I'm having an issue that's been blocking me from progressing with an app for a while and I think I'm finally at my wits end of trying to figure it out. For some reason, I can't seem to get foreign keys to work in SQLite.swift/SQLite (I can't figure out whether I'm misusing the library or misunderstanding SQLite in general). I'm trying to use the cascading delete function, and I feel as though I have everything set up correctly, but it isn't working.
Let me make sure my understanding of this is clear first. I have a parent table "Categories" with a child table "Subcategories" that is a parent table to child table "Transactions." Subcategories has a row "category_id" that is related to the "id" row of Categories with a foreign key that cascades on delete. Transactions has a row "subcategory_id" that is related to the "id" row of Subcategories with a foreign key that sets null on delete. When I delete a row from Categories, any row with that category id in Subcategories should also be removed, and any row in Transactions with that subcategory id should have the subcategory id field set to null. Is that correct?
I have all of my SQLite things handled in a single class. Here is a snippet of my code that pertains to the creation of the Subcategories table where I create the foreign keys:
do {
try db!.run(subcategories.create(ifNotExists: true) { table in
table.column(id, primaryKey: .autoincrement)
table.column(name, defaultValue: "New Subcategory")
table.column(sort)
table.column(category_id)
table.column(budget_id)
table.foreignKey(category_id, references: categories, id, update: .cascade, delete: .cascade)
table.foreignKey(budget_id, references: budgets, id, update: .cascade, delete: .cascade)
})
} catch {
print("SQLite: Unable to create 'Subcategories' table")
}
Here is the full code for that class.
If anyone can shed any light on what I'm doing wrong here, I'll give you my firstborn child (or maybe a thanks at least).
I ended up finding the answer here, and it is in fact related to the keys not being enabled.
https://github.com/stephencelis/SQLite.swift/issues/757
Related
I have two tables have circular reference to each other (you can see the FK and PK i nthe image)
(In otherprotectionItems table , I have a column from Document , and that record in document is related to otherprotectionItem table ad a foreign key. the first relation is NO ACTION in delete and the second relation is CASCADE on delete)
I have this issue when I want to delete a row in otherprotectionItem table.
Error :
Unable to determine a valid ordering for dependent operations. Dependencies may exist due to foreign key constraints, model requirements, or store-generated values.
Just wanto to note , I have this solution. but I prefer to have a better . Otherwise this is the answer.
I will remove the documents manually , save change in DB . and then remove the OtherprotectionItem table record
Data.Util.DocumentFinder.FindRecursive(item)
.ToList()
.ForEach(d => db.Entry(d).State = System.Data.Entity.EntityState.Deleted);
db.SaveChanges();
db.OtherProtectionItems.Remove(item);
db.SaveChanges();
Note : this FindRecursive is a function I create and it iterates all documents and find all documents related to this OtherprotectionItem record
I have a database with three tables: Word, Idiom, WordIdiom that stores many to many relation between this two tables. WordItem includes only foreign keys for Word and Idiom tables.
After that, I have created Entity model, based on database. I have filled two tables with relevant content, and now I want to add cross-links between these tables.
So, I have written this code:
using (var db = new IdiomsDictionaryEntities())
{
var allIdioms = from idiom in db.Idioms select idiom;
foreach (var idiom in allIdioms)
{
string[] words = idiom.IdiomText.Split(new[] { " ", "-" }, StringSplitOptions.None);
foreach (var word in words)
{
var wordItem = db.Words.SingleOrDefault(exWord => exWord.WordString.ToLower().Equals(word));
if (wordItem == null)
{
Console.WriteLine("Idiom: " + idiom.IdiomText + ", missing word: " + word);
continue;
}
idiom.Words.Add(wordItem);
db.SaveChanges();
}
}
}
But when I run this code, I'm getting following error:
An unhandled exception of type 'System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DbUpdateException' occurred in EntityFramework.dll
Additional information: An error occurred while saving entities that do not expose foreign key properties for their relationships. The EntityEntries property will return null because a single entity cannot be identified as the source of the exception. Handling of exceptions while saving can be made easier by exposing foreign key properties in your entity types. See the InnerException for details.
Inner-inner exception:
Unable to update the EntitySet 'WordIdiomMatch' because it has a DefiningQuery and no element exists in the element to support the current operation.`
As it is my first time with Entity Framework, I'm really don't know how to fix this. I have tried to add [ForeignKey()] property to Entity Framework models, but probably have done it wrong. I have also tried to add a primary key for WordIdiom, but it brakes even more things, as in this case I cannot even add items to Word and Idiom tables.
I have solved the problems, with help of #KerryRandolph and #AntoinePelletier
I was trying to update entities derived from a many-to-many relationship using Pure Join Table - meaning no other columns except foreign keys are allowed.
If you add a Primary Key column to a Join Table, you lose all of the entity framework advantages and have to implement insertion operation manually.
Proper solution was to alter the join table on the DB to make a PK that includes BOTH of the foreign ID columns.
