Interesting bug/oversight
Just encountered an interesting issue. I use DNS names instead of IPs in mysql grants. Yes, I'm aware of the performance impact, that's not an issue. I just found out through failing logins that a server was still connecting to an old DNS server, and properly updated the resolv.conf. Commandline host lookups then returned correct results. However, even after repeated flush hosts commands, the MySQL kept returning wrong results. Only after a full restart did it pick itself up and start doing proper lookups. I strongly suspect that this is due to it internally caching the nameserver, too, and not refreshing that along with the host cache on a flush hosts command. Can anyone confirm this is the case, and wether or not a bug has been logged about it? I can't seem to find one. -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
Re: Interesting bug/oversight
Johan, Consider also the DNS TTL. If you flush hosts in MySQL it'll ask again the OS to resolve a name , but if that is still in the DNS cache it could return that 'old' value instead of querying the newly updated NS. I'm not sure thou, may be test by restarting the name server cache deamon */etc/rc.d/init.d/nscd restart * Claudio 2011/5/19 Johan De Meersman vegiv...@tuxera.be Just encountered an interesting issue. I use DNS names instead of IPs in mysql grants. Yes, I'm aware of the performance impact, that's not an issue. I just found out through failing logins that a server was still connecting to an old DNS server, and properly updated the resolv.conf. Commandline host lookups then returned correct results. However, even after repeated flush hosts commands, the MySQL kept returning wrong results. Only after a full restart did it pick itself up and start doing proper lookups. I strongly suspect that this is due to it internally caching the nameserver, too, and not refreshing that along with the host cache on a flush hosts command. Can anyone confirm this is the case, and wether or not a bug has been logged about it? I can't seem to find one. -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel -- Claudio
Re: Interesting bug/oversight
- Original Message - From: Claudio Nanni claudio.na...@gmail.com Consider also the DNS TTL. That should be irrelevant when changing DNS servers :-) If you flush hosts in MySQL it'll ask again the OS to resolve a name , but if that is still in the DNS cache it could return that 'old' value instead of querying the newly updated NS. I know, but it's another DNS server so not applicable. Also, I did verify on the commandline :-) I'm not sure thou, may be test by restarting the name server cache deamon /etc/rc.d/init.d/nscd restart Not running local caching. The host only runs MySQL which has it's own cache, so that would be a useless layer. Nice try :-) -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel
Re: Interesting bug/oversight
In the last episode (May 19), Johan De Meersman said: I use DNS names instead of IPs in mysql grants. Yes, I'm aware of the performance impact, that's not an issue. I just found out through failing logins that a server was still connecting to an old DNS server, and properly updated the resolv.conf. Commandline host lookups then returned correct results. However, even after repeated flush hosts commands, the MySQL kept returning wrong results. Only after a full restart did it pick itself up and start doing proper lookups. I strongly suspect that this is due to it internally caching the nameserver, too, and not refreshing that along with the host cache on a flush hosts command. Can anyone confirm this is the case, and wether or not a bug has been logged about it? I can't seem to find one. I doubt that mysql calls anything other than gethostbyname() or getaddrinfo(), so your behaviour is probably dependant on whatever OS you are running and how often its local resolver re-checks resolv.conf. Usually that's only once when a program starts. If you're running bind, nscd, or some other intermediate DNS client on your machine, bouncing that should work. If not, you'll need to bounce mysql. -- Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Interesting bug/oversight
- Original Message - From: Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com I doubt that mysql calls anything other than gethostbyname() or getaddrinfo(), so your behaviour is probably dependant on whatever OS you are running and how often its local resolver re-checks resolv.conf. Usually that's only once when a program starts. If you're running bind, nscd, or some other intermediate DNS client on your machine, bouncing that should work. If not, you'll need to bounce mysql. Yep, that was my first though, too. The documentation also confirms that the daemon calls gethostbyaddr() and gethostbyname(). However, as I said, it failed to switch to the new nameserver upon changing the resolv.conf, and didn't until I kicked the daemon in the olives. Production machine also pointed to the wrong DNS server, but since I can't just restart that (badly written Java apps go boom) it still hasn't switched. Adding the correct entry to /etc/hosts does work around the issue, further confirming that yes, it probably does use the standard resolver. Random *nix people in the meantime confirm that this is not only a MySQL problem; although I can't help but wonder if it would be possible to work around it in the flush hosts procedure. -- Bier met grenadyn Is als mosterd by den wyn Sy die't drinkt, is eene kwezel Hy die't drinkt, is ras een ezel -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=arch...@jab.org
Re: Interesting SQL Query - Total and Grouped Counts together?
