Search Results

Search found 1112 results on 45 pages for 'constraints'.

Page 8/45 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Grails' GORM constraint question

    - by xain
    Hi, I have the following Domain Class: class Metric { String name float value static belongsTo = [Person,Corporation] static indexes = { name() } } How can I add a constraint so Person,Corporation and name are unique ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MySQL Removing Some Foreign keys

    - by Drew
    I have a table whose primary key is used in several other tables and has several foreign keys to other tables. CREATE TABLE location ( locationID INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT PRIMARY KEY ... ) ENGINE = InnoDB; CREATE TABLE assignment ( assignmentID INT NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT PRIMARY KEY, locationID INT NOT NULL, FOREIGN KEY locationIDX (locationID) REFERENCES location (locationID) ... ) ENGINE = InnoDB; CREATE TABLE assignmentStuff ( ... assignmentID INT NOT NULL, FOREIGN KEY assignmentIDX (assignmentID) REFERENCES assignment (assignmentID) ) ENGINE = InnoDB; The problem is that when I'm trying to drop one of the foreign key columns (ie locationIDX) it gives me an "ERROR 1025 (HY000): Error on rename" error. How can I drop the column in the assignment table above without getting this error?

    Read the article

  • how can i set up a uniqueness constraint in mysql for columns that can be null?

    - by user299689
    I know that in MySQL, UNIQUE constraits don't treat NULL values as equal. So if I have a unique constraint on ColumnX, then two separate rows can have values of NULL for ColumnX and this wouldn't violate the constraint. How can I work around this? I can't just set the value to an arbitrary constant that I can flag, because ColumnX in my case is actually a foreign key to another table. What are my options here? Please note that this table also has an "id" column that is its primary key. Since I'm using Ruby on Rails, it's important to keep this id column as the primary key. Note 2: In reality, my unique key encompasses many columns, and some of them have to be null, because they are foreign keys, and only one of them should be non-null. What I'm actually trying to do is to "simulate" a polymorphic relationship in a way that keep referential integrity in the db, but using the technique outlined in the first part of the question asked here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/922184/why-can-you-not-have-a-foreign-key-in-a-polymorphic-association

    Read the article

  • Do I need to write a trigger for such a simple constraint?

    - by Paul Hanbury
    I really had a hard time knowing what words to put into the title of my question, as I am not especially sure if there is a database pattern related to my problem. I will try to simplify matters as much as possible to get directly to the heart of the issue. Suppose I have some tables. The first one is a list of widget types: create table widget_types ( widget_type_id number(7,0) primary key, description varchar2(50) ); The next one contains icons: create table icons ( icon_id number(7,0) primary key, picture blob ); Even though the users get to select their preferred widget, there is a predefined subset of widgets that they can choose from for each widget type. create table icon_associations ( widget_type_id number(7,0) references widget_types, icon_id number(7,0) references icons, primary key (widget_type_id, icon_id) ); create table icon_prefs ( user_id number(7,0) references users, widget_type_id number(7,0), icon_id number(7,0), primary key (user_id, widget_type_id), foreign key (widget_type_id, icon_id) references icon_associations ); Pretty simple so far. Let us now assume that if we are displaying an icon to a user who has not set up his preferences, we choose one of the appropriate images associated with the current widget. I'd like to specify the preferred icon to display in such a case, and here's where I run into my problem: alter table icon_associations add ( is_preferred char(1) check( is_preferred in ('y','n') ) ) ; I do not see how I can enforce that for each widget_type there is one, and only one, row having is_preferred set to 'y'. I know that in MySQL, I am able to write a subquery in my check constraint to quickly resolve this issue. This is not possible with Oracle. Is my mistake that this column has no business being in the icon_associations table? If not where should it go? Is this a case where, in Oracle, the constraint can only be handled with a trigger? I ask only because I'd like to go the constraint route if at all possible. Thanks so much for your help, Paul

    Read the article

  • Check constraint over two columns

    - by Rippo
    I want to add a Check Constraint to a table for server 2005 but cannot work it out. MemberId ClubId MeetingId 1 100 10 2 100 10 3 100 10 7 101 10 <-This would throw a check constraint 1 100 11 2 100 11 I do not want to have more than one ClubId for a single MeetingId Basically a ClubId can only belong to a single MeetingId but can have more than one member assigned. How do I achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Check if a type is an instantiation of a template

    - by Pedro Lacerda
    I have structs like struct RGBA (T) {/* ... */} struct BMPFile (DataT) if (is(DataT == RGBA)) {/* ... */} But is(DataT == RGBA) cannot work because DataT is a type and RGBA is a template. Instead I need check if a type is an instantiation of a template in order to declare file like BMPFile!(RGBA!ushort) file; In a comment @FeepingCreature showed struct RGBA(T) { alias void isRGBAStruct; } struct BMPFile (DataT) if (is(DataT.isRGBAStruct)) {} Although to be working I have no tips on alias void isRGBAStruct.