First of all, i see that you have 2 add() for the same purpose. Witch is wrong. Imagine what it would look like in the data base :
wordItem.Idioms.Add(idiom);
ok now X and Y are linked by the link table as "X-Y" record.
idiom.Words.Add(wordItem);
And now... it would create another record that link these as "Y-X" witch is useles, if there is already an "X-Y" record then X is linked to Y with this single record and the other way around too.
And i'd say... usualy the primary key of a link table is the combination of the two foreign keys it contain, so the double add would crash anyway.
I am encountering a recurring problem that just makes no sense, and hoping someone (in the Breeze team?) can shed some light.
The following model illustrates the entities in question.
As you can see, I'm adhering pretty strictly to Entity Framework conventions in my property names, and as a result, if I check in SQL the cascade on delete rules are set by EF code first when it creates the db.
Now, when I try to delete a BusUnit manually in SQL, the delete cascades correctly and the corresponding BusUnitDimensions are also deleted, as it should be. Likewise, if I delete a Dimension in SQL, the corresponding BusUnitDimensions are also deleted.
However, in my application, if I mark a BusUnit as setDeleted with Breeze and then try saveChanges, I get the following error.
The operation failed: The relationship could not be changed because one
or more of the foreign-key properties is non-nullable. When a change is
made to a relationship, the related foreign-key property is set to a null
value. If the foreign-key does not support null values, a new relationship
must be defined, the foreign-key property must be assigned another
non-null value, or the unrelated object must be deleted.
Strangely though, if I mark a Dimension for deletion and then save (within Breeze), the cascaded delete works correctly and both the Dimension and its corresponding BusUnitDimensions are deleted.
So, why the inconsistency? Why are the cascaded delete rules in SQL not being applied for BusUnits but yet they're working for Dimensions? I've read elsewhere that Breeze does not support cascaded deletes, but then why is my Dimensions case working?
EDIT:
I've removed my previous edits as they weren't relevant. The changes below follow on from Ward's answer...
My model now looks like this, and BusUnitDims now uses BusUnitId and DimId as a compound key, and I've added a bool, IsBud for the purposes of payload.
I haven't yet implemented deletes for BusUnits, but already if I try delete a Dim, I'm getting the same error message:
The operation failed: The relationship could not be changed because one
or more of the foreign-key properties is non-nullable. When a change is
made to a relationship, the related foreign-key property is set to a null
value. If the foreign-key does not support null values, a new relationship
must be defined, the foreign-key property must be assigned another
non-null value, or the unrelated object must be deleted.
I have noticed that cascaded deletes is no longer enabled, and in fact, to get EF to build the database I to add the following configuration:
modelBuilder.Entity<BusUnitDim>()
.HasRequired(bud => bud.BusUnit)
.WithMany(bu => bu.BusUnitDims)
.HasForeignKey(bud => bud.BusUnitId)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
modelBuilder.Entity<BusUnitDim>()
.HasRequired(bud => bud.Dim)
.WithMany(d => d.BusUnitDims)
.HasForeignKey(bud => bud.DimId)
.WillCascadeOnDelete(false);
So, with cascading now explicitly not in place, I can understand why the error occurs. Does that imply that in the controller, one has to specifically mark each map for deletion when deleting a parent Dim or BusUnit and before saveChanges is called, or is there some way to configure EF to take advantage of cascaded deletes as this would hugely simplify the code in my controller?
(PS: it gets even more complex, because BusUnitDims ends up having a further join table of its own, MetricBusUnitDims to accommodate yet another entity in the model and their relationships. This is why I'm trying to get the principles right early on)
EDIT: (A CONTROLLER SOLUTION FOR BUSUNITS)
So, the following approach works for BusUnits:
function deleteBusUnit(busUnitVm) { // note that you pass in the item viewmodel, not the entity
var busUnit = busUnitVm.busUnit;
var mapVms = busUnitVm.dimMapVms;
var dimHash = createBusUnitDimHash(busUnit);
mapVms.forEach(function (mapVm) {
var map = dimHash[mapVm.dim.id];
if (map) {
datacontext.markDeleted(map);
}
});
datacontext.markDeleted(busUnit);
save().then(function() { getDBoardConfig(); });
}
}
Is this the correct approach? if so, I'll still have to figure out the following:
How to approach Dims. These are different becuase the item viewmodel is defined for BusUnits.
How to approach the situation where there is a join tabel one level down, e.g. MetricBusUnitDIm.
EDIT: (A CONTROLLER SOLUTION FOR DIMS)
function deleteDim(dim) {
return bsDialog.deleteDialog(dim.name, true)
.then(function () {
vm.busUnitVms.forEach(function (busUnitVm) {
busUnitVm.busUnit.busUnitDims.forEach(function (bud) {
if (bud.dimId === dim.id) {
datacontext.markDeleted(bud);
}
});
});
datacontext.markDeleted(dim);
save().then(function () { getDboardConfig(); });
});
}
I believe your problems are traceable to the fact that your mapping table BusUnitDimension has its own primary key, Id, as opposed to the more typical approach in which the BusUnitId and DimensionId FK properties together comprise the compound primary key of BusUnitDimension.
Observe that OrderDetails in Northwind and the HeroPoweMap in the Breeze many-to-many example have compound keys.
Your choice creates complications.
