I'm getting ORA-04091: mutating error
I have a trigger on tableA. Inside this trigger it uses a start & end date field on the record the trigger is running for and breaks it into how many months it spans. I then loop over each month and add the exact duplicate record to tableB if it doesn't exist or update fields if it does exist. I was trying to do that with a merge where the 'using' is tableA (the one the trigger is firing on) but this causes the error.
I could check if the record exists (:NEW) in tableB and insert/update based on that, but since that's basically what a merge command is doing, is there a way to use merge in this fashion without getting the mutating error?
Assuming that the only information you need from A is the data in the row that is being modified, you can do something like
MERGE INTO b
USING( SELECT :new.col1, :new.col2, :new.col3, ... , :new.colN
FROM dual )
ON( ... )
...
That's basically the same thing that you'd do if you wanted to code a MERGE where the source was data from parameters passed into the procedure.
Related
I feel like this is one of those "if you're careful you can do it" scenarios that Oracle just doesn't want to let me do.
My problem is that I have a single configuration table that I want to enable inheritance via Triggers. Think an Employee table with a SUPERVISOR ID column, and 'inherited' SUPERVISOR NAME that self populates if the ID is changed.
I'd like to do a simple self-lookup to capture a value from another row at time of INS/UPD. But Oracle is rejecting as a mutating trigger error.
My code is essentially:
TRIGGER UPD_CHILD_RECORD
BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE
ON MYSCHEMA.FAKE_EMPLOYEE
FOR EACH ROW
WHEN (NEW.SUPERVISOR_ID IS NOT NULL)
BEGIN
IF INSERTING OR UPDATING
THEN
:NEW.SUPERVISOR_NAME = (
SELECT MAX(NAME)
FROM MYSCHEMA.FAKE_EMPLOYEE
WHERE EMPLOYEE_ID = :NEW.SUPERVISOR_ID
);
END IF;
END UPD_CHILD_RECORD
;
thanks.
This is a normal behavior. Oracle protects you from inconsistent data that you may get accessing a table which is already being updated.
Imagine this scenario.
You submit two update statements and have a trigger that selects from that same table. Let's assume that the first statement is successfully applied and the data gets changed. Now it's time for the second statement. What output would you expect from the select statement in the trigger? Should it return data as it was before the first update, or should it include the changes made? You probably think that Oracle should return the new data. But first, Oracle does not really know your intentions, and second, that would mean that your query is dependent on row order, which contradicts the relational algebra.
The solution for your problem is quite simple. You do not need the SUPERVISOR_NAME column at all. To get supervisor's name, simply join the table with itself and get the desired result, something like:
select t1.ID, t1.SUPERVISOR_ID, t2.NAME from FAKE_EMPLOYEE t1
left join FAKE_EMPLOYEE t2 on t1.SUPERVISOR_ID = t2.ID;
So I am trying to use triggers to basically set some rules.. If anyone has an ID number lower than 3, he will have to pay only 100 dollars, but if someone has an ID above that, he will have to pay more. I did some research and have been told to use triggers and that triggers are very useful when fetching multiple rows. So I tried doing that but it didn't work. Basically the trigger gets created but then when i try to add values, I get the following error:-
ORA-01422: exact fetch returns more than requested number of rows
ORA-06512: at "S.PRICTICKET", line 6
ORA-04088: error during execution of trigger 'S.PRICTICKET'
here is what i did to make the trigger:-
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER PRICTICKET BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE OR DELETE ON PAYS FOR EACH ROW ENABLE
DECLARE
V_PRICE PAYS.PRICE%TYPE;
V_ID PAYS.ID%TYPE;
V_NAME PAYS.NAME%TYPE;
BEGIN
SELECT ID,NAME INTO V_ID,V_NAME FROM PAYS;
IF INSERTING AND V_ID<3 THEN
V_PRICE:=100;
INSERT INTO PAYS(ID,NAME,PRICE) VALUES (V_ID,V_NAME,V_PRICE);
ELSIF INSERTING AND V_ID>=3 THEN
V_PRICE:=130;
INSERT INTO PAYS(ID,NAME,PRICE) VALUES (V_ID,V_NAME,V_PRICE);
END IF;
END;
and the thing is, when i execute this code, i actually do get a message saying the trigger has been compiled. but when when i try to insert values into the table by using the following code, i get the error message I mentioned above.
