<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Migration to Firebird fails for a simple table" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117092#c10">Comment # 10</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Migration to Firebird fails for a simple table" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117092">bug 117092</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:gerhard.weydt@t-online.de" title="Gerhard Weydt <gerhard.weydt@t-online.de>"> Gerhard Weydt</a> <pre>I should perhaps give some information about this table. It is a single table isolated from a database because it's the one that caused trouble. The table describes the relation between the tables Mitglied and Jahr, hence its name. The relation is n:m, id is the primary key of Mitglied and Jahr is primary key of table Jahr. I needed a unique key consisting of these two fields, and as HSQLDB always wants a primary key, I chose not to create an additional column, but define this unique index as the primary key. In fact a unique index would have been sufficient. I tried to create a similar table in 6.1 with Firebird, with a unique index, which is explicitly allowed as one of the two ways to guarantee uniqueness, but the table isn't editable in Base. Now this could be the fault of Base and not of Firebird, because it's the same reaction as with a HSQLDB table without primary key. I will do some more testing and will probably enter that as another bug report, as it's not connected with migration.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>