    Read the article

  • Symfony 1.4: Deleting a sfGuardUser

    - by Tom
    Hi, I'm having some trouble with the following... I have a sfGuardUser table set up normally, and it has a one-to-one relationship with a Profile table, which contains some additional user info. When a user wants to delete themselves from the site, I'd like to retain their info in the Profile table for various purposes BUT delete the sfGuardUser in order to keep that table cleaner/shorter (not just set it to inactive). I was under the impression that I could set the FK in the Profile table to NULL and then delete the sfGuardUser, but it seems the FK-constraint fails. Indeed, it seems I can't delete either and the queries fail: If I try to delete the sfGuardUser, the Profile table will have an invalid FK If I try to delete a Profile, the sfGuardUser will have an invalid FK Other than leaving outdated sfGuardUsers and Profiles in these tables, or having to use a cascaded delete to get rid of both, can anyone tell me if there's any other way around this? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How do I make a GUI that behaves like this?

    - by Karl Knechtel
    This is difficult to explain without illustration, so - behold, an illustration, cobbled together from screenshots of a few hello-world examples and a lot of Paint work: I have started out using Windows Forms on .NET (via IronPython, but that shouldn't be important), and haven't been able to figure out very much. GUI libraries in general are very intimidating, simply because every class has so many possible attributes. Documentation is good at explaining what everything does, but not so good at helping you figure out what you need. I will be assembling the GUI dynamically, but I'm not expecting that to be the hard part. The sticking points for me right now are: How do I get text labels to size themselves automatically to the width of the contained text (so that the text doesn't clip, and I also don't reserve unnecessary space for them when resizing the window)? How do I make the vertical scrollbar always appear? Setting the VScroll property (why is this protected when AutoScroll is public, BTW?) doesn't seem to do anything. How come the horizontal scrollbar is not added by AutoScroll when contents are laid out vertically (via Dock = DockStyle.Top)? I can use a minimum size for panels to prevent the label and corresponding control from overlapping when the window is shrunk horizontally, but then the scrollbar doesn't appear and the control is inaccessible. How can I put limits on window resizing (e.g. set a minimum width) without disabling it completely? (Just set minimum/maximum sizes for the Form?) Related to that, is there any way to set minimum/maximum widths or heights without setting a minimum/maximum size (i.e. can I constrain the size in only one dimension)? Is there a built-in control suitable for hex editing or am I going to have to build something myself? ... And should I be using something else (perhaps something more capable?) I've heard WPF mentioned, but I understand that this involves XML and I really want to build a GUI from XML - I already have data in an object graph, and doing some kind of weird XML pseudo-serialization (in Python, no less!) in order to create a GUI seems incredibly roundabout.

    Read the article

  • How to find the entity with the greatest primary key?

    - by simpatico
    I've an entity LearningUnit that has an int primary key. Actually, it has nothing more. Entity Concept has the following relationship with it: @ManyToOne @Size(min=1,max=7) private LearningUnit learningUnit; In a constructor of Concept I need to retrieve the LearningUnit with the greatest primary key. If no LearningUnit exists yet I instantiate one. I then set this.learningUnit to the retrieved/instantied. Finally, I call the empty constructor of Concept in a try-catch block, to have the entitymanager do the cardinality check. If an exception is thrown (I expect one in the case that already another 7 Concepts are referring to the same LearningUnit. In that case, I case instantiate a new LearningUnit with a new greater primary key. Please, also point out, if any, clear pitfalls in my outlined algorithm above.

    Read the article

  • How should I do this (business logic) in Sql Server? A constraint?

    - by Pure.Krome
    Hi folks, I wish to add some type of business logic constraint to a table, but not sure how / where. I have a table with the following fields. ID INTEGER IDENTITY HubId INTEGER CategoryId INTEGER IsFeatured BIT Foo NVARCHAR(200) etc. So what i wish is that you can only have one featured thingy, per articleId + hubId. eg. 1, 1, 1, 1, 'blah' -- Ok. 2, 1, 2, 1, 'more blah' -- Also Ok 3, 1, 1, 1, 'aaa' -- constraint error 4, 1, 1, 0, 'asdasdad' -- Ok. 5, 1, 1, 0, 'bbbb' -- Ok. etc. so the third row to be inserterd would fail because that hub AND category already have a featured thingy. Is this possible?

