Setting uniq number in instead-of-trigger using EF - asp.net-mvc-3

I'm using ASP.NET MVC3 and Entity Framework with Database first aproach.
I have a table with id(key), number and description columns. I need to generate a number after item insertion. I created instead of trigger where I generate number that I need (it depends on last number that allready exists in database).
The problem is: When users insert items at same time the number in both cases is the same. So for both inserted items trigger fires and inside the trigger select returns same last number of item that allready exsist.
What is the best practice to solve this kind of issue?
Thanks.

I believe this will help you.
http://www.sqlteam.com/article/custom-auto-generated-sequences-with-sql-server
Also, if you're using SQL Server 2012, there is a new feature called SQL Sequence. It's something that Oracle databases have for a long time.
If you need those numbers without any gap, I'd suggest you to lock the table (prevent write), query it, update the row with max(number) and unlock it.

Related

Set sort on first column as default in TOAD

I'm using Toad for Oracle 12.5 and a little thing anoy me : when I look into the "Data" tab of a table, the row order is all jumbled up.
On any other DB software I used (SQL developper, phpmyadmin, etc), the default data view would retur the rows ordered by the primary key
So, I would like it to automaticly by default sort the data in the "Data" tab of each table to the first column, or even better, to the table primary key.
I've looked in the options but I can't see anything related to this.
Have some of you had the same problem ?
No oracle client that I have seen ever tacks an "order by" onto a statement on its own accord. It returns what the query returns in the order (or lack thereov) that it receives it.
Now it may LOOK ordered if the rows were inserted in order, but that is a fluke. Period.
And frankly, I'd be upset if a UI arbitrarily added expensive sorts to my queries unless I specifically told it to.
I have some BIG tables. presuming that I want the UI to take the time to scan the index and grab the lowest PK values just because I opened the DATA tab? No. Dear me - NO!
If I want it ordered, I will open the sort/filter dialog and specify so, or click on the appropriate column header to sort the results.
ADDITION:
If there ARE some tables where you want this behaviour (I can see the convenience if checking code tables for example), then use the sort/filter dialog on the data grid for that table to set an order by and TOAD will remember that setting for that table in this schema until you remove it. So you CAN set this behaviour where you want and not deal with the performance aspects where you don't.

Linq to SQL - Random Select Order and Paging

We have a database with 2,00,000 vendor in 100 plus category, if someone visit the website we want to allow them to select a category and show them 25 Vendor per page, first we kept order by VendorId but it always use to get first 25, but we removed it, but now in paging it sometime repeat the vendor, is there a way to get random 25 vendor and also keep the paging.
Regards
you can randomize your result but everytime you dot he query, it will create new random list so unless you randomize and save the randomized state in your Code and page over it, it cant be done straightforward way.
refer, SQL Query results pagination with random Order by in SQL Server 2008
I believe this requirement is impossible to implement if a new random order is needed every time, there needs to be good performance and every item should have equal chance to get selected. I believe you should redesign the way your application works.
One possible workaround is to have a couple of columns in a table and fill them with random numbers. When a user requests the list assign the random column to him (stick it in the URL for example). Then do an order by that column and display the results. Randomly switch 4-5 columns to create the appearance of randomness. Update the random numbers in the columns once a day.

VB6 and data-bound MSHFlexGrid, moving and populating columns

I'm working on a VB6 program that connects to a SQL Server 2008 R2 database. In the past I have always used the MSFlexGrid control and populated it manually. Now, however, the guy who is paying me for this wants me to use data-bound grids instead, which forces me to use the MSHFlexGrid control because I'm using ADO and not DAO. So, I have two questions...
First, how would I move a column in a MSHFlexGrid? For example, if I wanted the third column to appear as the sixth column in the grid, is there a simple single line of code that would do that?
Second, believe it or not, I've never had to do anything in a grid other than display the data, as is, from a recordset. Now, however, I have a recordset with some fields that contain just ID numbers that refer to records in other files - for example, a field containing an ID number referring to a record in the Customers table, instead of the field containing the customer's name. What is the easiest way to, instead of having a column showing customer ID numbers from the recordset, having that column show customer names? I thought I read somewhere that there's a way to embed a sql command in a MSHFlexGrid column, but if there is I wouldn't know how to do it. Is this possible, or is there a simpler way to do it?
TIA,
Kevin
The column order would typically be handled by your SELECT statement.
Say you have a Pies table that has a FruitID foreign key related to the FruitID in a Fruits table:
SELECT PieID AS ID, Pie, Fruit FROM Pies LEFT OUTER JOIN Fruits
ON Pies.FruitID = Fruits.FruitID
This returns 3 items: ID, Pie, and Fruit in that order.
Moving columns after the query/display operation is rarely used, but yes ColPosition can be used for that.
Wow! VB6.... Back to the future! :-)
You can move Columns using the ColPosition Property.
This article shows how you could setup the grid to display hierarchical data.
If you just want to display the customer name on the same line as the main data then that is doable as well by just creating the proper SQL for your data source. For that matter you can control the column order the same way as well.
Now, how about considering upgrading to .Net? Just kidding..... No, I'm not. OK. I am, maybe. :-)