INSERT INTO PAYS(ID,NAME) VALUES (19,'SS');
You're getting the error you specified, ORA-01422, because you're returning more than one row with the following SELECT:
SELECT ID,NAME INTO V_ID,V_NAME FROM PAYS;
You need to restrict the result set. For example, I'll use the :NEW psuedorecord to grab the row's new ID value, which if unique, will restrict the SELECT to one row:
SELECT ID,NAME INTO V_ID,V_NAME FROM PAYS WHERE ID = :NEW.ID;
Here is the Oracle docs on using triggers: https://docs.oracle.com/database/121/TDDDG/tdddg_triggers.htm#TDDDG99934
However, I believe your trigger has other issues, please see my comments and we can discuss.
EDIT: Based on our discussion.
ORA-04088: error during execution of trigger
Using INSERT inside a BEFORE INSERT trigger on the same table will create an infinite loop. Please consider using an AFTER INSERT and change your INSERTS to UPDATES, or an INSTEAD OF INSERT.
Additionally, remove DELETE from the trigger definition. That makes no sense in this context.
Let's begin clearing up a few things. You were told "triggers are very useful when fetching multiple rows" this is, as a general rule and without additional context, false. There are 4 types of DML triggers:
Before Statement - fires 1 time for the statement regardless of the number of rows processed.
Before Row - fires once for each row processed during the statement before old and new values are merged into a single set of values. At this point you are allowed to change the values in the columns.
After Row - fires once for row processed during the statement after merging old and new values into a single set of values. At this point you cannot change the column values.
After statement - fires once for the statement regardless of the number of rows processed.
Keep in mind that the trigger is effectively part of the statement.
A trigger can be fired for Insert, Update, or Delete. But, there is no need to fire on each. In this case as suggested, remove the Delete. But also the Update as your trigger is not doing anything with it. (NOTE: there are compound triggers, but they contain segments for each of the above).
In general a trigger cannot reference the table that it is fired upon. See error ORA-04091.
If you're firing a trigger on an Insert it cannot do an insert into that same table (also see ORA-04091) and even if you get around that the Insert would fire the trigger, creating a recursive and perhaps a never ending loop - that would happen here.
Use :New.column_name and :Old.column_name as appropriate to refer to column values. Do not attempt to select them.
Since you are attempting to determine the value of a column you must use a Before trigger.
So applying this to your trigger the result becomes:
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER PRICTICKET
BEFORE INSERT ON PAYS
FOR EACH ROW ENABLE
BEGIN
if :new.id is not null
if :new.ID<3 then
:new.Price :=100;
else
:new.Price := 130;
end if ;
else
null; -- what should happen here?
end if ;
END PRICTICKET ;
I am using mybatis to perform a massive batch insert on an oracle DB.
My process is very simple: I am taking records from a list of files and inserting them into a specific table after performing some checks on the data.
-Each file contains an average of 180.000 records and I can have more than one file.
-Some records can be present in more than one file.
-A record is identical to another one if EVERY column matches, in other words I cannot simply perform a check on a specific field. And I have defined a constraint in my DB which makes sure this condition is satisfied.
To put it simply I want to just ignore the constraint exception Oracle will give to me in case that constraint is violated.
Record is not present?-->insert
Record is already present?--> go ahead
is this possible with mybatis?Or can I accomplish something at DB level?
I have control on both Application Server and DB so please tell me what's the most efficient way to accomplish this task (even though I'd like to avoid being too much DB dependant...)
of course, I'd like to avoid performing a select* before each insertion...given the number of records I am dealing with it would ruin my application's performances
Use the IGNORE_ROW_ON_DUPKEY_INDEX hint:
insert /*+ IGNORE_ROW_ON_DUPKEY_INDEX(table_name index_name) */
into table_name
select * ...
