Solved

Best way to get a unique key field value using PowerBuilder and SQL Server?

Posted on 2015-02-12
7
226 Views
Last Modified: 2015-02-23
The program that I have created using PowerBuilder has a database table with a unique key field.  It is not an identity field, but just an integer field.  I have always used a system to get a new unique value of having a separate table that holds the next number to be used, and then updates that table when the next value is needed from it.  This has worked well up until now.  There are several users of the program and they are entering data quickly.  More than one user is trying to grab a unique value at the same time and in some cases they get the same value, causing a database error when trying to save the data (problem with the primary key).  
At a job a long time ago I seem to recall using a SQL Server stored procedure maybe to grab that next value, because maybe it locked the table, or somehow provided a more reliable way of insuring the value is unique.  Anyhow, I can't find that code and am not sure how to approach it.  Does that process sound familiar to anyone?
Or, what method do you recommend to solve this issue?
0
Comment
Question by:lwillford
7 Comments
 
LVL 3

Accepted Solution

by:
kotukunui earned 350 total points
ID: 40606589
The best solution is to use SQL Server's "identity" feature.

If that is completely out of the question then maintaining your own sequence table can be made to work. Just remember to enclose the whole process in a database transaction to make sure the table is locked to other users until you get your value. Maybe encapsulate it into a stored procedure:

CREATE PROCEDURE [get_next_value] 
	@NewKeyValue INT OUTPUT 
AS
BEGIN

    BEGIN TRANSACTION

		SELECT @NewKeyValue = MAX(key_value) + 1 
		FROM sequence_table

		UPDATE sequence_table
		SET key_value = @NewKeyValue

	COMMIT TRANSACTION

	RETURN 
END

Open in new window


Put in a bit of error handling code just to make sure it all goes smoothly and the job is done.
0
 
LVL 75

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Perkins
ID: 40613414
If you are using at least SQL Server 2012 ou may want to look into using the Sequence object.
0
 
LVL 47

Expert Comment

by:Vitor Montalvão
ID: 40613710
Yes, Sequence is a very good idea.
How to create it:
CREATE SEQUENCE dbo.MySeqName
    START WITH 1
    INCREMENT BY 1

Open in new window


And how to increment:
SELECT NEXT VALUE FOR dbo.MySeqName

Open in new window


And how to verify the properties of a sequence:
SELECT * FROM sys.sequences WHERE name = 'MySeqName'

Open in new window

0
The Eight Noble Truths of Backup and Recovery

How can IT departments tackle the challenges of a Big Data world? This white paper provides a roadmap to success and helps companies ensure that all their data is safe and secure, no matter if it resides on-premise with physical or virtual machines or in the cloud.

 

Author Comment

by:lwillford
ID: 40614904
All - we are still rocking it old school here with SQL Server 2005, so Sequence would not work.  Good to know about for future work though.

kotukunui - thanks for the info.  I believe that is exactly what I used to use.  My original code is escaping me now - probably lost during job changes!  I did create a stored procedure and I can execute it successfully.  Refresh my memory on one more point... does encapsulating the process in a stored procedure put a lock on the table?    
Just wondering if there is anything else I need to do to ensure a unique value other than making the stored procedure call.
0
 
LVL 47

Expert Comment

by:Vitor Montalvão
ID: 40616017
does encapsulating the process in a stored procedure put a lock on the table?    
No.

I would use a solution with a simple UPDATE so it will lock the row:
UPDATE sequence_table 	SET key_value = key_value+1

Open in new window

0
 

Author Comment

by:lwillford
ID: 40625889
Vitor - So if my stored procedure in SQL Server contains the update, I will not need to do any additional locking on the table or worry about two people getting the same value from it?
0
 
LVL 47

Assisted Solution

by:Vitor Montalvão
Vitor Montalvão earned 150 total points
ID: 40625921
UPDATE command already locks the records that are being changed so no one can update the same record at same time.
Also, during an update no one are able to read the records being changed unless they use locking hints but then they will read the old values and not the new ones.
0

Featured Post

PRTG Network Monitor: Intuitive Network Monitoring

Network Monitoring is essential to ensure that computer systems and network devices are running. Use PRTG to monitor LANs, servers, websites, applications and devices, bandwidth, virtual environments, remote systems, IoT, and many more. PRTG is easy to set up & use.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

The Delta outage: 650 cancelled flights, more than 1200 delayed flights, thousands of frustrated customers, tens of millions of dollars in damages – plus untold reputational damage to one of the world’s most trusted airlines. All due to a catastroph…
For both online and offline retail, the cross-channel business is the most recent pattern in the B2C trade space.
Viewers will learn how to use the UPDATE and DELETE statements to change or remove existing data from their tables. Make a table: Update a specific column given a specific row using the UPDATE statement: Remove a set of values using the DELETE s…
The viewer will be introduced to the member functions push_back and pop_back of the vector class. The video will teach the difference between the two as well as how to use each one along with its functionality.

776 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question