On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 09:09:36PM -0500, Paul DuBois wrote: > At 18:52 -0500 6/5/03, Mark Rages wrote: > >According to the docs, single update statements are atomic. > > That's correct. > > Consider what happens if MySQL tries to update the first record and > then the second, version what happens if it tries to update the second > record and then the first. > > Then add an ORDER BY clause that will cause MySQL to update the records > in the order that doesn't result in duplicate keys. >
I didn't realize the physical order of the rows would be so important in a "relational" database. I am using "mysql Ver 11.18 Distrib 3.23.54, for pc-linux (i686)" so ORDER BY isn't going to work. I guess I'll have to do something like this: When I need to increment a group of rows: begin; update row N... update row 2... update row 1... commit; And when I need to decrement a group of rows: begin; update row 1... update row 2... update row N... commit; What a hack! Isn't there some better way? I guess I could forget about enforcing a consistent database and drop the unique constraint on the column. Regards, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