Baron, Thanks very much for that simple but very effective solution. I altered your SQL slightly, the final SQL looks like this: SELECT domain, count(*) AS 'count all', SUM(IF(mime = 'text/html', 1, 0)) AS 'count text', SUM(IF(mime LIKE 'image/%', 1, 0)) AS 'count image' FROM tableA GROUP BY domain ORDER BY domain Thanks again, Imran Chaudhry -- Atom Database A Custom Database Designed for Your Business [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://atomdatabase.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Interesting SQL Query - Total and Grouped Counts together?
I'm wondering if any of you can assist with an interesing SQL query. I have a single table within a database, the relevant fields of which are defined as: CREATE TABLE tableA ( domain text, mime text ); Where domain is a domain, such as: google.com emeraldcity.oohisntitgreen.com teddybears.com An example of rows might be: google.com, text/html google.com, image/gif google.com, image/jpeg google.com, text/html teddybears.com, text/html teddybears.com, image/png google.com, text/html google.com, image/png ... mime is defined as having entries such as: text/html image/png image/jpg image/gif application/x-tar What I am after doing with this table is writing an SQL query which produces a count of all domains where the mime is equal to text/html and next to that, a total count for that domain where the mime type is image/* -- so for example, I might expect the returned resultset to look like: Domain domaincount Mimecountimages - google.com120 12 emeraldcity. 200 40 teddybears.com 11 2 So far, we've considered and tried using a same-table join, various group-by and rollup ideas, but am unable to come up with anything which will produce the above in ONE row for each domain. Any advice and assistance would be great! -- Atom Database A Custom Database Designed for Your Business [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://atomdatabase.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting SQL Query - Total and Grouped Counts together?
Hi, Imran Chaudhry wrote: I'm wondering if any of you can assist with an interesing SQL query. I have a single table within a database, the relevant fields of which are defined as: CREATE TABLE tableA ( domain text, mime text ); Where domain is a domain, such as: google.com emeraldcity.oohisntitgreen.com teddybears.com An example of rows might be: google.com, text/html google.com, image/gif google.com, image/jpeg google.com, text/html teddybears.com, text/html teddybears.com, image/png google.com, text/html google.com, image/png ... mime is defined as having entries such as: text/html image/png image/jpg image/gif application/x-tar What I am after doing with this table is writing an SQL query which produces a count of all domains where the mime is equal to text/html and next to that, a total count for that domain where the mime type is image/* -- so for example, I might expect the returned resultset to look like: Domain domaincount Mimecountimages - google.com120 12 emeraldcity. 200 40 teddybears.com 11 2 So far, we've considered and tried using a same-table join, various group-by and rollup ideas, but am unable to come up with anything which will produce the above in ONE row for each domain. Any advice and assistance would be great! Try IF or CASE expressions: SELECT foo, count(*), sum(case when foo = 'bar' then 1 else 0 end) FROM tbl GROUP BY foo Baron -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting SQL Query - Total and Grouped Counts together?