I'm not sure about JDBC, but at least in OCI it is possible. With batch operations you pass vectors as bind variables and you also get back vector(s) of returned IDs and also a vector of error codes.
You can also use MERGE on database server side together with custon collection types. Something like:
merge into t
using ( select * from TABLE(:var) v)
on ( v.id = t.id )
when not matched then insert ...
Where :var is bind variable of SQL type: TABLE OF <recordname>
The word "TABLE" is a construct used to cast from bind variable into a table.
Another option is to use SQL error loggin clause:
DBMS_ERRLOG.create_error_log (dml_table_name => 't');
insert into t(...) values(...) log errors reject limit unlimited;
Then after the load you will have to truncate error loging table err$_t;
another option would be to use external tables
It looks that any solution is quite a lot work to do, when compared to using sqlldr.
Ignore error with error table
insert
into table_name
select *
from selected_table
LOG ERRORS INTO SANJI.ERROR_LOG('some comment' )
REJECT LIMIT UNLIMITED;
and error table schema is :
CREATE GLOBAL TEMPORARY TABLE SANJI.ERROR_LOG (
ora_err_number$ number,
ora_err_mesg$ varchar2(2000),
ora_err_rowid$ rowid,
ora_err_optyp$ varchar2(2),
ora_err_tag$ varchar2(2000),
n1 varchar2(128)
)
ON COMMIT PRESERVE ROWS;
I have some trouble when trying to update a table by looping cursor which select from source table through dblink.
I have two database DB1, DB2.
They are two different database instance.
And I am using this following statement in DB1:
CURSOR TestCursor IS
SELECT a.*, 'A' TEST_COL_A, 'B' TEST_COL_B
FROM rpt.SOURCE#DB2 a;
BEGIN
For C1 in TestCursor loop
INSERT into RPT.TARGET
(
/*The company_name and cust_id are select from SOURCE table from DB2*/
COMPANY_NAME, CUST_ID, TEST_COL_A, TEST_COL_B
)
values
(
C1.COMPANY_NAME, C1.CUST_ID, C1.TEST_COL_A , C1.TEST_COL_B
) ;
End loop;
/*Some code...*/
End
Everything works fine until I add a column "NEW_COL" to SOURCE table#DB2
The insert data got the wrong value.
The value of TEST_COL_A , as I expect, should be 'A'.
However, it contains the value of NEW_COL which i add at SOURCE table.
And the value of TEST_COL_B contains 'A'.
Have anyone encounter the same issue?
It seems like oracle cache the table columns when it compile.
Is there any way to add a column to source table without recompile?
According to this:
Oracle Database does not manage
dependencies among remote schema
objects other than
local-procedure-to-remote-procedure
dependencies.
For example, assume that a local view
is created and defined by a query that
references a remote table. Also assume
that a local procedure includes a SQL
statement that references the same
remote table. Later, the definition of
the table is altered.
Therefore, the local view and
procedure are never invalidated, even
if the view or procedure is used after
the table is altered, and even if the
view or procedure now returns errors
when used. In this case, the view or
procedure must be altered manually so
that errors are not returned. In such
cases, lack of dependency management
is preferable to unnecessary
recompilations of dependent objects.
In this case you aren't quite seeing errors, but the cause is the same. You also wouldn't have a problem if you used explicit column names instead of *, which is usually safer anyway. If you're using * you can't avoid recompiling (unless, I suppose, the * is the last item in the select list, in which case any extra columns on the end wouldn't cause a problem - as long as their names didn't clash).
I recommend that you use a single set processing insert statement in DB1 rather than a row at a time cursor for loop for the insert, for example:
INSERT into RPT.TARGET
select COMPANY_NAME, CUST_ID, 'A' TEST_COL_A, 'B' TEST_COL_B
FROM rpt.SOURCE#DB2
;
Rationale:
Set processing will almost always out perform Row-at-a-time
processing [which is really slow-at-a-time processing].
