sqlplus one foreign key to multiple tables? is ti possible - sqlplus

i wrote an SQL query like this:
FOREIGN KEY(CAR#)REFERENCES VEHICLE(SERIAL#),
FOREIGN KEY(SALE#)REFERENCES BUYER(SALE#),
FOREIGN KEY(SALE#)REFERENCES SELLER(SALE#),
am i allowed to do this considering i have all the tables required?

Related

Foreign key in join operations

Can anyone tell me the answer of following question in brief?
What role does the concept of foreign key play when specifying the join operations?
Most of the time we use primary key of one table as foreign key in another table so if we use foreign key in join then it will optimize your queries.

Rails multitable id incrementation

I have a rails application using Postgres - I need to have some tables that have the same data in essence. So I need to have a unique key that increments for all my tables, so there is virtually a pk constraint over all the table's ids.
Now, the question is - how do I do it? can I write a migration that defines the id of all the tables to increment for each insert to any of those tables? or must I do it on the database level?
If you have such a link between two tables, you shouldn't make them have the same primary key. This is not a good use of a database.
You should instead give one of these tables a foreign key to the other one, and use this relation to identify the linked rows between the two tables.
In Rails, it's called a "has_one" relation, and it's very handy : http://guides.rubyonrails.org/association_basics.html#the-has-one-association

Migration of existing data to PostgreSQL on ROR. Foreign Key needs rewriting?

I have an MS Access database with many tables, which are interlinked with Foreign keys. I am planning to put in on the web in an RoR application ( with Postgres). My question is, how does active_record handle foreign keys when data is being restored from pg_dump? The dump is created by converting the MS Access database. It has Integer fields which were originally AutoNumber of MS Access. I've made the schema with has_many, belongs_to and HABTM models and migrated. But will I have to rewrite the Foreign keys as the existing local keys will be replaced with new SEQUENCE numbers?

Join queries in Doctrine on tables without specified relations

I have two tables that do not have a relation defined with each other in the schema.yml.
However, table 1 has a foreign key reference to the primary key of table 2. Clearly, I goofed up by not designing the database well, but now it's mitigation time.
I must do a left join between the two tables coupled with a where clause that will retrieve the select rows I want. And to do this, I do:
Doctrine_Query::create()->select('t.*, l.lid')->from('Taxonomy t')->leftJoin('t.Cid c') ->leftJoin('c.Lesson l')->where('t.section = ?','Critical reading');
This should typically do it, but it does not because what it returns is all the rows from taxonomy table irrespective of the where condition. I am thinking, is this because of the relation not being specified in the column? That would be ridiculous cause the query works, only in a doctrine context it does not.
Thanks
In doctrine you can only join using the relations you defined on your schema, this is a know limitation. You may use the Native SQL feature as a workaround.

How to process N-N relationship in EF?

Suppose I have 3 tables in DB for a many to many relationship:
TabA(id1, ...): Primary Key: id1
TabB(id2, ...): Primary Key: id2
TabAB(Id1, id2,..): Foreign Key: id1, id2
So when create edmx with VS 2010 from DB, I only get two entities TabA and TabB in the model because TabAB has no primary key.
How to process this case with EF?
Are you sure EF didn't just turn TabAB into a relationship? It won't appear as a table in the model if there are no other columns. EF figures out that TabAB is a join table and treats it accordingly.
If not, the best way would be to alter TabAB to have a compound primary key of both id1 and id2. If there is some reason that combination of values is non-unique, it might be good to examine why.
The common way is to handle many-to-many relationships in EF - to have three tables in storage and only two tables in conceptual model. Third table in storage contains of columns that represent the foreign keys referencing to the main tables, and the primary key of the intermediate table is built over these reference columns. Designer just hides it :)
Read more here - http://weblogs.asp.net/zeeshanhirani/archive/2008/08/21/many-to-many-mappings-in-entity-framework.aspx.

Resources