In the MySQL documentation, we find this tantalizing statement: "It is possible that in the case of a duplicate-key error, a storage engine may perform the REPLACE as an update rather than a delete plus insert, but the semantics are the same. There are no user-visible effects other than a possible difference in how the storage engine increments Handler_xxx status variables."
Does anyone know what engine this is? I can't seem to find any info via google. If I could live with the choice of engine, I could make this work with no extra programming at all. Thanks, Jim McNeely On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:26 AM, Claudio Nanni wrote: > Only if you can change the application you could use INSERT....ON DUPLICATE > KEY UPDATE instead of REPLACE. > > Check Peter's post here: http://kae.li/iiigi > > Cheers > > Claudio > > > 2011/12/17 Jim McNeely <j...@newcenturydata.com> > >> Here is a fun one! >> >> I have a set of tables that get populated and changed a lot from lots of >> REPLACE statements. Now, I need an ON UPDATE trigger, but of course the >> trigger never gets triggered because REPLACES are all deletes and inserts. >> >> The trigger is going to populate another table as a queue for a system to >> do something whenever a particular field changes. >> >> SO, does anyone have some slick idea how to handle this little dilemma? I >> have an idea but I have a feeling there is something better out there. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Jim McNeely >> -- >> MySQL General Mailing List >> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql >> To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql >> >> > > > -- > Claudio
