Thanks Field 1 represents model number of products which should be unique. However due to some error in data entry some of the records are duplicate. I can safely delete those records.
Srimanta ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robertson-Ravo, Neil (REC)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 10:52 PM Subject: RE: Primary Keys & Duplicate Values > Yep, your problem is that you have dupes in the column you want to tag as a > PK. is Field 1 the only field which is uses dupe values? are the records > technically unique or can you safely delete them? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Srimanta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 07 October 2002 10:43 > To: CF-Talk > Subject: OT: Primary Keys & Duplicate Values > > > Hi, > Once again its me. > > I have a table with 18000 records. > There are three fields say field1, field2 and field3. > There are no primary keys at the moment. > > I want to delegate field1 as the primary key in the modified table. > When I try to create field1 as the primary key, an error is generated as > there are duplicate values in the records in field1. > How do I find which values are duplicate in field1. > I cannot use the Find and replace function as I do not know which values to > look for. Also manually it is impossible as there are too many records to > search through. > Is there a Cold Fusion custom tag or function or SQL syntax I can use? > Any help will be much appreciated. > > Thanks > Srimanta > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kola Oyedeji" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 9:38 PM > Subject: RE: Variable locking > > > > Hi > > > > I'm joining this thread late. Can I just confirm what you guys are > > saying: In CFMX named locks should be used in place of scoped locks and > > locks are only needed > > When a possible race condition could occur? > > > > Thanks > > > > Kola > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sean A Corfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 04 October 2002 22:53 > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: Re: Variable locking > > > > On Friday, Oct 4, 2002, at 12:07 US/Pacific, Gaulin, Mark wrote: > > > Actually, that using NAME is not a better practice... the SCOPE > > > attribute is > > > safer and is also what MM support advised us to use (when applicable). > > > > Pre-MX. > > > > > Sure, the scope of a NAME-based lock will be tighter than using SCOPE, > > > > > but > > > SCOPE will be safer and, as a bonus, you can use CF 5's (and prior) > > > auto-checking for missing locks... > > > > Which is no longer available in MX because it is no longer needed. > > > > > Basically, "NAME" is older than "SCOPE", and SCOPE was added to > > address > > > issues that NAME cannot handle. > > > > SCOPE was added to resolve bugs in earlier releases of CF around the > > shared scope memory corruption problems. That is no longer an issue in > > CFMX. > > > > An Architect's View -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ > > > > Macromedia DevCon 2002, October 27-30, Orlando, Florida > > Architecting a New Internet Experience > > Register today at http://www.macromedia.com/go/devcon2002 > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com
