Best Practices for Insert/Update/Delete

for now, doing a small school project, i find doing SPs for Insert useful, like checking for existing data and not inserting, that might not be the best method, i had advice from here i can use unique constraints instead, then what about update and delete? SPs also? the pros make SPs for everything? currently use dynamically generated SQL from SqlDataSources. for Update / delete. some delete are SPs too...

My 2 cents... SPs are a great way to interface with a database. For me, I will never access a DB in any other way. In fact, I would say it is good practice to secure the database so that only the defined stored procedures can be Executed against the DB. No direct table reads or writes. This will ensure that no one (other than an errant DBA) can do anything other than what is inteded by the interface provided through the stored procedures. It is essentially just another layer in the application model. Also, it provides a level of reusability, and design hiding... generally considered good things. An application will essentially only need to make "function calls" on the database, rather than some nasty select statement that, oh, by the way, I split this table out into two seperate ones, so now you have to go rewrite all your queries in every application that was ever written that uses my database because I didn't just write stored procedures in the first place, which, looking back would have been smart because then I would only have to fix things in two places.

// of course, you probably could create a view with the same name as the old table to fix it, but, just making a point

|||

I think you should use Stored Procedures whenever possible. But for making sure that the value in a column is unique you should always use unique constraints etc. For insert/update/delete always use SPs.

sql

Best practice

Hi
What is the prefered practice to use when I have 2 or more related
tables and I want to delete a row in the master table and I want the
child tables to automatically delete their related rows, Should I use
triggers in the database, enable cascade delete in the dataset or
somthing else ?
I use visual studio 2005 and sql server 2005.
Thanks
RolfIt depends. If you want the child records deleted, then a cascade delete is
appropriate. If you want the application to deal with the child records
first, then a foreign key constraint that will stop deletes will be valid.
Both are best practices, depending on your application requirements.
Geoff N. Hiten
Senior Database Administrator
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
<rolf-hje@.online.no> wrote in message
news:1139864939.431879.138190@.z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> What is the prefered practice to use when I have 2 or more related
> tables and I want to delete a row in the master table and I want the
> child tables to automatically delete their related rows, Should I use
> triggers in the database, enable cascade delete in the dataset or
> somthing else ?
> I use visual studio 2005 and sql server 2005.
> Thanks
> Rolf
>|||Cascade with error handling could be one way as you mention.
Another way wich I prefer is to use transaction when deleting data that
needs to delete related data.
I do recommend that you dont use triggers since that easily can make
things go out of control.|||It depends. Cascading deletes are the simplest to implement, but can
complicate deadlock minimization because the order in which locks are
obtained across tables is not clearly defined. In addition, INSTEAD OF
triggers cannot exist on the referencing table of a cascading referential
action. Using FOR or AFTER triggers to cascade deletes is generally a bad
idea--not because of the performance impact, but because several triggers
can exist for an action on a table and the order in which they are executed
is not deterministic, IMO they should be avoided. I prefer to perform
deletes within a transaction in a stored procedure. It is then clear from
reading the text of the proc which tables will be affected, and it's easier
to control the order in which locks are obtained to minimize the likelyhood
of a deadlock. The use of INSTEAD OF DELETE triggers instead of stored
procedures may warrant investigation because any locks applied depend on the
order in which statements appear within the trigger (none are applied as a
direct result of the trigger firing) in the same way as statements within a
stored procedure, and unlike the stored procedure method, they do not
require preventing direct access to the tables. (On the other hand, many
would say that you should always prevent direct access to the tables and
require all modifications to be performed using stored procedures.)
<rolf-hje@.online.no> wrote in message
news:1139864939.431879.138190@.z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Hi
> What is the prefered practice to use when I have 2 or more related
> tables and I want to delete a row in the master table and I want the
> child tables to automatically delete their related rows, Should I use
> triggers in the database, enable cascade delete in the dataset or
> somthing else ?
> I use visual studio 2005 and sql server 2005.
> Thanks
> Rolf
>|||OK, thanks for all replies
I think I will avvoid triggers and use cascading delete. But what is
more efficent. Cascading deletes in the database or cascading deletes
in the dataset. Is there a performance difference between these two
options ?
Thanks
Rolf

Best method for running several queries?

