Somehow, it seemed clearer when cascades had to be done with triggers (I hate it when things happen that I can't see). Is that because cascade conflicts aren't a problem in SQLite? And if that's the case, is that documented? I couldn't find anything about it in the docs. The foreign key in the child table will generally reference a. The referenced table is known as parent table while the table with the foreign key is known as child table. It enforces referential integrity within SQLite database. It occurred to me that I've never run into a cascade conflict with SQLite. SQLite Foreign Key is used to specify that values in one table also appear in another table. If I remember correctly, when enforcement was implemented, it was done internally with trigger programs anyway. With SQLServer, the workaround for cascade conflicts is triggers, and I remember having to use triggers for cascades in SQLite because foreign keys weren't enforced. With the equivalent schema BEGIN TRANSACTION įOREIGN KEY("titleid") REFERENCES "titles"("titleid") ON DELETE CASCADEįOREIGN KEY("titleid") REFERENCES "titles"("titleid") ON DELETE CASCADE,įOREIGN KEY("divid") REFERENCES "divs"("divid") ON DELETE CASCADEĬascades from deletion work as advertised. "Introducing FOREIGN KEY constraint may cause cycles or multiple cascade paths" Just to complement the first answer, its a good practice to add a name to constraints, like the code below: create table houseitems ( houseid integer not null, itemid integer not null, constraint houseitemspk primary key (houseid, itemid), constraint houseitemshousefk foreign key (houseid) references houses (id), constraint house. ![]() ![]() ![]() If one changes the last ON DELETE clause to ON DELETE CASCADE, you get the With this simple schema in SQLServer: CREATE TABLE.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |