Jedi,
> "The behavior of the auto-increment mechanism is not defined if a user gives
> a negative value to the column or if the value becomes bigger than the
> maximum integer that can be stored in the specified integer type."
> Does it mean that MySQL databases will definitely stop working at
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 10:43:41AM +0059, Jedi/Sector One wrote:
> Ok, except speculation on real life, there's no correct way to handle
> this.
Self-correction : it looks like MySQL returns ER_DUP_ENTRY when an
overflow occurs, even with InnoDB tables.
Great :)
--
__ /*- Frank DENI
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 06:35:07PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
> Did a little search of MARC on "auto-increment rollover", and it hit a
> thread from 1999. (This has been discussed many times before and since,
> of course. My choice of search term wasn't very good, I guess.)
> http://marc.theaimsgr
> I'm very new to MySQL (and SQL databases at large), so please
> apologize if I'm just missing an obvious point, or if it has
> already been discussed before.
Did a little search of MARC on "auto-increment rollover", and it hit a
thread from 1999. (This has been discussed many times before and si
I think you have no need to worry overflow if you use int type. You may have
added assurance if you also define it as unsigned. I just listed the max. of
different unsigned integer type for your reference
tinyint 255
smallint 65535
mediumint 16777215
int 4294967295
bigint 18446744073709551615
Hello.
I'm very new to MySQL (and SQL databases at large), so please apologize if
I'm just missing an obvious point, or if it has already been discussed before.
As I understand, auto-incremental columns (quite useful for primary
indexes) are always incremented. Even if rows are deleted, t