On Thu, April 26, 2007 18:38, Baron Schwartz wrote: Hi, Imran Chaudhry wrote: I'm wondering if any of you can assist with an interesing SQL query. I have a single table within a database, the relevant fields of Try IF or CASE expressions: SELECT foo, count(*), sum(case when foo = 'bar' then 1 else 0 end) FROM tbl GROUP BY foo Baron Cool, it's actually working :) I've been looking for something like that before. SELECT * FROM tablea t order by domain,mime; domainmime -- 'google.com', 'image/gif' 'google.com', 'image/jpeg' 'google.com', 'image/png' 'google.com', 'text/html' 'google.com', 'text/html' 'google.com', 'text/html' 'teddybears.com', 'image/png' 'teddybears.com', 'text/html' SELECT domain, count(*) `all`, sum(case when mime = 'text/html' then 1 else 0 end) html, sum(case when mime like 'image/%' then 1 else 0 end) image FROM tablea GROUP BY domain; domain all html image - 'google.com', 6, 3, 3 'teddybears.com', 2, 1, 1 -- Later Mogens Melander +45 40 85 71 38 +66 870 133 224 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: interesting benchmark at tweakers.net
On 12/19/06, David Sparks wrote: I noticed an interesting benchmark at tweakers.net that shows mysql not scaling very well on hyperthreading and multicore cpus (see links at end of email). Does anyone know what engine they are using for their tests? (Innodb, myisam, berkdb heheh) InnoDB, the first installment of the series of tests had the following configuration: http://tweakers.net/reviews/620/2 And I would venture that these results are not because they did horrible things to their MySQL configuration. On the second installment of the series http://tweakers.net/reviews/633/7 engineers from Sun were brought in and they consulted with engineers from MySQL and on the last installment Peter Zaitsev of the MySQL Performance Blog did a review of their configuration: http://tweakers.net/reviews/660/6 In fact they seem to show that postgres is a faster db overall. This goes against my personal experience where I benchmarked a real world app we have and found mysql 10 to 100 times faster In my experience such a large performance difference between PostgreSQL and MySQL can always be attributed to some obvious difference in the internals. For instance because PostgreSQL can use indexes on datatypes that MySQL can not (or doesn't even have) or because queries are very repetitive and MySQL can use the query cache which PostgreSQL does not have. Without such obvious factors I am very inclined to attribute differences of the magnitude you are claiming to a difference in knowledge of the databases at hand. Jochem -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: interesting benchmark at tweakers.net
Jochem van Dieten wrote: On 12/19/06, David Sparks wrote: I noticed an interesting benchmark at tweakers.net that shows mysql not scaling very well on hyperthreading and multicore cpus (see links at end of email). Does anyone know what engine they are using for their tests? (Innodb, myisam, berkdb heheh) InnoDB, the first installment of the series of tests had the following configuration: http://tweakers.net/reviews/620/2 I don't see where they say what engine they use, I just see that they slightly tuned up a few Innodb parameters. They also tuned up myisam parameters so the configuration section doesn't really answer that question. And I would venture that these results are not because they did horrible things to their MySQL configuration. On the second installment of the series http://tweakers.net/reviews/633/7 engineers from Sun were brought in and they consulted with engineers from MySQL and on the last installment Peter Zaitsev of the MySQL Performance Blog did a review of their configuration: http://tweakers.net/reviews/660/6 So its confirmed that mysql has serious problems scaling on concurrent hardware (both hyperthreading, multicore, and multiple cpu). This sucks ... our newest DB server is 2x dualcore. ds -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
interesting benchmark at tweakers.net
I noticed an interesting benchmark at tweakers.net that shows mysql not scaling very well on hyperthreading and multicore cpus (see links at end of email). Does anyone know what engine they are using for their tests? (Innodb, myisam, berkdb heheh) In fact they seem to show that postgres is a faster db overall. This goes against my personal experience where I benchmarked a real world app we have and found mysql 10 to 100 times faster, and that was ignoring both postgres poor connection performance and the hideous vacuum rigmarole. But that was 2 years ago, maybe postgres performance has finally caught up? Any other recent benchmark links? http://tweakers.net/reviews/657 http://tweakers.net/reviews/646/10 ds -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
interesting date/time query issue
I have data that is broken into anything from 30 sec to 15 minute time series (with a DATETIME field). I need to transform all of this into 15 minute data. Does anyone know off the top of their head if there a way I could use GROUP BY to make this happen? Nothing I have tried thus far has worked but it seems as though all of the pieces are there, but there does not appear to be any way to do the comparison in a way that GROUP BY can use it. Otherwise I can write a script to select all of the data and loop over it but you can see why I want to do this in SQL. Thanks, Tom -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting Query Problem