I have an SQL file saved from QA. It has several queries used for testing.
These are DELETE, UPDATE, INSERT, SELECT of various types. I highlight the
specific statement to run in that file. This keeps everything from running
at once.
Problem is that I access the server from several computers via QA. The SQL
file with all of the above queries is usually on one computer. Should I
just store the SQL file on the SQL Server machine as an SQL file or a stored
procedure? What is best for this? This file isn't something I would ever
want an app to have access to. It's strictly for manual testing purposes
via QA.
Thanks,
BrettScript files are considered source code. So, you would want to put it in a
souce control server somewhere and just grab it when you need it. Storing
the script inside sqlserver is probably not a good idea in this case.
-oj
"Brett" <no@.spam.net> wrote in message
news:ORw4XLLLFHA.2136@.TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>I have an SQL file saved from QA. It has several queries used for testing.
>These are DELETE, UPDATE, INSERT, SELECT of various types. I highlight the
>specific statement to run in that file. This keeps everything from running
>at once.
> Problem is that I access the server from several computers via QA. The
> SQL file with all of the above queries is usually on one computer. Should
> I just store the SQL file on the SQL Server machine as an SQL file or a
> stored procedure? What is best for this? This file isn't something I
> would ever want an app to have access to. It's strictly for manual
> testing purposes via QA.
> Thanks,
> Brett
>

BEGINNER: simple Delete trigger

Hello,
I am trying to learn SQL Server. I need to write a trigger which
deletes positions of the document depending on the movement type.
Here's my code:

set ANSI_NULLS ON
set QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON
go

CREATE TRIGGER [DeleteDocument]
ON [dbo].[Documents]
AFTER DELETE
AS
BEGIN
-- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
-- interfering with SELECT statements.
SET NOCOUNT ON;

IF Documenty.Movement = 'PZ' OR Documents.Movement = 'ZW'
DELETE FROM PositionsPZZW
WHERE Documents.Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);
IF Documents.Movement = 'WZ' OR Documents.Movement = 'RW'
DELETE FROM PositionsWZRW
WHERE Documents.Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);
IF Documents.Ruch = 'MM'
DELETE FROM PositionsMM
WHERE Documents.Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);
END

Unfortunatelly I receive errors which I don't understand:

Msg 4104, Level 16, State 1, Procedure DeleteDocument, Line 12
The multi-part identifier "Documents.Movement" could not be bound.
Msg 4104, Level 16, State 1, Procedure DeleteDocument, Line 12
The multi-part identifier "Documents.Movement" could not be bound.
Msg 4104, Level 16, State 1, Procedure DeleteDocument, Line 13
The multi-part identifier "Documents.Numer" could not be bound.
Msg 4104, Level 16, State 1, Procedure DeleteDocument, Line 15
The multi-part identifier "Documents.Movement" could not be bound.
Msg 4104, Level 16, State 1, Procedure DeleteDocument, Line 15
The multi-part identifier "Documents.Movement" could not be bound.
Msg 4104, Level 16, State 1, Procedure DeleteDocument, Line 16
The multi-part identifier "Documents.Number" could not be bound.
Msg 4104, Level 16, State 1, Procedure DeleteDocument, Line 18
The multi-part identifier "Documents.Movement" could not be bound.
Msg 4104, Level 16, State 1, Procedure DeleteDocument, Line 19
The multi-part identifier "Dokuments.Number" could not be bound.

Please help to correct the code.
Thank you very much!
/RAM/How to forbid deleting Positions if Documents.WasDeleted bit is not
set?
Please help.
/RAM/|||R.A.M. (r_ahimsa_m@.poczta.onet.pl) writes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Hello,
I am trying to learn SQL Server. I need to write a trigger which
deletes positions of the document depending on the movement type.
Here's my code:
>
set ANSI_NULLS ON
set QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON
go
>
CREATE TRIGGER [DeleteDocument]
ON [dbo].[Documents]
AFTER DELETE
AS
BEGIN
-- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from
-- interfering with SELECT statements.
SET NOCOUNT ON;
>
IF Documenty.Movement = 'PZ' OR Documents.Movement = 'ZW'
DELETE FROM PositionsPZZW
WHERE Documents.Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);
IF Documents.Movement = 'WZ' OR Documents.Movement = 'RW'
DELETE FROM PositionsWZRW
WHERE Documents.Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);
IF Documents.Ruch = 'MM'
DELETE FROM PositionsMM
WHERE Documents.Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);
END
>
Unfortunatelly I receive errors which I don't understand:

I understand the errors, but I understand about as little of your
trigger that SQL Server does. You seem to be making things up out of
thin air. When you say:

IF Documenty.Movement = 'PZ' OR Documents.Movement = 'ZW'

What are Documenty and Documents supposed to be? Maybe you mean

IF EXISTS (SELECT *
FROM deleted
WHERE movement IN ('PZ', 'ZW'))

The same goes for

DELETE FROM PositionsPZZW
WHERE Documents.Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);

This would compile if you have a column Documents in PositionsPZZW,
and this columns is of a CLR UDT and had an attribute named Number.
What this really should be, I don't even want to guess, since I know
nothing about PositiosnPZZW.

The standarad recommendation is that you post:

o CREATE TABLE statements for your tables.
o INSERT statments with sample data.
o In this case: a sample DELETE statement.
o The desired result given the sample.

It also helps to give a little more detailed description of the problem.

By the way, why are there three Positions tables? Maybe there is a good
reason for this, but I have a suspicion that one should do.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx|||On Thu, 6 Jul 2006 08:25:27 +0000 (UTC), Erland Sommarskog
<esquel@.sommarskog.sewrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>I understand the errors, but I understand about as little of your
>trigger that SQL Server does. You seem to be making things up out of
>thin air. When you say:
>
IF Documenty.Movement = 'PZ' OR Documents.Movement = 'ZW'

I meant Documents.Movement

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>
>What are Documenty and Documents supposed to be? Maybe you mean
>
IF EXISTS (SELECT *
FROM deleted
WHERE movement IN ('PZ', 'ZW'))

Exactly

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>
>
>The same goes for
>
DELETE FROM PositionsPZZW
WHERE Documents.Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);
>
>This would compile if you have a column Documents in PositionsPZZW,
>and this columns is of a CLR UDT and had an attribute named Number.
>What this really should be, I don't even want to guess, since I know
>nothing about PositiosnPZZW.

I need:
IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM deleted WHERE Movement IN ('PZ', 'ZW'))
DELETE FROM PositionsPZZW
WHERE Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>By the way, why are there three Positions tables? Maybe there is a good
>reason for this, but I have a suspicion that one should do.

They have different columns describing items.

Thank you, you have helped me... Problem closed
Could you help me with post "one more question"? Thank you!
/RAM/|||Sorry, too short problem description.
Anyway, I solved.
/RAM/|||R.A.M.,
What was the solution you found? Please post as others might have a
simular problem.
TIA
Rob

R.A.M. wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Sorry, too short problem description.
Anyway, I solved.
/RAM/

|||On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 10:46:50 +0200, R.A.M. <r_ahimsa_m@.poczta.onet.pl>
wrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM deleted WHERE Movement IN ('PZ', 'ZW'))
>DELETE FROM PositionsPZZW
>WHERE Number IN (SELECT Number FROM deleted);

That looks dangerous. If one row in DELETED has a 'PZ' value, all
rows in PositionsPZZW that match DELETED will be dropped, even those
that do NOT have 'PZ' or 'ZW'.

How about this alternative:

DELETE FROM PositionsPZZW
WHERE Number IN
(SELECT Number FROM deleted WHERE Movement IN ('PZ', 'ZW'));

It does not require the IF test at all, as if there are no matches it
will do nothing.

Roy Harvey
Beacon Falls, CT|||R.A.M. (r_ahimsa_m@.poczta.onet.pl) writes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

Could you help me with post "one more question"? Thank you!

If you repost it, and clarify what you mean. I understood very little
of it.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@.sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server 2005 at
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pr...oads/books.mspx
Books Online for SQL Server 2000 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodin...ions/books.mspx|||Please post DDL, so that people do not have to guess what the keys,
constraints, Declarative Referential Integrity, data types, etc. in
your schema are. Sample data is also a good idea, along with clear
specifications. It is very hard to debug code when you do not let us
see it.

