I want to create basically an update query on Open Office Base (the same way with Ms ACCESS).
Base does not typically use update queries (but see below). Instead, the easiest way to do an update command is to go to Tools -> SQL. Enter something similar to the following, then press Execute:
UPDATE "Table1" SET "Value" = 'BBB' WHERE ID = 0
The other way is to run the command with a macro. Here is an example using Basic:
Sub UpdateSQL
REM Run an SQL command on a table in LibreOffice Base
Context = CreateUnoService("com.sun.star.sdb.DatabaseContext")
databaseURLOrRegisteredName = "file:///C:/Users/JimStandard/Desktop/New Database.odb"
Db = Context.getByName(databaseURLOrRegisteredName )
Conn = Db.getConnection("","") 'username & password pair - HSQL default blank
Stmt = Conn.createStatement()
'strSQL = "INSERT INTO ""Table1"" (ID,""Value"") VALUES (3,'DDD')"
strSQL = "UPDATE ""Table1"" SET ""Value"" = 'CCC' WHERE ID = 0"
Stmt.executeUpdate(strSQL)
Conn.close()
End Sub
Note that the data can also be modified with a form or by editing the table directly.
Under some circumstances it is possible to create an update query. I couldn't get this to work with the default built-in HSQLDB 1.8 engine, but it worked with MYSQL.
In the Queries section, Create Query in SQL View
Click the toolbar button to Run SQL Command directly.
Enter a command like the following:
update mytable set mycolumn = 'This is some text.' where ID = 59;
Hit F5 to run the query.
It gives an error that The data content could not be loaded, but it still performs the update and changes the data. To get rid of the error, the command needs to return a value. For example, I created this stored procedure in MYSQL:
DELIMITER $$
CREATE PROCEDURE update_val
(
IN id_in INT,
IN newval_in VARCHAR(100)
)
BEGIN
UPDATE test_table SET value = newval_in WHERE id = id_in;
SELECT id, value FROM test_table WHERE id = id_in;
END
$$
DELIMITER ;
Then this query in LibreOffice Base modifies the data without giving any errors:
CALL update_val(2,'HHH')
See also:
https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=75763
https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=6655
https://ask.libreoffice.org/en/question/32700/how-to-create-an-update-query-in-base-sql/
Modifying table entries from LibreOffice Base, possible?
Right now I am in the middle of migrating from SQLite to Postgresql and I came across this problem. The following prepared statement works with SQLite:
id = 5
st = ActiveRecord::Base.connection.raw_connection.prepare("DELETE FROM my_table WHERE id = ?")
st.execute(id)
st.close
Unfortunately it is not working with Postgresql - it throws an exception at line 2.
I was looking for solutions and came across this:
id = 5
require 'pg'
conn = PG::Connection.open(:dbname => 'my_db_development')
conn.prepare('statement1', 'DELETE FROM my_table WHERE id = $1')
conn.exec_prepared('statement1', [ id ])
This one fails at line 3. When I print the exception like this
rescue => ex
ex contains this
{"connection":{}}
Executing the SQL in a command line works. Any idea what I am doing wrong?
Thanks in advance!
If you want to use prepare like that then you'll need to make a couple changes:
The PostgreSQL driver wants to see numbered placeholders ($1, $2, ...) not question marks and you need to give your prepared statement a name:
ActiveRecord::Base.connection.raw_connection.prepare('some_name', "DELETE FROM my_table WHERE id = $1")
The calling sequence is prepare followed by exec_prepared:
connection = ActiveRecord::Base.connection.raw_connection
connection.prepare('some_name', "DELETE FROM my_table WHERE id = $1")
st = connection.exec_prepared('some_name', [ id ])
The above approach works for me with ActiveRecord and PostgreSQL, your PG::Connection.open version should work if you're connecting properly.
Another way is to do the quoting yourself:
conn = ActiveRecord::Base.connection
conn.execute(%Q{
delete from my_table
where id = #{conn.quote(id)}
})
That's the sort of thing that ActiveRecord is usually doing behind your back.
Directly interacting with the database tends to be a bit of a mess with Rails since the Rails people don't think you should ever do it.
If you really are just trying to delete a row without interference, you could use delete:
delete()
[...]
The row is simply removed with an SQL DELETE statement on the record’s primary key, and no callbacks are executed.
So you can just say this:
MyTable.delete(id)
and you'll send a simple delete from my_tables where id = ... into the database.
Recently, a program that creates an Access db (a requirement of our downstream partner), adds a table with all memo columns, and then inserts a bunch of records stopped working. Oddly, there were no changes in the environment that I could see and nothing in any diffs that could have affected it. Furthermore, this repros on any machine I've tried, whether it has Office or not and if it has Office, whether it's 32- or 64-bit.
The problem is that when you open the db after the program runs, the destination table is empty and instead there's a MSysCompactError table with a bunch of rows.
