[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6665?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14065835#comment-14065835
 ] 

Bryan Pendleton commented on DERBY-6665:
----------------------------------------

>  It sounds cleaner, though, to use the table/constraint UUIDs and not deal 
> with the conglomerate ids at all.

+1.

One thing that occurs to me is that someone trying to diagnose problems in this 
area would naturally
try to query the database metadata and look in the system catalogs to figure 
out these UUIDs.

To me, that process would be easiest if we used the UUIDs that corresponded to 
the "logical"
elements in the schema (tables, indexes, constraints, etc.) rather than the 
lower-level
"physical" elements in the schema.

Just wanted to chime in with that observation.

> Violation of deferred constraints not detected when conglomerates are shared
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-6665
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6665
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: SQL
>    Affects Versions: 10.11.0.0
>            Reporter: Knut Anders Hatlen
>         Attachments: braindump.diff, junit.diff
>
>
> See the following script:
> {noformat}
> ij version 10.11
> ij> connect 'jdbc:derby:memory:db;create=true';
> ij> create table t1(x int primary key);
> 0 rows inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> create table t2(x int primary key);
> 0 rows inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> create table t3(x int, constraint fk1 foreign key (x) references t1 
> initially deferred, constraint fk2 foreign key (x) references t2 initially 
> deferred);
> 0 rows inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> insert into t1 values 1;
> 1 row inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> autocommit off;
> ij> insert into t3 values 1;
> 1 row inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> insert into t2 values 1;
> 1 row inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> delete from t1;
> 1 row inserted/updated/deleted
> ij> commit;
> ij> select * from t1;
> X          
> -----------
> 0 rows selected
> ij> select * from t2;
> X          
> -----------
> 1          
> 1 row selected
> ij> select * from t3;
> X          
> -----------
> 1          
> 1 row selected
> {noformat}
> Since T3.X contains a value (1) that is not present in T1, the foreign key 
> FK1 is violated, and the COMMIT statement should have failed.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to