Hello. Perhaps this will work (depends on the version of MySQL you're using): select question_id , count(*) from Records group by question_id having question_id not in ( select distinct question_id from Records r where member_id = @current_member_id); @current_member_id equals to current_user G G wrote: Hello, I have a simple Records table with two columns, member_id and question_id. The object of the query is to retrieve the question_id, as well as how many times it's been answered - as long as the current user hasn't answered it (member_id). So, the query shouldn't return any question_id's (and counts) if it has been answered by the current user. Right now I have this: SELECT question_id, COUNT(*) as times_answered FROM records GROUP BY question_id; I've tried throwing in different variants of 'WHERE member_id != X', but all that seems to return is the count of questions answered, minus the amount of times the particular user has answered them. For example, if user X has answered a question that had been answered another 50 times, my query will still return that question_id, but with a count of 49. Your help is appreciated in advance. Thanks! Kind Regards, Gerald Glickman G2 Innovations.com, Inc. http://www.g2innovations.com http://www.g2innovations.com/ -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.NET http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Gleb Paharenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.NET ___/ www.mysql.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting Query Problem
Hi, An alternative for any MySQL version (from 3.23.??) would be: SELECT r1.question_id,count(r1.member_id) FROM Records r1 LEFT JOIN Records r2 ON r1.question_id=r2.question_id AND r2.member_id=member_id WHERE r2.question_id IS NULL; member_id must be the member name. mpneves On Thursday 19 January 2006 11:18, Gleb Paharenko wrote: Hello. Perhaps this will work (depends on the version of MySQL you're using): select question_id , count(*) from Records group by question_id having question_id not in ( select distinct question_id from Records r where member_id = @current_member_id); @current_member_id equals to current_user G G wrote: Hello, I have a simple Records table with two columns, member_id and question_id. The object of the query is to retrieve the question_id, as well as how many times it's been answered - as long as the current user hasn't answered it (member_id). So, the query shouldn't return any question_id's (and counts) if it has been answered by the current user. Right now I have this: SELECT question_id, COUNT(*) as times_answered FROM records GROUP BY question_id; I've tried throwing in different variants of 'WHERE member_id != X', but all that seems to return is the count of questions answered, minus the amount of times the particular user has answered them. For example, if user X has answered a question that had been answered another 50 times, my query will still return that question_id, but with a count of 49. Your help is appreciated in advance. Thanks! Kind Regards, Gerald Glickman G2 Innovations.com, Inc. http://www.g2innovations.com http://www.g2innovations.com/ -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.NET http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Gleb Paharenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.NET ___/ www.mysql.com -- AvidMind, Consultadoria Informática, Unipessoal, Lda. Especialistas em OpenSource http://www.avidmind.net OBC2BIP -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Interesting Query Problem
Hello, I have a simple Records table with two columns, member_id and question_id. The object of the query is to retrieve the question_id, as well as how many times it's been answered - as long as the current user hasn't answered it (member_id). So, the query shouldn't return any question_id's (and counts) if it has been answered by the current user. Right now I have this: SELECT question_id, COUNT(*) as times_answered FROM records GROUP BY question_id; I've tried throwing in different variants of 'WHERE member_id != X', but all that seems to return is the count of questions answered, minus the amount of times the particular user has answered them. For example, if user X has answered a question that had been answered another 50 times, my query will still return that question_id, but with a count of 49. Your help is appreciated in advance. Thanks! Kind Regards, Gerald Glickman G2 Innovations.com, Inc. http://www.g2innovations.com http://www.g2innovations.com/
Interesting: maximum size of status variable
