But when I tried to input my data like 'abc', '123 abc' 'abc ','123 abc'
SQL server won't recognize 'abc' and 'abc ' is a different value if the last character is a space. Is there a way to make it as a different value? I tried to drop the primary and input the data. When I ran a group by the name column, 'abc' show 2 instead of 1. Seems SQL server is trying to ignore the space at the end too.
I also noticed unique index have the same problem too. Please help.
I am making a program in Visual Basic .NET with SQL Server 2000.
I have a table "MyTable" with a primary key named "Id". The primary key is 'Create Unique' checked and 'Index' selected. When I insert all the fields required, except "Id" of course, I need the new record's "Id" in my VisualBasic program, but I don't know how...
I must do one of them, but don't know how either of them:
-Create a trigger on insertion that will send to the user that sended the insert command the "Id" of the record just created.
or
-get the command in Visual Basic that will send the Insert command with a return field ("Id")
Hi,I would like to add a unique index that consists of two fields in atable.e.g. tbl_A (field1,field2) -- field1 & field2 Indexed and combinationmust be Unique.Can anyone tell me the actual sql syntax to create this index?Thanks,June.
Hello, I will explain myself further. I want to make my table in such a way that no two colums have the same value for example: Row 1 - Column 1 = "cool" Row 1 - Column 3 = 91 Row 3 - Column 1 = "cool" Row 3 - Column 3 = 91
I dont care about one column having duplicate values, I want to protect against Column 1 and 3 having the same values on other rows. Is this possible to do in sql server?
We are on SQL 2014...we have a bunch of views in a database where we are trying to find the views which have more than 16 columns max for unique index/constraint...this is needed so we can convert them to indexed views...
In SQL 2012.A query that joins 2 table, with order by clause doesn't get sorted and the result set is not ordered. This happens when some of the columns in the where criteria are in a unique index which is the index that is used for the join between the 2 tables, and all the columns in the unique index are in the where criteria.In the query plan there is no component for sort.The work around was to drop the unique index, or change it to a non-unique index. Once this was done, the execution plan was changed to add the sort component (even when the index was changed to non-unique and the join was still using this index).
We are going to use SQL Sever change tracking. The problem is that some of our tables, which are to be tracked, have no primary keys. There are only unique clustered indexes. The question is what is the best way to turn on change tracking for these tables in our circumstances.
Msg 2601, Level 14, State 1, Procedure DFP_report_load, Line 161 Cannot insert duplicate key row in object 'dbo.DFP_Reports_History' with unique index 'ix_report_history_creative_id'.
The duplicate key value is (40736326382, 1, 2015-07-03, 67618862, 355324). Msg 3621, Level 0, State 0, Procedure DFP_report_load, Line 161
The statement has been terminated.
Exception in Task: Cannot insert duplicate key row in object 'dbo.DFP_Reports_History' with unique index 'ix_report_history_creative_id'. The duplicate key value is (40736326382, 1, 2015-07-03, 67618862, 355324).
A UNIQUE INDEX must inherently impose a unique constraint and a UNIQUE CONSTRAINT is most likely implemented via a UNIQUE INDEX. So what is the difference? When you create in Enterprise Manager you must select one or the other.
What's the difference in the effect of the followings: CREATE UNIQUE NONCLUSTERED INDEX and ALTER TABLE dbo.titles ADD CONSTRAINT titleind UNIQUE NONCLUSTERED
I found there're two settings in Indexs/Keys dialog box of the management studio, Is Unique, and Type. The DDL statements above are generated by setting Is Unique to yes plus Type to Index, and just Type to Unique Key, respectively. What's the difference between them?
Hi everyone, I need urgent help to resolve this issue... As far as the performance goes which one is better.. Unique Index(col1, col2) OR Unique constraint(col1, col2) ? Unique constraint automatically adds a unique index and unique index takes care of uniqueness then whats the use of unique constraint ?
BOL says a unique constraint is preferred over a unique index. It also states that a unique constraint creates a unique index. What then is the difference between the two, and why is a constraint preferred over the index?
hi team, .Can i create umique constraint with out unique index.when i am creating a unique constraint sql creates a unique index (default) can i have only unique constraint ?
Can anyone tell what are the specific scenarios where Unique key is recommened over primary key ? While designing a database table in what all cases we should think about going for Unique key rather than a primary key.
hello all sorry m asking Database Question .. m talking about SQL SERVER 2005 but i have bit confusion... what difference between a primary key and a unique key? if m not wrong then primary key doesn't allow NULLs, but unique key allows NULLs but in many searches comes that primary key doesn't allow NULLs, but unique key allows one NULL only. what this means 'one NULL only'?? according to my practical we can give more then 1 nulls... plz clear this point???
