I hate to pry (snoop) but my curiosity is just going nuts! If this is a sensitive issue, please ignore my questions....
What are you doing that requires you to mass-replace so many records so often? Are they design or processing requirements (or both) that require this kind of bulk exchange of records? How open are you to the idea of possibly changing the way you deal with these records? I would feel horrible if after all this time and all of the brains that subscribe to this list that you would end this thread without some kind of improvement to your situation. Respectfully, Shawn Green Database Administrator Unimin Corporation - Spruce Pine matt ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/13/2004 03:26:57 PM: > matt ryan wrote: > > > > >> Replace does a delete followed by an insert. > >> > > Ahh, I'm testing innodb on our tables with this problem > > > Doh another problem > > innodb has no merge option, I have too much data, and the only way to > deal with it, is partition the data and then tie it together with merge > views. > > Unfortunatly innodb will not work for me :( > > > Anybody know if SQL Server desktop supports what I need? I know oracle > does, but the cost is an issue, maxdb costs too much too. > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