Greetings, I've been keeping track of Bytes_sent and Bytes_received for a while in the fashion of 'mysqlreport': divide those values over Uptime in order to obtain a data rate (bytes/sec). The resulting graphs look like this: | | | /| /| |/ |/ | | / | / | / | / | /| / |/ |/ +-- time - Bewildered I started troubleshooting, and I think I have found the cause: the value of Bytes_* has a maximum value of around 4GB, or the size of an INT UNSIGNED. Can anyone confirm that this is the max value for status variables? -- Martijn -- The information contained in this communication and any attachments is confidential and may be privileged, and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. ASML is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission of the information contained in this communication, nor for any delay in its receipt. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting: maximum size of status variable
Martijn van den Burg wrote: Greetings, I've been keeping track of Bytes_sent and Bytes_received for a while in the fashion of 'mysqlreport': divide those values over Uptime in order to obtain a data rate (bytes/sec). The resulting graphs look like this: | | | /| /| |/ |/ | | / | / | / | / | /| / |/ |/ +-- time - Bewildered I started troubleshooting, and I think I have found the cause: the value of Bytes_* has a maximum value of around 4GB, or the size of an INT UNSIGNED. Can anyone confirm that this is the max value for status variables? -- Martijn Yes, bytes_sent and bytes_received are type unsigned long (4 bytes), so max value is 4.2G. -Daniel -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Interesting Hardware Article
Anandtech has an interesting article (http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2447) on hardware for Linux database servers. Some very interesting conclusions: 1) Moving to 64-bit MySQL on a 64-bit Xeon actually decreases performance by about 12% on average, while an Opteron running 64-bit MySQL gets a 32% performance increase. 2) Innodb scales better (obviously) 3) A server with one CPU that has a dual-core Opteron (the X2 CPUs) is faster than a server with two single-core CPUs. 4) SuSE SLES 9.1 outperforms Gentoo by about 12% I would take Anandtech with a grain of salt - this isn't what they normally do, and I can't verify their benchmarking was reasonably accurate (surprised at the disks they used - one ATA, one SCSI). David. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting Hardware Article
On 18/06/2005, at 4:28 AM, David Griffiths wrote: Anandtech has an interesting article (http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2447) on hardware for Linux database servers. Some very interesting conclusions: 1) Moving to 64-bit MySQL on a 64-bit Xeon actually decreases performance by about 12% on average, while an Opteron running 64-bit MySQL gets a 32% performance increase. 2) Innodb scales better (obviously) 3) A server with one CPU that has a dual-core Opteron (the X2 CPUs) is faster than a server with two single-core CPUs. 4) SuSE SLES 9.1 outperforms Gentoo by about 12% I would take Anandtech with a grain of salt - this isn't what they normally do, and I can't verify their benchmarking was reasonably accurate (surprised at the disks they used - one ATA, one SCSI). Umm the benchmarks between XEON and Opteron have been around since the Opteron came out. Typically I would say its been tweaked for a unix environment whereas the XEON has been tweaked for a windoze one ;) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting Hardware Article
probably biased towards AMD. money is a powerful thing, which is why it should be taken with a grain of salt as you stated. i would guess the 12% decrease on 64bit xeon and 32% increase on 64bit opteron is BS. why didn't they try itanium instead? ;) David Griffiths wrote: Anandtech has an interesting article (http://www.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=2447) on hardware for Linux database servers. Some very interesting conclusions: 1) Moving to 64-bit MySQL on a 64-bit Xeon actually decreases performance by about 12% on average, while an Opteron running 64-bit MySQL gets a 32% performance increase. 2) Innodb scales better (obviously) 3) A server with one CPU that has a dual-core Opteron (the X2 CPUs) is faster than a server with two single-core CPUs. 4) SuSE SLES 9.1 outperforms Gentoo by about 12% I would take Anandtech with a grain of salt - this isn't what they normally do, and I can't verify their benchmarking was reasonably accurate (surprised at the disks they used - one ATA, one SCSI). David. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmmm, verrry interesting on big summation
Harrison, Taking your suggestion and building a combined key of member_id and pts_awarded the query took 17 mins create table pts_sumC_snap select member_id, count(1) count, sum(pts_awarded) points from pts_awarded_snap group by member_id; Query OK, 12488780 rows affected (16 min 50.21 sec) Records: 12488780 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0 Building the combined index took 1 hr 12 mins for the total creation time of approximately 1.5 hours. Without any kind of index on the pts_awarded_snap table the query took 7 hours to build a similar summation table. When I built the index on member_id, the query took 31 hours to complete utilizing the index that took more time to build. This data set holds 776723372 rows. Bottom line, there appears to quite a difference between how fast indicies can be read and processed than how long it takes to process the index and data combination. Brad Eacker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: interesting....BUG? COMMENTS?
