# updateSQL on a fresh database
**URL:** https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825
**Category:** General Discussion
**Created:** [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
**Posts on this page:** 17
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/1 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
I have an issue when using liquibase:updateSQL goal in maven.
I have a fresh database and this is the first time liquibase accesses the database.
When using mvn install liquibase creates the two tables DATABASECHANGELOG and DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK into the database,
and it also adds the creation of these tables to the migration script that is generated alongwith other changes that need to be applied to the database.
– Create Database Lock Table
CREATE TABLE `my_db`.`DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK` (`ID` INT NOT NULL, `LOCKED` TINYINT(1) NOT NULL, `LOCKGRANTED` DATETIME, `LOCKEDBY` VARCHAR(255), CONSTRAINT `PK_DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK` PRIMARY KEY (`ID`));
INSERT INTO `my_db`.`DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK` (`ID`, `LOCKED`) VALUES (1, 0);
SELECT LOCKED FROM `my_db`.`DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK` WHERE `ID`=1;
– Lock Database
UPDATE `my_db`.`DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK` SET `LOCKEDBY` = ‘192.168.1.110’, `LOCKGRANTED` = ‘2010-10-01 11:50:14.140’, `LOCKED` = 1 WHERE ID = 1;
– Create Database Change Log Table
CREATE TABLE `my_db`.`DATABASECHANGELOG` (`ID` VARCHAR(63) NOT NULL, `AUTHOR` VARCHAR(63) NOT NULL, `FILENAME` VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL, `DATEEXECUTED` DATETIME NOT NULL, `MD5SUM` VARCHAR(32), `DESCRIPTION` VARCHAR(255), `COMMENTS` VARCHAR(255), `TAG` VARCHAR(255), `LIQUIBASE` VARCHAR(10), CONSTRAINT `PK_DATABASECHANGELOG` PRIMARY KEY (`ID`, `AUTHOR`, `FILENAME`));
Obviously either 1 of the two should happen.
Thus when I use the migration script IT WILL throw an error as the two tables DATABASECHANGELOG and DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK already exist.
I know I can manually remove the above sql from the migration.sql file that has been generated. But I don’t want to do that inorder to keep the build automated.
Maybe I have missed something. Any help or solution would be greatly appreciated.
---
### Author:  [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/2 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
What version of liquibase are you running? 1.9.5?
Nathan
---
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/3 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
yes, 1.9.5.0
ideally it would be great if all is done via the migration script and there is no handshake with the db during the maven build process.
so updateSQL should only produce the migration script without creating any tables in the db.
---
### Author:  [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/4 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
Yes. That is a bug that is in 1.9 that has been fixed for the upcoming 2.0.
Nathan
---
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/5 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
Great!! could you tell me what is the fix that you have done?
So that I can accordingly modify my build.
Also, what is the expected release date for 2.0?
---
### Author:  [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/6 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
The change was wrapped up with the fairly major refactoring that I did for liquibase 2.0. The easiest approach for you in 1.9 may be a post-processing step in your maven script that reads the generated file in and strips out the bad SQL calls.
Nathan
---
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/7 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
Thanks.
Any idea for the release of 2.0?
---
### Author:  [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/8 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
I just released RC6, hopefully the last one. I’ll have to see what comes in for bug reports to know for sure, though.
Nathan
---
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/9 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
hi I tired 2.0-rc6 and it’s still doing the same as 1.9.5.0
it connects to the database, creates the two LOG tables
then writes them to the migration script.
I thought you mentioned that, this was a bug and had been removed in version 2.0?
or did I understand incorrectly?
let me know
ideally it would be great if all is done via the migration script and there is no handshake with the db during the maven build process.
so updateSQL should only produce the migration script without creating any tables in the db.
---
### Author:  [@oliver\_libutzki](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/oliver_libutzki)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/10 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
I have a similar problem. I use Liquibase 2.0.0 RC6 on a fresh (postgresql) database as well. Running in updateSQL mode, the modifications have not been executed on the database, but
as you can see the sql script generated by Liquibase tries to create the lock table twice.
-- Create Database Lock Table CREATE TABLE databasechangeloglock (ID INT NOT NULL, LOCKED BOOLEAN NOT NULL, LOCKGRANTED TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE, LOCKEDBY VARCHAR(255), CONSTRAINT PK\_DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK PRIMARY KEY (ID));
INSERT INTO databasechangeloglock (ID, LOCKED) VALUES (1, FALSE);
– Lock Database
– Create Database Change Log Table
CREATE TABLE databasechangelog (ID VARCHAR(63) NOT NULL, AUTHOR VARCHAR(63) NOT NULL, FILENAME VARCHAR(200) NOT NULL, DATEEXECUTED TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE NOT NULL, ORDEREXECUTED INT NOT NULL, EXECTYPE VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL, MD5SUM VARCHAR(35), DESCRIPTION VARCHAR(255), COMMENTS VARCHAR(255), TAG VARCHAR(255), LIQUIBASE VARCHAR(20), CONSTRAINT PK\_DATABASECHANGELOG PRIMARY KEY (ID, AUTHOR, FILENAME));
– Create Database Lock Table
CREATE TABLE databasechangeloglock (ID INT NOT NULL, LOCKED BOOLEAN NOT NULL, LOCKGRANTED TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE, LOCKEDBY VARCHAR(255), CONSTRAINT PK\_DATABASECHANGELOGLOCK PRIMARY KEY (ID));
INSERT INTO databasechangeloglock (ID, LOCKED) VALUES (1, FALSE);
---
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/11 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
hey nathan
any info on this?
---
### Author:  [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/12 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
It’s on my list to look at but haven’t gotten to yet. I created [http://liquibase.jira.com/browse/CORE-731](http://liquibase.jira.com/browse/CORE-731) to help track it.
Nathan
---
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/13 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
cool thanks Nathan.
It would be good if the statements are IN the migration script instead during execution of updateSQL
Thus, it might also be useful that you don’t need to provide db url, username and password for updateSQL.
What do you think?
---
### Author:  [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/14 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
Yes, that is what it should do. UpdateSQL should not actually create the tables, just add to the script that they need to be made.
Nathan
---
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/15 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
Great. so we wouldn’t need to provide db url and user/pass as well. right?
---
### Author:  [@nvoxland](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/nvoxland)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/16 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
You will still need an active database to connect to, since we use the database type and version to determine the correct SQL to generate. There is a feature request in jira to remove this for blank databases, but it will not be in 2.0.
Nathan
---
### Author:  [@andthereitgoes](https://forum.liquibase.org/u/andthereitgoes)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://forum.liquibase.org/t/updatesql-on-a-fresh-database/825/17 "2010-10-01T11:06:00Z")
surely the version and db type can be provided in the master change log file, isn’t it?