First, it becomes possible to create multiple BusUnitDimension entities representing the same association between BusUnit and Dimension (i.e., they all have the same pair of FKs). The database may be able to prevent this (it's been a long time since I looked) but whether it does or doesn't, it won't prevent you from creating those duplicates in Breeze ... and maybe not in EF either.
Secondly, it opens you up to the problem you're currently facing. If those mapping entities are in the DbContext when you perform the delete, EF may (apparently does) try to null their FK properties as it sets either BusUnit or Dimension to the deleted state.
You can get around this, as has been suggested, by making both the BusUnitId and DimensionId FK properties nullable. But that is contrary to the semantics as a BusUnitDimension must link a real BusUnit to a real Dimension; they aren't optional. The practical consequence may be that you don't get cascade delete from the EF perspective if you do this (not sure if the DB will enforce that either). That means you'd have orphaned BusUnitDimension rows in your database with one or both FKs being null. I speculate because I'm not used to getting into this kind of trouble.
Another approach would be to set their FK values to zero (I think Breeze does this for you). Of course this implies the existence of BusUnit and Dimension table rows with Id == 0, if only during the delete operation.
Btw, you could actually have such "sentinel entities" in your DB.
You must make sure that these BusUnitDimension are in the deleted state or EF (and the DB) will either reject them (referential integrity constraint) or orphan them (you'll have BusUnitDimension rows in your database with one or both FKs being zero).
Alternatively, if you know that the DB will cascade delete them, you can simply remove them from the DbContext (remove from the EntityInfoMap in the EFContextProvider). But now you have to tell the Breeze client to get rid of them too if it happens to have them hanging around.
Enough Already!
These wandering thoughts should tell you that you've got yourself in a jam here with way too much bookkeeping ... and all because you gave BusUnitDimension its own Id primary key.
It gets a lot easier if you give BusUnitDimension the compound key, {BusUnitId, DimensionId}. You must also give it a payload property (anything will do) to prevent EF from hiding it in its "many-to-many" implementation because Breeze doesn't handle that. Adding any nonsense property will do the trick.
HTH
That has nothing to do with Breeze.. The originating message is from Entity Framework..
inside BusUnitDimension Model update BusUnitId property to:
public Nullable<int> BusUnitId { get; set; }
Notice the Nullable struct..
I have 3 normalised tables consisting of Employees, Departments and EmployeesToDepartments. I wish to be able to assign an Employee to one or more Department, hence the link table (EmployeesToDepartments). I can successfully query the database and extract the full hierarchy of entities via the Navigation properties using
this.ObjectContext.Employees.Include("EmployeesToDepartments").Include("EmployeesToDepartments.Department")
plus the [Include] attribute in the metadata, thus allowing me to access the Departments for a given Employee. Upon trying to remove a link between an [Employee] and [Department] in the [EmployeesToDepartments] table I was given a Foreign Key Constrain error.
I have simplified my model to include just one navigation property between [Employees] and [EmployeesToDepartments]. A Foreign Key constraint between[Employees].[ID] and [EmployeesToDepartments].[IDEmployee] was preventing me from updating the EmployeesToDepartments table. With this removed via a Relationship setting I can now update the table. I can now execute the following code
foreach (var rel in _employee.EmployeesToDepartments)
{
_employee.EmployeesToDepartments.Remove(rel);
}
_domainContext.SubmitChanges();
without error.
I was expecting to see the entries in the RelEmployeesToDepartments with the IDEmployee to have been deleted. What I see in the table are the value 0 where the IDEmployee previously was.
Is it possible to force a DELETE statement to be issued? Am I misunderstanding the basic concepts here?
Any help would be much appreciated.
Removing entities in navigation property only breaks the link between entities. You have to delete from the EntitySet to achive what you want.
ex)
myDomainContext.EmployeeDepartments.Remove(employeeDepartmentToRemove);
myDomainContext.SubmitChanges();
I have a relational model with an associative table. But in addition to the related keys, this table also has a flag. I would like to define two associations: one where the flag is true and another where it is false. The EF designer can add a condition to an entity, but not to an association.
The associative table looks like this:
UserPrivilege
-------------
UserId int (FK1)
PrivilegeId int (FK2)
IsGranted bit
I would like to create two associations between the User entity and the Privilege entity: PrivilegesGranted and PrivilegesDenied.
You can't do this directly through the designer.
But this is possible in the XML using DefiningQuery and Create and Delete sprocs. See this old post on my blog for more: Associations with Payloads.
The only thing that is a bit interesting is I assume the PK is just UserId and PrivilegeId, which means a user can't be granted and denied for a particular privilege at the same time.
So if you write code like this:
Privilege p = user.Granted.First();
user.Granted.Remove(p);
user.Denied.Add(p);
ctx.SaveChanges();
Update ordering is important. because you are using a DefiningQuery for both associations, the EF doesn't know they are related, and that it needs to do the delete before it can do the update.
So you might end up with PK violations.
A way to address this issue is in the Insert and Delete sprocs for each association, you can essentially make them change the current row for the User and Privilege pair, if it exists update it with the correct IsGranted value, if not create it, i.e. make it an upsert.
Let me know how you go here
Alex