Here's the distilled code:
var connectionString = "Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0;Data Source=corrupt.mdb;Jet OLEDB:Engine Type=5";
// create the db and make a table
var cat = new ADOX.Catalog();
try
{
cat.Create(connectionString);
var tbl = new ADOX.Table();
try
{
tbl.Name = "tbl";
tbl.Columns.Append("a", ADOX.DataTypeEnum.adLongVarWChar);
cat.Tables.Append(tbl);
}
finally
{
Marshal.ReleaseComObject(tbl);
}
}
finally
{
cat.ActiveConnection.Close();
Marshal.ReleaseComObject(cat);
}
using (var connection = new OleDbConnection(connectionString))
{
connection.Open();
// insert a value
using (var cmd = new OleDbCommand("INSERT INTO [tbl] VALUES ( 'x' )", connection))
cmd.ExecuteNonQuery();
}
Here are a couple of workarounds I've stumbled into:
If you insert a breakpoint between creating the table and inserting the value (line 28 above), and you open the mdb with Access and close it again, then when the app continues it will not corrupt the database.
Changing the engine type from 5 to 4 (line 1) will create an uncorrupted mdb. You end up with an obsolete mdb version but the table has values and there's no MSysCompactError. Note that I've tried creating a database this way and then upgrading it to 5 programmatically at the end with no luck. I end up with a corrupt db in the newest version.
If you change from memo to text fields by changing the adLongVarWChar on line 13 to adVarWChar, then the database isn't corrupt. You end up with text fields in the db instead of memo, though.
A final note: in my travels, I've seen that MSysCompactError is related to compacting the database, but I'm not doing anything explicit to make the db compact.
Any ideas?
As I replied to HasUp:
According MS support, creation of Jet databases programmatically is deprecated. I ended up checking in an empty model database and then copying it whenever I needed a new one. See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/318559 for more info.
I simplified the code a little while trying to debug:
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult Register(User model)
{
DateTime bla = new DateTime(2012, 12, 12);
try
{
User user = new User
{
gid = 1,
cid = 1,
firstName = model.firstName,
lastName = model.lastName,
email = model.email,
username = model.username,
password = model.password,
creationDate = bla,
active = 1
};
myContext.Users.AddObject(user);
myContext.SaveChanges();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
throw ex;
}
return View();
}
The values are transmited accordingly. Users table:
[id] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
[cid] [int] NULL,
[gid] [int] NULL,
[firstName] [nvarchar](100) NOT NULL,
[lastName] [nvarchar](100) NOT NULL,
[email] [nvarchar](max) NOT NULL,
[username] [nvarchar](100) NOT NULL,
[password] [nvarchar](100) NOT NULL,
[creationDate] [datetime] NOT NULL,
[active] [int] NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_Users_3213E83F0AD2A005] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED
I deleted all the foreign keys to be sure that nothing affects it. I am qute certain that at a previous moment it was working, but now I can not figure where the issue is.
It crashes while performing the savechanges:
{"An error occurred while updating the entries. See the inner exception for details."}
{"The member with identity '' does not exist in the metadata collection.\r\nParameter name: identity"}
I had the same error being thrown when I try to insert using EF, the error was
The member with identity 'Id' does not exist in the metadata collection.\r\nParameter name: identity
It wasn't obvious at first but the exception message was very concise because my database knows the column Id int but the property created for the object on my code was int ID so coming back to named mapping, Id is not mapped to ID.
So when an object with property ID is sent to database that only know Id you will get the above error.
I hope this helps, thanks
The issue was reproducing because of a trigger that was on the users table. Removed it and the issue is not reproducing anymore.
There is probably a trigger on the table being updated and it returns output. The output is thrown away but it conflicts with EF. Such output is often used to debug triggers (and forgotten to delete later):
select 'trigger called, i am here'
or there can be missing variable:
select column
instead of
select #variable=column
I think that the best solution is in this post. I used the 3rd option and works.
Here I report the reply in the link:
The issue could be related to a "instead of insert" trigger on one of
your tables.
The EF framework is performing validation on the inserted row of data
by calling scope_identity(). However, an "instead of insert" trigger
will change the context of the insertion in such a way that the EF
system's call to scope_identity will return null.
A couple ways around this:
Use a stored procedure to insert the data ( not tested )
Remove the instead of insert trigger ( triggers can cause other problems, so some people argue not to use them) ( tested, works!)
Turn off validation in the EF framework, so: context.Configuration.ValidateOnSaveEnabled = false ( tested, works!)
I had this same error today and spent a few frustrating hours trying to figure it out.
I was using Entity Framework to insert a record with an identity column into a SQL server database table. Simple enough.
The table had a trigger on it which in turn ran a stored procedure. The stored procedure had a line in it:
select newid()
This is the line that broke Entity Framework.