Nestor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I send this last week and no one commented. Nestor, I've already asked you check value of sql_select_limit variable: SELECT @@session.sql_select_limit; Is SELECT * FROM course_eng exact query that you use? Has anyone run into this simmilar problem? -Original Message- From: Nestor Florez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:28 AM I have a php web application that has an admin page for inserting course records and one for selecting course records and a client page for selecting course record. In the admin side I insert records with an insert into Course_Eng and I select records witha select * from Course_Eng In the client side I get records witha select * from course_eng The kicker is that my client webbased select will only return 40 records (no limits are being use) but my admin webbased select returns 200 records. I SSH into the server and when I check the table desc course_eng look good. After scraching my head several times I found out that if manually typed on the server my select statement as select * from Course_Eng I would get 200 records back, but if I typed select * from course_eng I would get 40 records. Is this a bug? or a feature? Whe I did a show tables;, the table name is course_eng ther was no table Course_Eng If I remember correct in the SQL syntax the case should not matter? I change all my inserts and selects to Course_Eng that seem to work and returned me the most records My server is a Mac OS 10.2 and the Mysql version is server version: 4.0.16 Any ideas? -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net ___/ www.mysql.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: interesting....BUG?
Victoria, The seleect statements that I wrote is what I use. And if there was a limit should the limit be used in both o f my select? Database changed mysql SELECT @@session.sql_select_limit; ++ | @@session.sql_select_limit | ++ | 4294967295 | ++ 1 row in set (0.02 sec) *- Rhino, I enter the command manually from Myusql after I have changed databases ( use database) and the answers where different. I catell you that show tables only shows : mysql show tables; +-+ | Tables_in_ecrop | +-+ | course_eng | | course_esp | +-+ I have it working by switching all my commands to access Course_Eng but I was just wondering about this. Thanks for your help :-) Nestor :-) Néstor A. Flórez Victoria Reznichenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3/22/2004 2:06:55 AM Nestor Florez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a php web application that has an admin page for inserting course = records and one for selecting course records=20 and a client page for selecting course record. =20 In the admin side I insert records with an insert into Course_Eng and I = select records witha select * from Course_Eng In the client side I get records witha select * from course_eng The kicker is that my client webbased select will only return 40 records = (no limits are being use) but my admin webbased select returns 200 records. I SSH into the server and when I = check the table desc course_eng look good. After scraching my head several times I found out that if manually typed = on the server my select statement as select * from Course_Eng I would get 200 records = back, but if I typed select * from course_eng I would get 40 records. Is this a bug? or a feature? Whe I did a show tables;, the table name is course_eng ther was no = table Course_Eng If I remember correct in the SQL syntax the case should not matter? I change all my inserts and selects to Course_Eng that seem to work and = returned me the most records My server is a Mac OS 10.2 and the Mysql version is server version: = 4.0.16 SELECT * FROM course_eng is the exact query that you use? Check with SELECT @@session.sql_select_limit that it's not SQL_SELECT_LIMIT issue. -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net ___/ www.mysql.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: interesting....BUG? COMMENTS?
I send this last week and no one commented. Has anyone run into this simmilar problem? -Original Message- From: Nestor Florez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:28 AM I have a php web application that has an admin page for inserting course records and one for selecting course records and a client page for selecting course record. In the admin side I insert records with an insert into Course_Eng and I select records witha select * from Course_Eng In the client side I get records witha select * from course_eng The kicker is that my client webbased select will only return 40 records (no limits are being use) but my admin webbased select returns 200 records. I SSH into the server and when I check the table desc course_eng look good. After scraching my head several times I found out that if manually typed on the server my select statement as select * from Course_Eng I would get 200 records back, but if I typed select * from course_eng I would get 40 records. Is this a bug? or a feature? Whe I did a show tables;, the table name is course_eng ther was no table Course_Eng If I remember correct in the SQL syntax the case should not matter? I change all my inserts and selects to Course_Eng that seem to work and returned me the most records My server is a Mac OS 10.2 and the Mysql version is server version: 4.0.16 Any ideas? thanks, Néstor A. Flórez --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.644 / Virus Database: 412 - Release Date: 3/26/2004 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: interesting....BUG? COMMENTS?
