In 2K8+ you have the merge operation that does that. An statement against a table having more than one unique or primary key is also marked as unsafe. I ended up doing this and it worked great. Should I trap the error and ignore it, or is there an easier way? There is field 'id', which is Primary Key. You can take my word for it that a primary key will react exactly the same way. If the row is updated, it remains the same. Thank you all for the prompt reply and helpful suggestions.
Not the answer you're looking for? Updating a row that causes a duplicate. Simple where Table1LastName Table2LastName type statements. Delete your original table and rename the new table. As many have shown it is not a big deal to handle one row cases, but when dealing with large datasets, one needs a cursor, with all the performance problems that come along. Provide details and share your research! I've never tried this against a stored procedure so using the two methods may not be compatible. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 on this site the.
If for some horrible reason you can't avoid inserting duplicates, you ought to be able to trap the error on the client and ignore it. The double key value is 143801. The statement has been terminated. Although my emphatic advice to you is to structure your sql so as to not attempt duplicate inserts Philip Kelley's snippet is probably what you need , I want to mention that an error on a statement doesn't necessarily cause a rollback. Could anyone explain how to create the unique index? This would require two separate queries plus some programmed logic.
And if in the future, you should light a candle, light one for them. If in the future, you should say a prayer, say one for them. Note: I have this working with 2 temp tables created. One side effect is that you must qualify references to nonunique column names. The statement has been terminated. What you are saying is that if update fails and another process gets there first with an insert your insert will fail. All the table's companies have a name, but only companies listed on the stock market have a code.
That depends on the usage pattern. In the first sample, you will only ever need to locate the row s once. I need to insert rows into the table from remote server with sql server 2005 running on it. Inserting two or more identical rows This one really throws people. I can't seem to get it right. In general your column names are so vague they are not very usable. Jonathan Leffler: It's not your fault for mis-understanding the feature.
The reason I choose this over Philip Kelley's solution is that you can provide several rows of data and only have the missing ones actually get in: I came here because I was trying to do the same thing; I knew I had dupes in the source data but only wanted to update the target data and not add the dupes. Thanks for contributing an answer to Database Administrators Stack Exchange! Browse other questions tagged or. I want to ignore it and continue execute the 3rd statement. Oh yeah, Y has a unique constraint on it--so they're indexed, and this should perform optimally. I've made this scripts work. A transaction does not guaranty that the insert will succeed even if the update failed because the record existed.
There is an issue with the logic of this solution; You said you don't want to stop the error but want the process to keep running if it does error. This function is particularly useful for multi-rows inserts. If the row already exists it should be updated or overwritten, otherwise it should be inserted. Need to split a string? Here is my attempt at fixing up what you had. If this is sql server you should not use that because it is a datatype which has nothing to do with time of day. It will always be correct, it will port. And be careful with such ambiguous names like timestamp.
That's the alpha and omega of the issue. After the first insert hit , it will be all single statement updates, no ifs or buts. So I put the indexed view in a different publication to the table publication to try to prevent crosstalk on the update mechanism , but with no luck The advice I saw from the topics on this issue is not to rely on uncommented trace flags. So why am I getting an error? So if I have a table with a primary key of HistTranId. The duplicate key value is January. Some ultra-high-transaction-per-second systems use a different strategy where the locks are not used, but any errors are trapped and then converted to an update. Read the article at for best practices on asking questions.