For tables with identity columns, Entity Framework expects to be returned a single row with a single field that is the identity column.
it's because of trigger pass back value to EF
if you are using trigger. in my problem i must check a value by selecting from other table and using of 'select' cause error in EF, so you must replace 'select' with 'set'.
you can not use this code.
select #any= any from tablename
you should use set instead of select
set #any= (select any from tablename)
Somedays, I hate M$.
The member with identity 'ChangeID' does not exist in the metadata collection.
Parameter name: identity
I've spent two days trying to get around this.
I'm using MVC.
To get all the data I need in one fell swoop, I created a view of the table in the DB for this application, and tables in other databases. (You may update views, with some constraints.)
I do a get, and all my data is present in the record, keys, descriptions, foreign keys, etc.
I created triggers on my view, to update the portion of the view that came from the local table.
Instead of Delete worked fine.
Instead of Update worked fine.
This error kept raising it's head on Instead of Insert. I could NOT get the insert trigger to successfully insert into my table. If I ran an insert on the view, with all fields provided in the SQL Management Studio, it worked fine. I know the exact values being passed because I ran SQL Server Profiler to see the code being passed.
But when the app attempted the update, it failed with The member with identity 'ChangeID' does not exist in the metadata collection.
Clue up above, someone said, "MVC expects table key to be ID"
I renamed ChangeID as ID in my view, changed it in the App, and BAM! Now it works.
What did NOT work:
db.Configuration.ValidateOnSaveEnabled = false;
adding a select to the trigger to get scope identity
Why do I have to modify my DB or my view to satisfy some hidden M$ assumption?
None the less, after two very frustrating days, code is now working. Maybe this will save someone else some time as well.
Try this
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult Register(User model)
{
DateTime bla = new DateTime(2012, 12, 12);
try
{
model.gid = 1;
model.cid = 1;
model.creationDate = bla;
model.active = 1;
myContext.Users.AddObject(model);
myContext.SaveChanges();
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Console.WriteLine(ex);
throw;
}
return View();
}
I was having this issue and my fix, was that in my connection-string metadata I did not specify my model in the .msl format.
See more info here
In my case, SetName of the entity was incorrect. Shortly, this worked for me:
Use
myContext.AddObject(nameOfSetEntity, user);
Instead of:
myContext.Users.AddObject(user);
To get the whole correct name of the entity (thanks to Nix's answer)
string className = typeof(User).Name;
var container = myContext.MetadataWorkspace.GetEntityContainer(myContext.DefaultContainerName, System.Data.Metadata.Edm.DataSpace.CSpace);
string nameOfSetEntity= (from meta in container.BaseEntitySets
where meta.ElementType.Name == className
select meta.Name).First();
Context.AddObject(nameOfSetEntity, user);
Im currently researching how to port the Data Access Layer of an existing .NET 4.0 MVC 3 web application over to an entity framework. There are many reasons, but the primary one being due to thousands of stored procedures, adding just 1 field to a table results in 30 - 50 sproc edits!!
We are using MS SQL Server 2008 R2 and, ideally, we would like to use NHibernate and Fluent for mapping.
I have simplified the problem Im having into a simple example:
Imagine the following 2 tables:
'Products' Table
ID (INT)
DefaultName (NVARCHAR(128))
'Product Names' Table
ProductID (INT)
Name (NVARCHAR(128))
Culture (VARCHAR(10))
The Products table will contain a list of products, each of them will have a default, English, name. The Product Names table will contain the ID of the Product and many translations.
Currently, using stored procedures, we have the following:
SELECT Products.ID,
ISNULL(ProductNames.Name, Products.DefaultName) AS Name
FROM Products
LEFT JOIN ProductNames ON ProductNames.ProductID = Products.ID AND ProductNames.Culture = #Culture;
Note: #Culture is passed into the procedure
This always ensures a single Product with either a localised name or default (English) name is returned.
My question is: Is this possible to do at the Mapping level of Fluent NHibernate? I have been searching for days on 'How to join on 2 columns', but cant find a solution which works. It would seem odd if this is not possible in such a mature framework?
As an example of what I have been experimenting with:
public class ProductMap : ClassMap<Product> {
public ProductMap() {
Id(p => p.Id);
Join("ProductNames", pn => {
pn.Optional()
.KeyColumn("ProductID")
.Map(p => p.Name);
});
}
}
However, this results in the following exception:
More than one row with the given identifier was found: 109, for class: Product
This is because product 109 has 5 translations and thus all 5 cannot be mapped to a single string.
I have managed to use the 'HasMany<>' method to map all translations into a List within a Product. However, this is not what I need.
if the name is readonly then
public class ProductMap : ClassMap<Product> {
public ProductMap() {
Id(p => p.Id);
Map(p => p.Name).Formula("Select ISNULL(pn.Name, DefaultName) FROM ProductNames pn WHERE pn.ProductID = ID AND pn.Culture = '" + GetCUltureFromSomewhere() + "'");
}
}