Is there any way to auto generate the unique primary key when inserting data in MS SQL? there is a way to create the increasing integer as primary key, but is there any ways other than that?
For our database application we get our primary keys by calling a stored procedure that pass's in the table name and outputs the next primary key number assigned to that table.
ALTER procedure [dbo].[sp_getNextKey]
@TableName char(100),
@NextKey T_ID output
as
SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL READ COMMITTED
begin transaction
select @NextKey = NextKeyValue from T_KeyGenerator where TableName like @TableName
update T_KeyGenerator set NextKeyValue = NextKeyValue + 1 where TableName like @TableName
commit transaction
I then take that primary key, and other data, and insert that into the desired table.
The Problem I am having is that my user's keep getting "cannot insert duplicate key in table". So I assume that I do not have the transaction set right, or missing something. I need it to lock the row in the t_keyGenerator table so that no other users can view that row until I update it with the new value and commit the transaction.
I wrote this stored procedure and it works fine, it seems. The questions I have are as follows: (1) What is the difference between PRIMARY KEY and UNIQUE. They seem to pertain to the same behavior. When I used only UNIQUE as qualifier I did not see that the column was marked as primary in the SQL Management Studio. What I need is for a column to be unique in the sense that it would not allow duplicate values and it must have an INDEX on it. I need it to be descending. (2) Did I do it right or there are aspects in here I do not quite see?
set ANSI_NULLS ON set QUOTED_IDENTIFIER OFF GO ALTER PROCEDURE [dbo].[CreateTableDailyClose] @symbol varchar (10) = null AS BEGIN SET NOCOUNT ON; DECLARE @SQL VARCHAR(500) SET @SQL = 'CREATE TABLE dbo.dailyCl_' + @symbol + ' ( dateTimed DateTime NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, opened float NULL, high float NULL, low float NULL, closed float NULL, volume int NULL, adjClosed float NULL )' EXEC sp_sqlexec @Sql SET @SQL = 'CREATE UNIQUE INDEX dateTimed ON dbo.dailyCl_' + @symbol + ' (dateTimed DESC) ' EXEC sp_sqlexec @Sql END
What is the need of Primary Key if everything can be achieved by Unique Key? Everything that primary key does, Unique key can also fill those things.Why primary key is required?
if this question is inappropriate here, I apologize (it's at least obliquely related). I have been using ssno as a unique key in a datawarehouse I have been working on because all of the component systems have had it. I now have a database to add where ssno is not available. I have first, last address, city, state,zip and dob.
Question is, how to construct a unique identifier from those components. If not unique, then at least usable?
I have a deal table, each of these investments must be unique. I created a int pk : idDeal. Does that make sense or should i just use the deal colm being it has a unique constraint, Reguarding indexes, should i make the auto # colm my pk and make that the clustered index? and put another index on the Deal Colmn? Any suggestions welcomed
Hi I have a strange requirement in ETL operation. My Source contains only the details table data. Out of it, I have to load the master table and refer the Master table primary key ID to load Details table. I can easily load the Master Table with aggregate transformation. But problem is how to look up the Master Table Primary Key ID to load the Details table, as the master does not contains any unique key to lookup. This may seems to be strange but this is my requirement. You can refer the Source and Destination data model as below. They may give you clear picture. Can you guys help me out on this?
As I am creating the non-clustered indexes for the tables, I dont quite understand how dose it really matter to put the columns in the index key columns or put them into the included columns of the index?
I am really confused about that and I am looking forward to hearing from you and thank you very much again for your advices and help.
This is for SQL 2000 (SP 2) using Enterprise Manager. I have a table with a unique index comprised of several int fields. The index needs to include an additional bit field that is part of the table. But when I go to modify the index, the bit field name doesn't appear in the Column Name list. Can anyone shed any light on the problem? Thanks.
I have read that you get better performance with unique indexes rather than non-unique indexes. I have experimented with this in SQL 2000. I have two identical tables (with about 250000 rows each) with a 12-character unique column. In one table I define it as a regular index and in the other I define it as a unique index. No matter what I try I get identical performance, and the query optimizer shows an identical plan. I even tried clauses such as WHERE 1 < (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM TheTable WHERE key_column = OtherTable.key_column) which should obviously return nothing if TheTable.key_column is unique. However the query still ran a long time no matter if the index is unique or not. I have also tried a unique constraint instead of a unique index and got the same (non)results. Can anyone come up with an example where creating a unique index actually makes a performance difference?