Created attachment 144590 [details]
A simple database for testing
macOS High Sierra 10.13.6
Example: I have a table with records 1-30 with the primary key AutoValue set to Yes. I delete records 16-30. I don't want the next record I add to have a primary key of 31.
To reset this, I go to Tools > SQL and type in alter table TABLE_NAM alter FIELD_NAME restart with 15;
All is well, and I am able to add new records without a gap in the primary key sequence.
However, if I again delete some records and try to execute this SQL statement again, I receive the following error message:
1: firebird_sdbc error: *violation of PRIMARY or UNIQUE KEY constraint "INTEG_1" on table "TABLE_NAM" caused by 'alter table "TABLE_NAM" alter "FIELD_NAME" restart with NNNN;'
(NNNN being whatever number I input in my second attempt at restarting the sequence.)
The funny thing is, despite the error message, Base will do as I directed and restart the sequence once again.
Attached is the database I was using.
I get the following error message
1: firebird_sdbc error:
*Dynamic SQL Error
*SQL error code = -104
*Token unknown - line 1, column 42
Build ID: b8658c0e847afe1ed199c5fa7a2dd5d1d61ccbac
CPU threads: 4; OS: Mac OS X 10.13.6; UI render: default;
Locale: fr-FR (fr_FR.UTF-8); Calc: threaded
and the SQL command:
ALTER TABLE "Employee Table" ALTER FIELD "Employee ID" RESTART WITH 16
Sorry, my bad, I misread the SQL statement. Retrying with the correct expression, I can reproduce this.
(In reply to Alex Thurgood from comment #2)
> Sorry, my bad, I misread the SQL statement. Retrying with the correct
> expression, I can reproduce this.
and what's the correct expression ?
alter table "Employee Table" alter "Employee ID" restart with 15;
To make sure we're focusing on the bugs that affect our users today, LibreOffice QA is asking bug reporters and confirmers to retest open, confirmed bugs which have not been touched for over a year.
There have been thousands of bug fixes and commits since anyone checked on this bug report. During that time, it's possible that the bug has been fixed, or the details of the problem have changed. We'd really appreciate your help in getting confirmation that the bug is still present.
If you have time, please do the following:
Test to see if the bug is still present with the latest version of LibreOffice from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/
If the bug is present, please leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.
If the bug is NOT present, please set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED-WORKSFORME and leave a comment that includes the information from Help - About LibreOffice.
Please DO NOT
Update the version field
Reply via email (please reply directly on the bug tracker)
Set the bug's Status field to RESOLVED - FIXED (this status has a particular meaning that is not
appropriate in this case)
If you want to do more to help you can test to see if your issue is a REGRESSION. To do so:
1. Download and install oldest version of LibreOffice (usually 3.3 unless your bug pertains to a feature added after 3.3) from http://downloadarchive.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/
2. Test your bug
3. Leave a comment with your results.
4a. If the bug was present with 3.3 - set version to 'inherited from OOo';
4b. If the bug was not present in 3.3 - add 'regression' to keyword
Feel free to come ask questions or to say hello in our QA chat: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/#libreoffice-qa
Thank you for helping us make LibreOffice even better for everyone!
Created attachment 155164 [details]
a small example base with macro
I just tried this Sunday, 20/10/2019 and the bug is still present.
I use LibreOffice :
Version: 220.127.116.11 (x64)
Build ID: 23edc44b61b830b7d749943e020e96f5a7df63bf
Threads CPU : 4; OS : Windows 10.0; UI Render : par défaut; VCL: win;
Locale : fr-FR (fr_FR); Langue IHM : fr-FR