    Read the article

  • Unable to drop constraint in sql server 2005 "Could not drop constraint. See previous errors"

    - by DannykPowell
    I'm trying to drop a constraint on a db table, something like: ALTER TABLE MyTable drop CONSTRAINT FK_MyTable_AnotherTable But the execution just runs and runs. If I stop it I see: Msg 3727, Level 16, State 0, Line 2 Could not drop constraint. See previous errors. Web search throws up various pages but note that the constraint is properly named and I am trying to remove it using the correct name

    Read the article

  • Why can I create a table with PRIMARY KEY on a nullable column?

    - by AlexKuznetsov
    The following code creates a table without raising any errors: CREATE TABLE test( ID INTEGER NULL, CONSTRAINT PK_test PRIMARY KEY(ID) ) Note that I cannot insert a NULL, as expected: INSERT INTO test VALUES(1),(NULL) ERROR: null value in column "id" violates not-null constraint DETAIL: Failing row contains (null). ********** Error ********** ERROR: null value in column "id" violates not-null constraint SQL state: 23502 Detail: Failing row contains (null). Why can I create a table with a self-contradictory definition? ID column is explicitly declared as NULLable, and it is implicitly not nullable, as a part of the PRIMARY KEY. Does it make sense? Edit: would it not be better if this self-contradictory CREATE TABLE just failed right there?

    Read the article

  • C++ enforce conditions on inherited classes

    - by user231536
    I would like to define an abstract base class X and enforce the following: a) every concrete class Y that inherits from X define a constructor Y(int x) b) it should be possible to test whether two Y objects are equal. For a, one not very good solution is to put a pure virtual fromInt method in X which concrete class will have to define. But I cannot enforce construction. For b), I cannot seem to use a pure virtual method in X bool operator == (const X& other) const =0; because in overridden classes this remains undefined. It is not enough to define bool operator == (const Y& other) const { //stuff} because the types don't match. How do I solve these problems?

    Read the article

  • C# overloading with generics: bug or feature?

    - by TN
    Let's have a following simplified example: void Foo<T>(IEnumerable<T> collection, params T[] items) { // ... } void Foo<C, T>(C collection, T item) where C : ICollection<T> { // ... } void Main() { Foo((IEnumerable<int>)new[] { 1 }, 2); } Compiler says: The type 'System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable' cannot be used as type parameter 'C' in the generic type or method 'UserQuery.Foo(C, T)'. There is no implicit reference conversion from 'System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable' to 'System.Collections.Generic.ICollection'. If I change Main to: void Main() { Foo<int>((IEnumerable<int>)new[] { 1 }, 2); } It will work ok. Why compiler does not choose the right overload?

    Read the article

  • How can I approach creating an efficient algorithm for maximizing value with these specific constraints?

    - by sway
    I'm having trouble coming up with an approach that isn't n^2 for this problem. Here's a contrived, simplified version I've come up with: Let's say you're a company that needs 4 employees to launch in a new city, a manager, two salespeople, and a customer support rep, and you magically know how much impact every candidate will have and how much salary they require to take the job. Your table of potential employees looks something like this: Name Position Salary Impact Adam Smith Manager 60,000 11 Allison Brown Salesperson 40,000 9 Brad Stewart Manager 55,000 9 ...etc (thousands of records) What algorithmic approach can be taken to find the maximum "impact" while still filling all the positions and remaining under, say, a 200,000 budget? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • What to call objects that may delete cached data to meet memory constraints?

    - by Brent
    I'm developing some cross-platform software which is intended to run on mobile devices. Both iOS and Android provide low memory warnings. I plan to make a wrapper class that will free cached resources (like textures) when low memory warnings are issued (assuming the resource is not in use). If the resource returns to use, it'll re-cache it, etc... I'm trying to think of what this is called. In .Net, it's similar to a "weak reference" but that only really makes sense when dealing with garbage collection, and since I'm using c++ and shared_ptr, a weak reference already has a meaning which is distinct from the one I'm thinking of. There's also the difference that this class will be able to rebuild the cache when needed. What is this pattern/whatever is called? Edit: Feel free to recommend tags for this question.