Insert VS (Select and Insert)

I am writing a simple program to insert rows into a table.But when i started writing the program i got a doubt. In my program i will get duplicate input some times. That time i have to notify the user that this already exists.
Which of the Following Approaches is good to Use to achieve this
Directly Perform Insert statement will get the primary key violation error if it is duplicate notify otherwise it will be inserted. One Query to Perform
First make a search for the primary key values. If found a Value Prompt User. Otherwise perform insert operation.For a non-duplicate row this approach takes 2 queries.
Please let me know trade-offs between these approaches. Which one is best to follow ?
Regards,
Sunny.
I would choose the 2nd approach.
The first one would cause an exception to be thrown which is known to be very expensive...
The 2nd approach would use a SELECT count(*) FROM mytable WHERE key = userinput which will be very fast and the INSERT statement for which you can use the same DB connection object (assuming OO ;) ).
Using prepared statements will pre-optimize the queries and I think that will make the 2nd approach much better and mre flexible than the first one.
EDIT: depending on your DBMS you can also use a if not exists clause
EDIT2: I think Java would throw a SQLExcpetion no matter what went wrong, i.e. using the 1st approach you wouldn't be able to differ between a duplicate entry or an unavailable database without having to parse the error message - which is again a point for using SELECT+INSERT (or if not exists)

What would be the best algorithm to find an ID that is not used from a table that has the capacity to hold a million rows

