Doesn't that code risk being broken in a later version that doesn't update in the order provided by the sub-query?
-----Original Message----- From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of J T Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 9:23 AM To: rsm...@rsweb.co.za; sqlite-users@sqlite.org Subject: Re: [sqlite] sqlite bugreport : unique index causes valid updates to fail Might have another work around. update page set position=position + 1 where designation=(select designation from page where book='1' order by position desc) and then insert your page. Please see if that'll work. I tested it, but your results may differ. -----Original Message----- From: RSmith <rsm...@rsweb.co.za> To: General Discussion of SQLite Database <sqlite-users@sqlite.org> Sent: Mon, Dec 8, 2014 9:15 am Subject: Re: [sqlite] sqlite bugreport : unique index causes valid updates to fail On 2014/12/08 15:58, Gwendal Roué wrote: > I'm new to this mailing list, and I won't try to push my opinion, which is : yes this is a bug, and this bug could be fixed > without introducing any regression (since fixing it would cause > failing code to suddenly run, and this has never been a > compatibility issue). Thank you all for your support and explanations. > The root cause has been found, and lies in the constraint > checking algorithm of sqlite. I have been able to find a work around > that is good enough for me. Now the subject deserves a rest, > until, maybe, someday, one sqlite maintainer who his not attached to > the constraint-checking algorithm fixes it. Have a nice day, > Gwendal Roué Your new-ness is irrelevant, if you have a worthy argument it deserves being heard. To that end, let me just clarify that nobody was saying the idea of deferring the constraint checking is invalid or ludicrous (at least I had no such intention) and you make a valid point, especially since most other DB engines do work as you suggest - and this will be fixed in SQLite4 I believe, where backward-compatibility is not an issue. The reason I (and others) will say it isn't a bug is because it isn't working different than is intended, or more specifically, than is documented. It works exactly like described - whether you or I agree with that paradigm or not is up to discussion but does not make it a "bug" as long as it works as described. I hope the work-around you found works great! _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users This email and any attachments are only for use by the intended recipient(s) and may contain legally privileged, confidential, proprietary or otherwise private information. Any unauthorized use, reproduction, dissemination, distribution or other disclosure of the contents of this e-mail or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