    Read the article

  • Grails bean-fields plugin

    - by Don
    Hi, I'm having problems using the Grails bean-fields plugin with a class this is annotated Validateable, but is not a domain/command class. The root cause of the problem appears to be in this method of BeanTagLib.groovy private def getBeanConstraints(bean) { if (bean?.metaClass?.hasProperty(bean, 'constraints')) { def cons = bean.constraints if (cons != null) { if (log.debugEnabled) { log.debug "Bean is of type ${bean.class} - the constraints property was a [${cons.class}]" } // Safety check for the case where bean is no a proper domain/command object // This avoids confusing errors where constraints comes back as a Closure if (!(cons instanceof Map)) { if (log.warnEnabled) { log.warn "Bean of type ${bean.class} is not a domain class, command object or other validateable object - the constraints property was a [${cons.class}]" } } } else { if (log.warnEnabled) { log.warn "Bean of type ${bean.class} has no constraints" } } return cons } else return null } I tested out this method above in the grails console and when I pass an instance of MyBean into this method, it logs: Bean of type ${bean.class} is not a domain class, command object or other validateable object - the constraints property was a [${cons.class}] Because the constraints are returned as an instance of Closure instead of a Map. If I could figue out how to get a Map reference to the constraints of a @Validateable class (that is not a domain/command class), I guess I could resolve the problem. Thanks, Don

    Read the article

  • How should I define a composite foreign key for domain constraints in the presence of surrogate keys

    - by Samuel Danielson
    I am writing a new app with Rails so I have an id column on every table. What is the best practice for enforcing domain constraints using foreign keys? I'll outline my thoughts and frustration. Here's what I would imagine as "The Rails Way". It's what I started with. Companies: id: integer, serial company_code: char, unique, not null Invoices: id: integer, serial company_id: integer, not null Products: id: integer, serial sku: char, unique, not null company_id: integer, not null LineItems: id: integer, serial invoice_id: integer, not null, references Invoices (id) product_id: integer, not null, references Products (id) The problem with this is that a product from one company might appear on an invoice for a different company. I added a (company_id: integer, not null) to LineItems, sort of like I'd do if only using natural keys and serials, then added a composite foreign key. LineItems (product_id, company_id) references Products (id, company_id) LineItems (invoice_id, company_id) references Invoices (id, company_id) This properly constrains LineItems to a single company but it seems over-engineered and wrong. company_id in LineItems is extraneous because the surrogate foreign keys are already unique in the foreign table. Postgres requires that I add a unique index for the referenced attributes so I am creating a unique index on (id, company_id) in Products and Invoices, even though id is simply unique. The following table with natural keys and a serial invoice number would not have these issues. LineItems: company_code: char, not null sku: char, not null invoice_id: integer, not null I can ignore the surrogate keys in the LineItems table but this also seems wrong. Why make the database join on char when it has an integer already there to use? Also, doing it exactly like the above would require me to add company_code, a natural foreign key, to Products and Invoices. The compromise... LineItems: company_id: integer, not null sku: integer, not null invoice_id: integer, not null does not require natural foreign keys in other tables but it is still joining on char when there is a integer available. Is there a clean way to enforce domain constraints with foreign keys like God intended, but in the presence of surrogates, without turning the schema and indexes into a complicated mess?

    Read the article

  • In a star schema, are foreign key constraints between facts and dimensions neccessary?

    - by Garett
    I'm getting my first exposure to data warehousing, and I’m wondering is it necessary to have foreign key constraints between facts and dimensions. Are there any major downsides for not having them? I’m currently working with a relational star schema. In traditional applications I’m used to having them, but I started to wonder if they were needed in this case. I’m currently working in a SQL Server 2005 environment.

    Read the article

  • Foreign key constraints in Android using SQLite? on Delete cascade.

    - by LordSnoutimus
    I have two tables: tracks and waypoints, a track can have many waypoints, but a waypoint is assigned to only 1 track. In the way points table I have a column called "trackidfk" which inserts the track_ID once a track is made, however I have not setup Foreign Key constraints on this column. When I delete a track I want to delete the assigned waypoints, is this possible?. I read about using Triggers but I don't think they are supported in Android. To create the waypoints table: public void onCreate(SQLiteDatabase db) { db.execSQL("CREATE TABLE " + TABLE_NAME + " (" + _ID + " INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT, " + LONGITUDE + " INTEGER," + LATITUDE + " INTEGER," + TIME + " INTEGER,"+ TRACK_ID_FK + " INTEGER );");

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >