topic Re: Referential integrity constraint violation in Alfresco Archive

Referential integrity constraint violation

fbrcls — Mon, 27 Oct 2014 14:19:16 GMT

Hi,I receive the following exception during my process execution:### Error updating database. Cause: org.h2.jdbc.JdbcSQLException: Referential integrity constraint violation: "ACT_FK_VAR_BYTEARRAY: PUBLIC.ACT_RU_VARIABLE FOREIGN KEY(BYTEARRAY_ID_) REFERENCES PUBLIC.ACT_GE_BYTEARRAY(ID_) ('20')"; SQ

Re: Referential integrity constraint violation

jbarrez — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:50:05 GMT

I'm not quite sure, but I think it is due to first adding null as value there and then replacing it. Is there any reason why you set null? Isn't the fact that the variable doesn't exist is enough?

Re: Referential integrity constraint violation

fbrcls — Tue, 28 Oct 2014 11:32:24 GMT

The service task calls a Java bean that can return null as value. That's the reason. Later in the process I will check on this value.

Re: Referential integrity constraint violation

jbarrez — Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:04:27 GMT

I got the use case, im just saying is that it is probably because the engine doesn't know the type when you pass in null. Try to not set the variable when your receive it, and use execution.getVariable() == null later on .

Re: Referential integrity constraint violation

johnm — Thu, 10 Mar 2016 17:11:47 GMT

Hi,
just adding my own experience, in case it helps some one (using activiti version 5.14). We had the same issue, but with a slightly different (but related) cause.

We have a process variable, that contains the stringified value of a java enum. In one of my integration tests the variable was accidentally (incorrectly) initialised to "" (empty string).

With this initialisation in place, eventually (some time later) the test would fail with the above violation. I think it relates somehow to it being a different java type on either occasion that activiti serializes it.

I believe it is essentially the same issues as described in https://activiti.atlassian.net/browse/ACT-1839.

One I removed the (incorrect) initialisation.. the problem went away.

hth's
John