To elaborate ..
a) A table (BIGTABLE) has a capacity to hold a million rows with a primary Key as the ID. (random and unique)
b) What algorithm can be used to arrive at an ID that has not been used so far. This number will be used to insert another row into table BIGTABLE.
Updated the question with more details..
C) This table already has about 100 K rows and the primary key is not an set as identity.
d) Currently, a random number is generated as the primary key and a row inserted into this table, if the insert fails another random number is generated. the problem is sometimes it goes into a loop and the random numbers generated are pretty random, but unfortunately, They already exist in the table. so if we re try the random number generation number after some time it works.
e) The sybase rand() function is used to generate the random number.
Hope this addition to the question helps clarify some points.
The question is of course: why do you want a random ID?
One case where I encountered a similar requirement, was for client IDs of a webapp: the client identifies himself with his client ID (stored in a cookie), so it has to be hard to brute force guess another client's ID (because that would allow hijacking his data).
The solution I went with, was to combine a sequential int32 with a random int32 to obtain an int64 that I used as the client ID. In PostgreSQL:
CREATE FUNCTION lift(integer, integer) returns bigint AS $$
SELECT ($1::bigint << 31) + $2
$$ LANGUAGE SQL;
CREATE FUNCTION random_pos_int() RETURNS integer AS $$
select floor((lift(1,0) - 1)*random())::integer
$$ LANGUAGE sql;
ALTER TABLE client ALTER COLUMN id SET DEFAULT
lift((nextval('client_id_seq'::regclass))::integer, random_pos_int());
The generated IDs are 'half' random, while the other 'half' guarantees you cannot obtain the same ID twice:
select lift(1, random_pos_int()); => 3108167398
select lift(2, random_pos_int()); => 4673906795
select lift(3, random_pos_int()); => 7414644984
...
Why is the unique ID Random? Why not use IDENTITY?
How was the ID chosen for the existing rows.
The simplest thing to do is probably (Select Max(ID) from BIGTABLE) and then make sure your new "Random" ID is larger than that...
EDIT: Based on the added information I'd suggest that you're screwed.
If it's an option: Copy the table, then redefine it and use an Identity Column.
If, as another answer speculated, you do need a truly random Identifier: make your PK two fields. An Identity Field and then a random number.
If you simply can't change the tables structure checking to see if the id exists before trying the insert is probably your only recourse.
There isn't really a good algorithm for this. You can use this basic construct to find an unused id:
int id;
do {
id = generateRandomId();
} while (doesIdAlreadyExist(id));
doSomethingWithNewId(id);
Your best bet is to make your key space big enough that the probability of collisions is extremely low, then don't worry about it. As mentioned, GUIDs will do this for you. Or, you can use a pure random number as long as it has enough bits.
This page has the formula for calculating the collision probability.
A bit outside of the box.
Why not pre-generate your random numbers ahead of time? That way, when you insert a new row into bigtable, the check has already been made. That would make inserts into bigtable a constant time operation.
You will have to perform the checks eventually, but that could be offloaded to a second process that doesn’t involve the sensitive process of inserting into bigtable.
Or go generate a few billion random numbers, and delete the duplicates, then you won't have to worry for quite some time.
Make the key field UNIQUE and IDENTITY and you wont have to worry about it.
If this is something you'll need to do often you will probably want to maintain a live (non-db) data structure to help you quickly answer this question. A 10-way tree would be good. When the app starts it populates the tree by reading the keys from the db, and then keeps it in sync with the various inserts and deletes made in the db. So long as your app is the only one updating the db the tree can be consulted very quickly when verifying that the next large random key is not already in use.
Pick a random number, check if it already exists, if so then keep trying until you hit one that doesn't.
Edit: Or
better yet, skip the check and just try to insert the row with different IDs until it works.
First question: Is this a planned database or a already functional one. If it already has data inside then the answer by bmdhacks is correct. If it is a planned database here is the second question:
Does your primary key really need to be random? If the answer is yes then use a function to create a random id from with a known seed and a counter to know how many Ids have been created. Each Id created will increment the counter.
If you keep the seed secret (i.e., have the seed called and declared private) then no one else should be able to predict the next ID.
If ID is purely random, there is no algorithm to find an unused ID in a similarly random fashion without brute forcing. However, as long as the bit-depth of your random unique id is reasonably large (say 64 bits), you're pretty safe from collisions with only a million rows. If it collides on insert, just try again.
depending on your database you might have the option of either using a sequenser (oracle) or a autoincrement (mysql, ms sql, etc). Or last resort do a select max(id) + 1 as new id - just be carefull of concurrent requests so you don't end up with the same max-id twice - wrap it in a lock with the upcomming insert statement
I've seen this done so many times before via brute force, using random number generators, and it's always a bad idea. Generating a random number outside of the db and attempting to see if it exists will put a lot strain on your app and database. And it could lead to 2 processes picking the same id.
Your best option is to use MySQL's autoincrement ability. Other databases have similar functionality. You are guaranteed a unique id and won't have issues with concurrency.
It is probably a bad idea to scan every value in that table every time looking for a unique value. I think the way to do this would be to have a value in another table, lock on that table, read the value, calculate the value of the next id, write the value of the next id, release the lock. You can then use the id you read with the confidence your current process is the only one holding that unique value. Not sure how well it scales.
Alternatively use a GUID for your ids, since each newly generated GUID is supposed to be unique.
Is it a requirement that the new ID also be random? If so, the best answer is just to loop over (randomize, test for existence) until you find one that doesn't exist.
If the data just happens to be random, but that isn't a strong constraint, you can just use SELECT MAX(idcolumn), increment in a way appropriate to the data, and use that as the primary key for your next record.
You need to do this atomically, so either lock the table or use some other concurrency control appropriate to your DB configuration and schema. Stored procs, table locks, row locks, SELECT...FOR UPDATE, whatever.
Note that in either approach you may need to handle failed transactions. You may theoretically get duplicate key issues in the first (though that's unlikely if your key space is sparsely populated), and you are likely to get deadlocks on some DBs with approaches like SELECT...FOR UPDATE. So be sure to check and restart the transaction on error.
First check if Max(ID) + 1 is not taken and use that.
If Max(ID) + 1 exceeds the maximum then select an ordered chunk at the top and start looping backwards looking for a hole. Repeat the chunks until you run out of numbers (in which case throw a big error).
if the "hole" is found then save the ID in another table and you can use that as the starting point for the next case to save looping.
Skipping the reasoning of the task itself, the only algorithm that
will give you an ID not in the table
that will be used to insert a new line in the table
will result in a table still having random unique IDs
is generating a random number and then checking if it's already used
The best algorithm in that case is to generate a random number and do a select to see if it exists, or just try to add it if your database errs out sanely. Depending on the range of your key, vs, how many records there are, this could be a small amount of time. It also has the ability to spike and isn't consistent at all.
Would it be possible to run some queries on the BigTable and see if there are any ranges that could be exploited? ie. between 100,000 and 234,000 there are no ID's yet, so we could add ID's there?
Why not append your random number creator with the current date in seconds. This way the only way to have an identical ID is if two users are created at the same second and are given the same random number by your generator.

Resources