Subject | Re: [ib-support] Re: Database corruption after alter table |
---|---|
Author | Carsten Schaefer |
Post date | 2003-03-07T12:13Z |
""Alexander V.Nevsky"" <ded@...> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:b47fiu+tntp@......
But why can i insert a foreign key for this column without any
exception.
The field id_mitarbeiter is primary key for t_mitarbeiter and there is
no null value allowed.
gru�
Carsten
news:b47fiu+tntp@......
> --- In ib-support@yahoogroups.com, Carsten Sch=E4fer<ca_schaefer@g...>=20
> wrote:for=20
> > Alexander,
> > i think it is all right, what you have written, but it's not=20
> relevant for my case.
> > (there was no data insertet in the database after my updates)
>
> Carsten, it can't be relevant to new data. If you don't set value
> not null column variants:now
> 1. Components can set something for you as Thomas said
> 2. You'll get exception on insert
>
> But it is relevant to already existing records:
> Some table contained colunm A INT only:
> 1
> 2
> 3
> you added not null column B without default and _old_ records are
> 1 nullto=20
> 2 null
> 3 null
> until you don't fill them.
>
> > I forget to define a default value.
> > Why is there no error raised from the database, if this leads
> unrestorable backups ?without=20
>
> Because there is not another way to add new not null column
> default to table with data and sometimes it exactly what we need,=20must=20
> having in mind to fill it using some sophicticated algorithm. We
> care about filling ourselves.Maybe this behavior is correct.
>
But why can i insert a foreign key for this column without any
exception.
The field id_mitarbeiter is primary key for t_mitarbeiter and there is
no null value allowed.
gru�
Carsten