Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Hello Ann Well, that was not the case, because without the word CONSTRAINT has failed and with that word has worked fine and I was the only user of the database at that moment. But no problem, I know the solution: always use the word CONSTRAINT. Greetings. Walter. On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 12:37 PM, liviusliv...@poczta.onet.pl [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hi, have you sample database to reproduce this. How you test this difference? Have you some backup of database and restore it and then test this two options? regards, Karol Bieniaszewski *From:* mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com firebird-support@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sunday, August 23, 2015 5:48 AM *To:* firebird-support@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key Nobody knows the answer? Well, then I shall add this to the Firebird's mysteries. Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Ann Well, the world has not falled out, nothing so dangerous, the error message is: Cannot commit transaction: The insert failed because a column definition includes validation constraints. validation error for column ID, value *** null ***. The question is: Why without using CONSTRAINT appears that message but using CONSTRAINT all works fine? And there are not row/s with a NULL value in the column ID. At least, they are not showed with the following query: SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE ID IS NULL So, it seems very strange to me. The logic for me is: both works or both fails, but why one fails and the other works? Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: On Aug 21, 2015, at 2:13 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? But (just sometimes) the first case fails. How does it fail? What's the error message? Or does it kill the connection? Crash the server? Freeze the O/S? Set the machine on fire? Cheers, Ann
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Hello Karol No, I don't have a backup previous to add the Primary Key then I can use for reproduce the problem. Using ISQL, one time I try to add the Primary Key without using the word CONSTRAINT, seconds later I try again but using the word CONSTRAINT. The first time had failed, the second time worked fine. I was curious ... why? I think that a possibility is that the name INTEG_47 was previously used but not eliminated of the metadata. INTEG_47 was the name of the failed Primary Key, as ISQL shows me. The table had not NULL neither duplicated values in the column ID. Greetings. Walter. On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 12:37 PM, liviusliv...@poczta.onet.pl [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hi, have you sample database to reproduce this. How you test this difference? Have you some backup of database and restore it and then test this two options? regards, Karol Bieniaszewski *From:* mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com firebird-support@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sunday, August 23, 2015 5:48 AM *To:* firebird-support@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key Nobody knows the answer? Well, then I shall add this to the Firebird's mysteries. Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Ann Well, the world has not falled out, nothing so dangerous, the error message is: Cannot commit transaction: The insert failed because a column definition includes validation constraints. validation error for column ID, value *** null ***. The question is: Why without using CONSTRAINT appears that message but using CONSTRAINT all works fine? And there are not row/s with a NULL value in the column ID. At least, they are not showed with the following query: SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE ID IS NULL So, it seems very strange to me. The logic for me is: both works or both fails, but why one fails and the other works? Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: On Aug 21, 2015, at 2:13 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? But (just sometimes) the first case fails. How does it fail? What's the error message? Or does it kill the connection? Crash the server? Freeze the O/S? Set the machine on fire? Cheers, Ann
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Hi, what about drop this PK do backup restore and try again? P.S. If you previously name some constraint as INTEG... then conflict with name can appear regards, Karol Bieniaszewski From: mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 5:00 PM To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key Hello Karol No, I don't have a backup previous to add the Primary Key then I can use for reproduce the problem. Using ISQL, one time I try to add the Primary Key without using the word CONSTRAINT, seconds later I try again but using the word CONSTRAINT. The first time had failed, the second time worked fine. I was curious ... why? I think that a possibility is that the name INTEG_47 was previously used but not eliminated of the metadata. INTEG_47 was the name of the failed Primary Key, as ISQL shows me. The table had not NULL neither duplicated values in the column ID. Greetings. Walter. On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 12:37 PM, liviusliv...@poczta.onet.pl [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hi, have you sample database to reproduce this. How you test this difference? Have you some backup of database and restore it and then test this two options? regards, Karol Bieniaszewski From: mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2015 5:48 AM To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key Nobody knows the answer? Well, then I shall add this to the Firebird's mysteries. Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Ann Well, the world has not falled out, nothing so dangerous, the error message is: Cannot commit transaction: The insert failed because a column definition includes validation constraints. validation error for column ID, value *** null ***. The question is: Why without using CONSTRAINT appears that message but using CONSTRAINT all works fine? And there are not row/s with a NULL value in the column ID. At least, they are not showed with the following query: SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE ID IS NULL So, it seems very strange to me. The logic for me is: both works or both fails, but why one fails and the other works? Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: On Aug 21, 2015, at 2:13 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? But (just sometimes) the first case fails. How does it fail? What's the error message? Or does it kill the connection? Crash the server? Freeze the O/S? Set the machine on fire? Cheers, Ann
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Hello Karol As I had said before, it is a mystery for me. The Primary Keys created by me always begin with the PK_ characters, if they begin with INTEG_ is because were created by ISQL. But not problem at all, using CONSTRAINT it is solved. Greetings. Walter. On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 12:51 PM, liviusliv...@poczta.onet.pl [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hi, what about drop this PK do backup restore and try again? P.S. If you previously name some constraint as INTEG... then conflict with name can appear regards, Karol Bieniaszewski *From:* mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com firebird-support@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Monday, August 24, 2015 5:00 PM *To:* firebird-support@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key Hello Karol No, I don't have a backup previous to add the Primary Key then I can use for reproduce the problem. Using ISQL, one time I try to add the Primary Key without using the word CONSTRAINT, seconds later I try again but using the word CONSTRAINT. The first time had failed, the second time worked fine. I was curious ... why? I think that a possibility is that the name INTEG_47 was previously used but not eliminated of the metadata. INTEG_47 was the name of the failed Primary Key, as ISQL shows me. The table had not NULL neither duplicated values in the column ID. Greetings. Walter. On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 12:37 PM, liviusliv...