) NOT NULL, AnalyteName varchar(25) NOT NULL, Concentration decimal(6.2) NULL) GO --Inserting data into a table INSERT dbo.LabResults (SampleID, SampleName, AnalyteName, Concentration) VALUES (1, 'MW2', 'Acetone', 1.00) VALUES (2, 'MW2', 'Dichloroethene', 1.00) VALUES (3, 'MW2', 'Trichloroethene', 20.00) VALUES (4, 'MW2', 'Chloroform', 1.00) VALUES (5, 'MW2', 'Methylene Chloride', 1.00) VALUES (6, 'MW6S', 'Acetone', 1.00) VALUES (7, 'MW6S', 'Dichloroethene', 1.00) VALUES (8, 'MW6S', 'Trichloroethene', 1.00) VALUES (9, 'MW6S', 'Chloroform', 1.00) VALUES (10, 'MW6S', 'Methylene Chloride', 1.00 VALUES (11, 'MW7', 'Acetone', 1.00) VALUES (12, 'MW7', 'Dichloroethene', 1.00) VALUES (13, 'MW7', 'Trichloroethene', 1.00) VALUES (14, 'MW7', 'Chloroform', 1.00) VALUES (15, 'MW7', 'Methylene Chloride', 1.00 VALUES (16, 'TripBlank', 'Acetone', 1.00) VALUES (17, 'TripBlank', 'Dichloroethene', 1.00) VALUES (18, 'TripBlank', 'Trichloroethene', 1.00) VALUES (19, 'TripBlank', 'Chloroform', 0.76) VALUES (20, 'TripBlank', 'Methylene Chloride', 0.51) GO //////////Parse/////////// Msg 102, Level 15, State 1, Line 5 Incorrect syntax near '6.2'. Msg 156, Level 15, State 1, Line 4 Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'VALUES'. ////////////////Execute//////////////////// Msg 102, Level 15, State 1, Line 5 Incorrect syntax near '6.2'. Msg 156, Level 15, State 1, Line 4 Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'VALUES'.
I have a table with a composite key formed by the unique combination of columns w, x, y, z I'm trying to write an INSERT statement along the following lines INSERT INTO myTable (SELECT w, x, y, z FROM someTable) t1 WHERE (this is the part I'm stumped on - where the unique combination of w, x, y, z is NOT in myTable already) Help would be appreciated. Can you use the NOT IN keyword on composite values?
How can I create a composite key (two primary keys for one table) using SQL Server 2005 Management Studio? Can I do it using the GUI, or do I have to write SQL code to do this? Thanks
Made an interesting discovery today - a column of data type Bit is not allowed to participate in composite key. Rather surprised.
I have a certain unique code that exhibits 2 unique states, which rendered the use of the boolean column, so the uniqueness goes <code>-1 and <code>-0. Is there any 'hack' so to speak to avoid using a Tinyint for the boolean column instead?
Suppose there is a composite index on a table, and in includes, for example 3 columns.
If I do a select using one of those three columns, will the select use the composite index? Will it aid in retrevial or should I create an index on the individual column.
The orininal design of my db (part of it...) is the following
A JOB has a Number and a Description. Each JOB can have one or two TASKS (min one, max two). Each TASK is identified by the JOB it belongs to and an Index (unique only for the same JOB). Each TASK has one an only one set of INFO1, one and only one set of INFO2, one and only one set of INFO3 etc.
(There is a reason to keep INFO1, 2 and 3 separate, because eachof them will be linked to different table. This might influence the answer to my real question.)
First of all, I wouldn't add any surrogate key for TASK, not to loose the logic behind; plus I'd put an ined on JonMum only, being Index equal to 1 or 2 only, so not selective.
The real question is about INFO1 (and 2, 3 etc.) table: should I leave JobNum and Index as PK (consider that the PK of INFo1 will be used as FK for another table), or should I use a surrogate key, like for eaxmple
C: INFO1 (Info1ID [PK], JobNum [FKb], Index [FKb], ...)
I don't really like this solution. Actually I'd prefer the following
C: INFO1 (Info1ID [PK], ...)
where Info1ID = JobNum + Index (+ = string concatenation).
I've a gerand table customers_orders table with customer_id and order_id. Whenever we have to find orders, for customer, this table is involved. Hey; i know u'll be angry y the heck this gerand exist but i've to blame the older dudes then. Now this table has composite clustered index; CUSTOMER_ID+ORDER_ID. The tables have grown over GB size; i see HASH INNER JOIN rather than MERGE for the GEREND and CUSTOMER table join.
Is it good to use composite clustered index; or should i clustered one the columns in the GEREND and other to normal index. What performance impact it could be.
ResID is PK, AdmID and SubID are Foreign Keys, right. Now What i want to ask/ learn that Am i suppose to combine ResID, AdmID and SubID as a composite PK or should i simply make the ResID as PK and other 2 be there as FK? When do we really need to use Composite PK and using it a good thing or not?
i have a master table with around 15 columns and i am trying to findthe appropriate primary keys and indexes for the table.To make the records unique, i need to include two datetime columns (start and end dates ) and two integer columns ( attributes of therecord ) to make up a composite primary key. Both of these fourcolumns are found in the WHERE clause of my queries.Is it acceptable in the view of performance and how should i createthe indexes?
