On Apr 20, 2011, at 9:01 AM, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Tim Soderstrom > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Apr 19, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Olaf van der Spek wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Tim Soderstrom >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Perhaps I am misunderstanding you, but would a transaction not be what >>>> you're asking for? >>>> >>>> BEGIN; >>>> UPDATE ... ; >>>> UPDATE ... ; >>>> ... >>>> COMMIT; >>> >>> Eh, no. That'd still be 10000 update statements. >> >> Yes, but the writes will occur in a single transaction when you COMMIT so it >> should be faster than doing isolated UPDATEs. Use a prepared statement if >> you want to get even more speed out of it (though I suspect any speed >> improvements may be sort of marginal, and that's assumption not bounded by >> any particular benchmarks I have done that show differences either way). > > I'd prefer a solution that's as simple as the original.
Well, I mean, then use MySQL :) Those features were removed from Drizzle for a reason (and probably a very good one) but if you're application doesn't fit and you're not willing to modify it, then I would suggest you use something that fits your requirements. Tim _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