It's been my experience that table names are case-sensitive in MySQL; you must get the case exactly right to get data from the desired table. Mind you, that is based on SQL issued at the command line. Your driver may make case irrelevant for access from clients. If your table name is 'course_eng', any select * query you do against it with the same where/group by should give you the same result regardless of whether you are running the query at the command line or from a program. The strangest part of what you describe is that select * from Course_eng returns *any* rows at all since you say this table does not exist; I have always gotten a clear error message if I asked for rows from a table which isn't there. Is it possible you *do* have a Course_eng table? Is it possible that the Course_eng table is in a different database and your program is reading it from a different database? For instance, if your real table is course_eng and it is in database Foo, could you have another table called Course_eng (note the uppercase 'C') in database Bar? If so, then maybe your program is doing a use Bar and then select * from Course_eng while you are doing use Foo and then select * from course_eng? I know that's probably far-fetched but it would tend to explain the symptoms. Or could you have course_eng and Course_eng in the same database, one with 200 rows and one with 40 rows but a bug in MySQL is keeping you from seeing one of them?? Rhino - Original Message - From: Nestor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 7:38 PM Subject: RE: interestingBUG? COMMENTS? I send this last week and no one commented. Has anyone run into this simmilar problem? -Original Message- From: Nestor Florez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:28 AM I have a php web application that has an admin page for inserting course records and one for selecting course records and a client page for selecting course record. In the admin side I insert records with an insert into Course_Eng and I select records witha select * from Course_Eng In the client side I get records witha select * from course_eng The kicker is that my client webbased select will only return 40 records (no limits are being use) but my admin webbased select returns 200 records. I SSH into the server and when I check the table desc course_eng look good. After scraching my head several times I found out that if manually typed on the server my select statement as select * from Course_Eng I would get 200 records back, but if I typed select * from course_eng I would get 40 records. Is this a bug? or a feature? Whe I did a show tables;, the table name is course_eng ther was no table Course_Eng If I remember correct in the SQL syntax the case should not matter? I change all my inserts and selects to Course_Eng that seem to work and returned me the most records My server is a Mac OS 10.2 and the Mysql version is server version: 4.0.16 Any ideas? thanks, Néstor A. Flórez --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.644 / Virus Database: 412 - Release Date: 3/26/2004 -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: interesting....BUG?
Nestor Florez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a php web application that has an admin page for inserting course = records and one for selecting course records=20 and a client page for selecting course record. =20 In the admin side I insert records with an insert into Course_Eng and I = select records witha select * from Course_Eng In the client side I get records witha select * from course_eng The kicker is that my client webbased select will only return 40 records = (no limits are being use) but my admin webbased select returns 200 records. I SSH into the server and when I = check the table desc course_eng look good. After scraching my head several times I found out that if manually typed = on the server my select statement as select * from Course_Eng I would get 200 records = back, but if I typed select * from course_eng I would get 40 records. Is this a bug? or a feature? Whe I did a show tables;, the table name is course_eng ther was no = table Course_Eng If I remember correct in the SQL syntax the case should not matter? I change all my inserts and selects to Course_Eng that seem to work and = returned me the most records My server is a Mac OS 10.2 and the Mysql version is server version: = 4.0.16 SELECT * FROM course_eng is the exact query that you use? Check with SELECT @@session.sql_select_limit that it's not SQL_SELECT_LIMIT issue. -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net ___/ www.mysql.com -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
interesting....BUG?
