"H.Merijn Brand" <h.m.br...@xs4all.nl> writes:
> 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.
> This is just screaming for cursing users. More hate
Yeah, if MySQL actually had referential integrity then this would be a
nasty problem. Of course, the clever folks putting it together were
kind enough to anticipate this ... and just not bother implementing
those inconvenient checks at all.
MySQL, friend of us all.
Daniel
You know what I hate? I hate the way that people keep coming back to
the idea of some sort of "make the filesystem a database" magic.
You know what that would look like? MySQL. Oh, yeah, for sure, because
people don't want their file storage telling them that they can't delete
or rename a file for whatever reason.
--
X Windows is the Iran-Contra of graphical user interfaces: a tragedy of
political compromises, entangled alliances, marketing hype, and just plain
greed. X Windows is to memory as Ronald Reagan was to money.
-- The Unix Haters Handbook