But the code implies some design problems. What are the logical
differences among
PositionsPZZW, PositionsWZRW and PositionsMM ? This looks like
attribute splitting.

Why are you using triggers instead of DRI actions?|||On 6 Jul 2006 04:39:13 -0700, "rcamarda" <robc390@.hotmail.comwrote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by

>What was the solution you found? Please post as others might have a
>simular problem.
>TIA
>Rob

I decided not to use WasDeleted flag in Documents, so it was enough to
set Delete Rule in FK_Positions_Documents to "No Action".
/RAM/|||BEGINNER: simple Delete trigger

Before Update/Delete Trigger

Is there a way to create a trigger that will keep a user from updating or deleting a record? Thanks, JeremyRead about INSTEAD OF triggers in BOL|||Hi JCScoobyRS,

Originally posted by JCScoobyRS
Is there a way to create a trigger that will keep a user from updating or deleting a record? Thanks, Jeremy

h, why don't you revoke the user the UPDATE and DELETE permission?|||Very good idea BUT I'm trying to help a buddy out that needed the ability described in my first post. Is there a way? I'll check with him to see if that will work but I wouldn't mind an answer anyways. Thanks for your help, Jeremy|||Originally posted by JCScoobyRS
Very good idea BUT I'm trying to help a buddy out that needed the ability described in my first post. Is there a way? I'll check with him to see if that will work but I wouldn't mind an answer anyways. Thanks for your help, Jeremy

In this case you should go for INSTEAD OF triggers|||Okay...that sounds good. Here is an example of what I need to do:

I'm trying to prevent the UPDATE and DELETE on a table after a certain field has been entered(not null). Here is the trigger right now:

CREATE TRIGGER TRANSACTION_REPORTEE ON [dbo].[TRAVAUX_COMMANDE]
FOR UPDATE, DELETE
AS
IF [dbo].[TRAVAUX_COMMANDE].[Id_Transaction_GL] IS NOT NULL
BEGIN
RAISERROR ('Impossible de modifier une ligne reporte',10,1)
ROLLBACK TRAN
END

This is what my buddy has. Is there anyway to take what he has here and revise it with your idea in it for testing? Thanks alot, Jeremy

before delete triggers in MSSQL

Hi
I've got several tables that have foreign key relationships with a 'users'
table - for example tasks (assigned to user) and customers (liason of
customer). When I delete a user, I would like to set all the foreignkeyed
rows to have null as a user, rather than doing a cascading delete. This
could be done in a stored procedure, but the problem is that the application
has multiple modules that can be added and removed, so I don't know at
execution time what tables there are. The only way to do this I could think
of was with triggers. I know this is supposed to be a big no no, but
couldn't think of anything else. Not that it matters, because triggers won't
work here as the trigger is fired after the delete is done and hence bombs
out due to violated constraint checking. I can't use an 'INSTEAD OF' trigger
unfortunately as I need the facility to have multiple triggers. I see that
Oracle has a BEFORE trigger, imagining that this would solve the problem. Is
there similar functionality in SQL, or another way to do this?
I was hoping that this is a common task and that there is an easy way to do
it, but no luck so far with searches
Thanks
JoeOn Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:54:19 +0200, Mombers wrote:

> The only way to do this I could think
>of was with triggers. I know this is supposed to be a big no no, but
>couldn't think of anything else.
Hi Joe,
Why do you think triggers are a big no no? Of course, they shouldn't be
your first option and you should prefer DRI over triggers where possible,
but there are situations where triggers are an invaluable instrument.

> Not that it matters, because triggers won't
>work here as the trigger is fired after the delete is done and hence bombs
>out due to violated constraint checking.
That's correct. You either have to remove the foreign key constraint and
do the checking in the trigger as well, or you have to use INSTEAD OF
triggers.

> I can't use an 'INSTEAD OF' trigger
>unfortunately as I need the facility to have multiple triggers.
Maybe I'm missing something, but why don't you just combine the actions of
those various triggers into one trigger?

> I see that
>Oracle has a BEFORE trigger, imagining that this would solve the problem. I
s
>there similar functionality in SQL,
The INSTEAD OF trigger is the closest to a BEFORE trigger that SQL Server
has to offer.

