I am currently trying to create an sqlite database where I can import a table from another sqlite database (can't attach) and add some extra data to each column.
Since there is no INSERT OR UPDATE
I came up with this:
I was thinking about splitting the data into two tables and join them afterwards so I can just dump the whole import into one table replacing everything that changed and manage the extra data separately since that does not change on import.
The first table (let's call it base_data
) would look like
local_id | remote_id | base_data1 | base_data2 | ...
---------+-----------+------------+------------+----
besides the local_id
everything would just be a mirror of the remote database (I'll probably add a sync timestamp but that does not matter now).
The second table would look similar but has remote_id
set as foreign key
remote_id | extra_data1 | extra_data2 | ...
----------+-------------+-------------+----
CREATE TABLE extra_data (
remote_id INTEGER
REFERENCES base_data(remote_id)
ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE
DEFERRABLE INITIALLY DEFERRED,
extra_data1 TEXT,
extra_data2 TEXT,
/* etc */
)
Now my idea was to simply INSERT OR REPLACE INTO base_data ...
values because the database I import from has no sync timestamp or whatsoever and I would have to compare everything to find out what row I have to UPDATE
/ what to INSERT
.
But here lies the problem: INSERT OR REPLACE
is actually a DELETE
followed by an INSERT
and the delete part triggers the foreign key ON DELETE
which I thought I could prevent by making the constraint DEFERRED
. It does not work if I wrap INSERT OR REPLACE
in a transaction either. It's always deleting my extra data although the same foreign key exists after the statement.
Is it possible to stop ON DELETE
to trigger until the INSERT OR REPLACE
is finished? Maybe some special transaction mode / pragma ?
The problem with cascade on delete is, if you ever delete a value from the referenced table accidentally, all rows that use that value will be deleted (not just the value in those rows but the whole row).
Yes, the use of ON DELETE CASCADE is fine, but only when the dependent rows are really a logical extension of the row being deleted. For example, it's OK for DELETE ORDERS to delete the associated ORDER_LINES because clearly, you want to delete this order, which consists of a header and some lines.
A foreign key with cascade delete means that if a record in the parent table is deleted, then the corresponding records in the child table will automatically be deleted.
It seems work if I replace the ON DELETE CASCADE
part by a trigger like:
CREATE TRIGGER on_delete_trigger
AFTER DELETE ON base_data
BEGIN
DELETE FROM extra_data WHERE extra_data.remote_id=OLD.remote_id;
END;
That trigger is only triggered by a DELETE
statement and should solve my problem so far.
(Answer provided by the OP in the question)
Additional info by jmathew, citing the documentation:
When the
REPLACE
conflict resolution strategy deletes rows in order to satisfy a constraint, delete triggers fire if and only if recursive triggers are enabled.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With