@poczta.onet.pl [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Hi, have you sample database to reproduce this. How you test this difference? Have you some backup of database and restore it and then test this two options? regards, Karol Bieniaszewski *From:* mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com firebird-support@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Sunday, August 23, 2015 5:48 AM *To:* firebird-support@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key Nobody knows the answer? Well, then I shall add this to the Firebird's mysteries. Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Ann Well, the world has not falled out, nothing so dangerous, the error message is: Cannot commit transaction: The insert failed because a column definition includes validation constraints. validation error for column ID, value *** null ***. The question is: Why without using CONSTRAINT appears that message but using CONSTRAINT all works fine? And there are not row/s with a NULL value in the column ID. At least, they are not showed with the following query: SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE ID IS NULL So, it seems very strange to me. The logic for me is: both works or both fails, but why one fails and the other works? Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: On Aug 21, 2015, at 2:13 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? But (just sometimes) the first case fails. How does it fail? What's the error message? Or does it kill the connection? Crash the server? Freeze the O/S? Set the machine on fire? Cheers, Ann
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Hi, have you sample database to reproduce this. How you test this difference? Have you some backup of database and restore it and then test this two options? regards, Karol Bieniaszewski From: mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2015 5:48 AM To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key Nobody knows the answer? Well, then I shall add this to the Firebird's mysteries. Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Ann Well, the world has not falled out, nothing so dangerous, the error message is: Cannot commit transaction: The insert failed because a column definition includes validation constraints. validation error for column ID, value *** null ***. The question is: Why without using CONSTRAINT appears that message but using CONSTRAINT all works fine? And there are not row/s with a NULL value in the column ID. At least, they are not showed with the following query: SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE ID IS NULL So, it seems very strange to me. The logic for me is: both works or both fails, but why one fails and the other works? Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: On Aug 21, 2015, at 2:13 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? But (just sometimes) the first case fails. How does it fail? What's the error message? Or does it kill the connection? Crash the server? Freeze the O/S? Set the machine on fire? Cheers, Ann
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Nobody knows the answer? Well, then I shall add this to the Firebird's mysteries. Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Ann Well, the world has not falled out, nothing so dangerous, the error message is: Cannot commit transaction: The insert failed because a column definition includes validation constraints. validation error for column ID, value *** null ***. The question is: Why without using CONSTRAINT appears that message but using CONSTRAINT all works fine? And there are not row/s with a NULL value in the column ID. At least, they are not showed with the following query: SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE ID IS NULL So, it seems very strange to me. The logic for me is: both works or both fails, but why one fails and the other works? Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: On Aug 21, 2015, at 2:13 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? But (just sometimes) the first case fails. How does it fail? What's the error message? Or does it kill the connection? Crash the server? Freeze the O/S? Set the machine on fire? Cheers, Ann
[firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Nobody knows? Nobody has any idea? Greetings. Walter. On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? Of course that the table has not a Primary Key yet and the ID column has not nulls neither duplicated values. But (just sometimes) the first case fails. Greetings. Walter.
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Hello Ann Well, the world has not falled out, nothing so dangerous, the error message is: Cannot commit transaction: The insert failed because a column definition includes validation constraints. validation error for column ID, value *** null ***. The question is: Why without using CONSTRAINT appears that message but using CONSTRAINT all works fine? And there are not row/s with a NULL value in the column ID. At least, they are not showed with the following query: SELECT * FROM MyTable WHERE ID IS NULL So, it seems very strange to me. The logic for me is: both works or both fails, but why one fails and the other works? Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: On Aug 21, 2015, at 2:13 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? But (just sometimes) the first case fails. How does it fail? What's the error message? Or does it kill the connection? Crash the server? Freeze the O/S? Set the machine on fire? Cheers, Ann
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
hi. Maybe you post an ilegal name or this name are not unique for entery database objects name's. every object in firebird database must be unique. no matters if the same name is used on diferent tables. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Nobody knows? Nobody has any idea? Greetings. Walter. On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? Of course that the table has not a Primary Key yet and the ID column has not nulls neither duplicated values. But (just sometimes) the first case fails. Greetings. Walter. -- Ricardo...
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
Hello Ricardo Thank you for your answer, but that is not the problem. Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. Greetings. Walter. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Ricardo Uzcategui ricardou...@cantv.net [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: hi. Maybe you post an ilegal name or this name are not unique for entery database objects name's. every object in firebird database must be unique. no matters if the same name is used on diferent tables. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:24 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Nobody knows? Nobody has any idea? Greetings. Walter. On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Walter R. Ojeda Valiente sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? Of course that the table has not a Primary Key yet and the ID column has not nulls neither duplicated values. But (just sometimes) the first case fails. Greetings. Walter. -- Ricardo...
Re: [firebird-support] Re: Differences when adding a Primary Key
On Aug 21, 2015, at 2:13 PM, 'Walter R. Ojeda Valiente' sistemas2000profesio...@gmail.com [firebird-support] firebird-support@yahoogroups.com wrote: Without using CONSTRAINT doesn't work and in such case the name is choosed by Firebird, not for me. For add a Primary Key to a table we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD PRIMARY KEY (ID); or we can write: ALTER TABLE MyTable ADD CONSTRAINT MyPK PRIMARY KEY (ID); In the first case, the Firebird puts the name of the Primary Key, in the second case we choose that name, but... Why sometimes the first case fails and the second case always work? But (just sometimes) the first case fails. How does it fail? What's the error message? Or does it kill the connection? Crash the server? Freeze the O/S? Set the machine on fire? Cheers, Ann