Set processing the insert is a scalable solution. If the application will need to scale to tens of thousands of rows or millions of rows, the row-at-a-time solution will not likely scale.
Also, using the select * construct is dangerous for the reason you
encountered [and other similar reasons].
I am getting
ORA-30926: unable to get a stable set of rows in the source tables
in the following query:
MERGE INTO table_1 a
USING
(SELECT a.ROWID row_id, 'Y'
FROM table_1 a ,table_2 b ,table_3 c
WHERE a.mbr = c.mbr
AND b.head = c.head
AND b.type_of_action <> '6') src
ON ( a.ROWID = src.row_id )
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET in_correct = 'Y';
I've ran table_1 it has data and also I've ran the inside query (src) which also has data.
Why would this error come and how can it be resolved?
This is usually caused by duplicates in the query specified in USING clause. This probably means that TABLE_A is a parent table and the same ROWID is returned several times.
You could quickly solve the problem by using a DISTINCT in your query (in fact, if 'Y' is a constant value you don't even need to put it in the query).
Assuming your query is correct (don't know your tables) you could do something like this:
MERGE INTO table_1 a
USING
(SELECT distinct ta.ROWID row_id
FROM table_1 a ,table_2 b ,table_3 c
WHERE a.mbr = c.mbr
AND b.head = c.head
AND b.type_of_action <> '6') src
ON ( a.ROWID = src.row_id )
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET in_correct = 'Y';
You're probably trying to to update the same row of the target table multiple times. I just encountered the very same problem in a merge statement I developed. Make sure your update does not touch the same record more than once in the execution of the merge.
A further clarification to the use of DISTINCT to resolve error ORA-30926 in the general case:
You need to ensure that the set of data specified by the USING() clause has no duplicate values of the join columns, i.e. the columns in the ON() clause.
In OP's example where the USING clause only selects a key, it was sufficient to add DISTINCT to the USING clause. However, in the general case the USING clause may select a combination of key columns to match on and attribute columns to be used in the UPDATE ... SET clause. Therefore in the general case, adding DISTINCT to the USING clause will still allow different update rows for the same keys, in which case you will still get the ORA-30926 error.
This is an elaboration of DCookie's answer and point 3.1 in Tagar's answer, which from my experience may not be immediately obvious.
How to Troubleshoot ORA-30926 Errors? (Doc ID 471956.1)
1) Identify the failing statement
alter session set events ‘30926 trace name errorstack level 3’;
or
alter system set events ‘30926 trace name errorstack off’;
and watch for .trc files in UDUMP when it occurs.
2) Having found the SQL statement, check if it is correct (perhaps using explain plan or tkprof to check the query execution plan) and analyze or compute statistics on the tables concerned if this has not recently been done. Rebuilding (or dropping/recreating) indexes may help too.
3.1) Is the SQL statement a MERGE?
evaluate the data returned by the USING clause to ensure that there are no duplicate values in the join. Modify the merge statement to include a deterministic where clause
3.2) Is this an UPDATE statement via a view?
If so, try populating the view result into a table and try updating the table directly.
3.3) Is there a trigger on the table? Try disabling it to see if it still fails.
3.4) Does the statement contain a non-mergeable view in an 'IN-Subquery'? This can result in duplicate rows being returned if the query has a "FOR UPDATE" clause. See Bug 2681037
3.5) Does the table have unused columns? Dropping these may prevent the error.
4) If modifying the SQL does not cure the error, the issue may be with the table, especially if there are chained rows.
4.1) Run the ‘ANALYZE TABLE VALIDATE STRUCTURE CASCADE’ statement on all tables used in the SQL to see if there are any corruptions in the table or its indexes.
4.2) Check for, and eliminate, any CHAINED or migrated ROWS on the table. There are ways to minimize this, such as the correct setting of PCTFREE.