> or another way to do this?
As I already indicated, you could move the constraint checking to the
trigger as well. But that's a bad idea, since that would force you to
write and maintain more trigger code, it would slow things down and it
would deny the query optimizer the knowledge of this constraint, so that
it can't use this knowledge to optimize query execution.
Best, Hugo
--
(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)|||I have to agree 100% with Hugo. Use instead of triggers, or drop your
relationships and implement them in triggers (which will be just as good,
but will be pretty painful to implement consiering you can just do it in the
instead of trigger.) You can have as many actions in the trigger as you
want.
----
Louis Davidson - drsql@.hotmail.com
SQL Server MVP
Compass Technology Management - www.compass.net
Pro SQL Server 2000 Database Design -
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=266
Blog - http://spaces.msn.com/members/drsql/
Note: Please reply to the newsgroups only unless you are interested in
consulting services. All other replies may be ignored :)
"Hugo Kornelis" <hugo@.pe_NO_rFact.in_SPAM_fo> wrote in message
news:cva111hh4p6m600c28jagd6m348r6g2jii@.
4ax.com...
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:54:19 +0200, Mombers wrote:
>
> Hi Joe,
> Why do you think triggers are a big no no? Of course, they shouldn't be
> your first option and you should prefer DRI over triggers where possible,
> but there are situations where triggers are an invaluable instrument.
>
> That's correct. You either have to remove the foreign key constraint and
> do the checking in the trigger as well, or you have to use INSTEAD OF
> triggers.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something, but why don't you just combine the actions of
> those various triggers into one trigger?
>
> The INSTEAD OF trigger is the closest to a BEFORE trigger that SQL Server
> has to offer.
>
> As I already indicated, you could move the constraint checking to the
> trigger as well. But that's a bad idea, since that would force you to
> write and maintain more trigger code, it would slow things down and it
> would deny the query optimizer the knowledge of this constraint, so that
> it can't use this knowledge to optimize query execution.
> Best, Hugo
> --
> (Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)

Before Delete Trigger?

I have a database that will be used as the back end of a distributed application that holds information based on application users. The application needs to log on and see if there are updates for the user. My current thoughts on this are that the application will log in and check a Date column named [modified] in the users table (I am not worried about what individual changes have occured, but more if anything has changed). To implement this I have now put Insert, Update triggers that use the tables relationships to track which users need to be updated on the tables that need to be watched... they look something like this:

CREATE TRIGGER MOD_UP_INS_GROUPS
ON dbo.Groups
FOR INSERT, UPDATE
AS
SET NOCOUNT ON
DECLARE @.IDVar1 as int
SET @.IDVar1 = (SELECT GroupID FROM inserted)
UPDATE Users
SET Modified = GetDate()
WHERE (AccountName IN
(SELECT DISTINCT dbo.Users.AccountName
FROM dbo.Groups INNER JOIN
dbo.GroupUserDetail ON dbo.Groups.GroupID = dbo.GroupUserDetail.GroupID INNER JOIN
dbo.Users ON dbo.GroupUserDetail.AccountName = dbo.Users.AccountName
WHERE (dbo.Groups.GroupID = @.IDVar1)))

This appears to be working great... however the Delete Trigger is where my problems start... I can not use the above trigger (with deleted in place of inserted) because it appears the delete action takes place prior to the Delete Trigger and with the referential deletes, etc. The path to the user is lost before I can track it with the delete trigger. Is there a way to make a BEFORE DELETE TRIGGER... or any other thoughts would be helpfull.

Thank You,
KentDo Instead of Trigger.|||Not sure I'm following...but you can code an INSTEAD OF trigger...look it up in BOL...|||I tried a Instead of Trigger but I had the following error:

Cannot ALTER INSTEAD OF DELETE or UPDATE TRIGGER 'MY TRIGGER NAME' on table 'dbo.Group' because the table has a FOREIGN KEY with cascaded DELETE or UPDATE.

Doing a little reading I have found I can't define this trigger on tables with foreign key relationships with cascading deletes.

The other problem I thought of with this type of trigger... is how do you let an outside programs sql delete requests continue with this trigger?|||Well...can you simply explain what your goal is, in business terms...

