On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 10:39:45 +0000, Jonathan Stowe <j...@gellyfish.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 11:21 +0100, H.Merijn Brand wrote: > > On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 04:43:51 -0500, num...@deathwyrm.com wrote: > > > > > Philip Newton wrote: > > > > It even lets you mix the two with REPLACE INTO, which will do an > > > > INSERT, unless the record is already present, in which case it'll do > > > > an UPDATE instead. > > > > > > Rather, it does a DELETE then an INSERT. Which I'd rate slightly more > > > hateful, since it's another entry towards any auto-insert fields running > > > out of numbers. But it probably depends on the situation. > > > > And delete won't work if it is a referenced record, where update would. > > MySQL has constraints like that? If it doesn't, that is yet another DB hate for MySQL. I get more and more the (comfortable) feeling that we made the right decision in NOT using MySQL > I know the next version to the one that I may or may not have installed > probably does, but that's a different hate. > > > This is just screaming for cursing users. More hate -- H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/) using & porting perl 5.6.2, 5.8.x, 5.10.x on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00, 11.11, & 11.23, SuSE 10.1 & 10.2, AIX 5.2, and Cygwin. http://qa.perl.org http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