Use Note 122020.1 - Row Chaining and Migration
4.3) If the table is additionally Index Organized, see:
Note 102932.1 - Monitoring Chained Rows on IOTs
Had the error today on a 12c and none of the existing answers fit (no duplicates, no non-deterministic expressions in the WHERE clause). My case was related to that other possible cause of the error, according to Oracle's message text (emphasis below):
ORA-30926: unable to get a stable set of rows in the source tables
Cause: A stable set of rows could not be got because of large dml activity or a non-deterministic where clause.
The merge was part of a larger batch, and was executed on a live database with many concurrent users. There was no need to change the statement. I just committed the transaction before the merge, then ran the merge separately, and committed again. So the solution was found in the suggested action of the message:
Action: Remove any non-deterministic where clauses and reissue the dml.
SQL Error: ORA-30926: unable to get a stable set of rows in the source tables
30926. 00000 - "unable to get a stable set of rows in the source tables"
*Cause: A stable set of rows could not be got because of large dml
activity or a non-deterministic where clause.
*Action: Remove any non-deterministic where clauses and reissue the dml.
This Error occurred for me because of duplicate records(16K)
I tried with unique it worked .
but again when I tried merge without unique same proble occurred
Second time it was due to commit
after merge if commit is not done same Error will be shown.
Without unique, Query will work if commit is given after each merge operation.
I was not able to resolve this after several hours. Eventually I just did a select with the two tables joined, created an extract and created individual SQL update statements for the 500 rows in the table. Ugly but beats spending hours trying to get a query to work.
As someone explained earlier, probably your MERGE statement tries to update the same row more than once and that does not work (could cause ambiguity).
Here is one simple example. MERGE that tries to mark some products as found when matching the given search patterns:
CREATE TABLE patterns(search_pattern VARCHAR2(20));
INSERT INTO patterns(search_pattern) VALUES('Basic%');
INSERT INTO patterns(search_pattern) VALUES('%thing');
CREATE TABLE products (id NUMBER,name VARCHAR2(20),found NUMBER);
INSERT INTO products(id,name,found) VALUES(1,'Basic instinct',0);
INSERT INTO products(id,name,found) VALUES(2,'Basic thing',0);
INSERT INTO products(id,name,found) VALUES(3,'Super thing',0);
INSERT INTO products(id,name,found) VALUES(4,'Hyper instinct',0);
MERGE INTO products p USING
(
SELECT search_pattern FROM patterns
) o
ON (p.name LIKE o.search_pattern)
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET p.found=1;
SELECT * FROM products;
If patterns table contains Basic% and Super% patterns then MERGE works and first three products will be updated (found). But if patterns table contains Basic% and %thing search patterns, then MERGE does NOT work because it will try to update second product twice and this causes the problem. MERGE does not work if some records should be updated more than once. Probably you ask why not update twice!?
Here first update 1 and second update 1 are the same value but only by accident. Now look at this scenario:
CREATE TABLE patterns(code CHAR(1),search_pattern VARCHAR2(20));
INSERT INTO patterns(code,search_pattern) VALUES('B','Basic%');
INSERT INTO patterns(code,search_pattern) VALUES('T','%thing');
CREATE TABLE products (id NUMBER,name VARCHAR2(20),found CHAR(1));
INSERT INTO products(id,name,found) VALUES(1,'Basic instinct',NULL);
INSERT INTO products(id,name,found) VALUES(2,'Basic thing',NULL);
INSERT INTO products(id,name,found) VALUES(3,'Super thing',NULL);
INSERT INTO products(id,name,found) VALUES(4,'Hyper instinct',NULL);
MERGE INTO products p USING
(
SELECT code,search_pattern FROM patterns
) s
ON (p.name LIKE s.search_pattern)
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET p.found=s.code;
SELECT * FROM products;
Now first product name matches Basic% pattern and it will be updated with code B but second product matched both patterns and cannot be updated with both codes B and T in the same time (ambiguity)!
That's why DB engine complaints. Don't blame it! It knows what it is doing! ;-)