I'm having a hard time seeing what you're trying to do..

Also, you got other problems

SET @.IDVar1 = (SELECT GroupID FROM inserted)

You do know that inserted may have many rows...so doing that will give you the last value in the result set...|||First of all thanks for your replies:

The Database is the backend of a Client-Server Application that assigns Startup Scripts for Company Programs to individual users within the company (Based on Windows Login Names that are stored in the users table). It does this in a method similar to the Windows Server Environment where you assign individual Company Programs to a Group then assign a group to a user or a user to a group.

The front end that the users see needs to be able to connect to the database and determine if anything has changed, and if so, update itself with the new settings whether it be the user has been added\deleted from a group or if an actual Company Program Startup Script has changed.

My attempted solution to this problem was to create a modified column in the users table. When a table is modified that effects a user or users the modified column for the user or users in question would be updated with the current date (getdate()). The front end then accessess the database and compares it's last updated date with the date in the users.modified column to determine if it needs to update. With the update, Insert Triggers I have been able to accomplish this very nice. However, the delete trigger causes problems because lets say a group is deleted... the group is deleted then referential updates delete the users who where assigned to that group in a groupdetails table then I am unable to track which users need to be modified...

The front end does not contain a database... but rather stores items in an ini file and the registry, therefore replication is not an option. The other thing is clients are not always connected to the network so the settings are stored on the local machine for the individual users.

I hope this is clearer... thanks again.

Before Delete

I have 2 databases "Law","Rules" .. the second have tables which is linked
to the first one... so i want to deny Deleting of Record from first if it
has a child record in the other database...
I notice that there is no "Before Delete" trigger in sql server so how could
i control deleteing records from first database..
Second.. how could i roll-back Delete or update operation?
Did you consider a Foreign key Constraint for that ? If it is not
applicable you can do a ROLLBACK within a trigger and raise an error to
show up the error to the user.
http://groups.google.de/group/micros...18307e92ac868c
HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.
|||Instead of trying ot use a trigger, how about applying a foreign key
constraint instead? Then when you try to delete a row from the first
table you'll get an error if there's a dependent row in the second
table. It'll also be much faster than using a trigger.
On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 16:16:51 +0200, "Islamegy" <Islamegy@.Private.4me>
wrote:

>I have 2 databases "Law","Rules" .. the second have tables which is linked
>to the first one... so i want to deny Deleting of Record from first if it
>has a child record in the other database...
>I notice that there is no "Before Delete" trigger in sql server so how could
>i control deleteing records from first database..
>Second.. how could i roll-back Delete or update operation?
>
|||hi,
bradsbulkmail@.comcast.net wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Instead of trying ot use a trigger, how about applying a foreign key
> constraint instead? Then when you try to delete a row from the first
> table you'll get an error if there's a dependent row in the second
> table. It'll also be much faster than using a trigger.
> On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 16:16:51 +0200, "Islamegy" <Islamegy@.Private.4me>
> wrote:
have you tried something like
SET NOCOUNT ON
CREATE DATABASE a
CREATE DATABASE b
GO
USE a
CREATE TABLE dbo.m (
Id int NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY ,
Descr varchar (10) NOT NULL
)
GO
USE b
GO
CREATE TABLE dbo.d (
ID int NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY ,
IdRif int NOT NULL
CONSTRAINT fk_d_m FOREIGN KEY
REFERENCES a.dbo.m (Id) ,
Descr varchar (10) NOT NULL
)
GO
USE master
GO
DROP DATABASE a
DROP DATABASE b
?
the actual result is
Server: Msg 1763, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Cross-database foreign key references are not supported. Foreign key
'a.dbo.m'.
Server: Msg 1750, Level 16, State 1, Line 1
Could not create constraint. See previous errors.
Andrea Montanari (Microsoft MVP - SQL Server)
http://www.asql.biz/DbaMgr.shtmhttp://italy.mvps.org
DbaMgr2k ver 0.15.0 - DbaMgr ver 0.60.0
(my vb6+sql-dmo little try to provide MS MSDE 1.0 and MSDE 2000 a visual
interface)
-- remove DMO to reply