People, I have a php web application that has an admin page for inserting course records and one for selecting course records and a client page for selecting course record. In the admin side I insert records with an insert into Course_Eng and I select records witha select * from Course_Eng In the client side I get records witha select * from course_eng The kicker is that my client webbased select will only return 40 records (no limits are being use) but my admin webbased select returns 200 records. I SSH into the server and when I check the table desc course_eng look good. After scraching my head several times I found out that if manually typed on the server my select statement as select * from Course_Eng I would get 200 records back, but if I typed select * from course_eng I would get 40 records. Is this a bug? or a feature? Whe I did a show tables;, the table name is course_eng ther was no table Course_Eng If I remember correct in the SQL syntax the case should not matter? I change all my inserts and selects to Course_Eng that seem to work and returned me the most records My server is a Mac OS 10.2 and the Mysql version is server version: 4.0.16 Any ideas? thanks, Nestor :-) Néstor A. Flórez -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Very interesting MySQL usage Article on ComputerWorld website
Hi group, I just read the first news item on the MySQL website and thought some of you might need to read about it as it is very interesting for those who use MySQL for hi end transactions. This gave me more powers in choosing MySQL as my favorite DBMS. Just go to http://www.mysql.com or http://www.computerworld.com/databasetopics/data/software/story/0,10801,85900,00.html?SKC=software-85900 to read the ComputerWorld article. It also compares prices at the end of the article. Thanks, __ NZEYIMANA Emery Fabrice NEFA Computing Services, Inc. P.O. Box 5078 Kigali Office Phone: +250-51 11 06 Office Fax: +250-50 15 19 Mobile: +250-08517768 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nefacomp.net/
Interesting !?!
Hello mysql, We make updade of database from 3.23.49 to 4.0.12 Before update we can see host of connections /see Example1/. After update every connections looks like they made from local host /see Example2/, but they did not. Any explanation of effect?!? Example1: mysql show processlist; +-+++---+-+--+---+--+ | Id | User | Host | db| Command | Time | State | Info | +-+++---+-+--+---+--+ | 1037596 | authengine | local.lozenec-sf.link.noc.sf.panda | squidauth | Sleep | 7081 | | NULL | | 1037597 | authengine | local.lozenec-sf.link.noc.sf.panda | squidauth | Sleep | 7081 | | NULL | | 1037622 | authengine | peer.hq.link.noc.sf.panda | squidauth | Sleep | 6751 | | NULL | | 1038112 | root | localhost | NULL | Query | 0 | NULL | show processlist | +-+++---+-+--+---+--+ 4 rows in set (0.00 sec) Your MySQL connection id is .. to server version: 3.23.49 Example2: mysql show processlist; ++---++--+-+--+---+--+ | Id | User | Host | db | Command | Time | State | Info | ++---++--+-+--+---+--+ | 1 | pbxengine | localhost:2277 | pbx | Sleep | 66 | | NULL | | 2 | pbxengine | localhost:3188 | pbx | Sleep | 40 | | NULL | | 3 | pbxengine | localhost:1337 | pbx | Sleep | 213 | | NULL | | 11 | pbxengine | localhost:2833 | pbx | Sleep | 309 | | NULL | | 57 | root | localhost | NULL | Query | 0| NULL | show processlist | ++---++--+-+--+---+--+ 5 rows in set (0.01 sec) Your MySQL connection id is to server version: 4.0.12 -- Best regards, PandaCoop-Krasimir_Slaveykov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting !?!
On Wed 2003-04-02 at 13:32:22 +0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello mysql, We make updade of database from 3.23.49 to 4.0.12 Before update we can see host of connections /see Example1/. After update every connections looks like they made from local host /see Example2/, but they did not. Any explanation of effect?!? A bug. It is listed as fixed in the change history for the next (not yet released) version 4.0.13 in the online manual. HTH, Benjamin. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Interesting !?!
Hello, We make updade of database from 3.23.49 to 4.0.12 Before update we can see host of connections /see Example1/. After update every connections looks like they made from local host /see Example2/, but they did not. Any explanation of effect?!? mysql show processlist; ++---++--+-+--+---+--+ | Id | User | Host | db | Command | Time | State | Info | ++---++--+-+--+---+--+ | 1 | pbxengine | localhost:2277 | pbx | Sleep | 66 | | NULL | | 2 | pbxengine | localhost:3188 | pbx | Sleep | 40 | | NULL | | 3 | pbxengine | localhost:1337 | pbx | Sleep | 213 | | NULL | | 11 | pbxengine | localhost:2833 | pbx | Sleep | 309 | | NULL | | 57 | root | localhost | NULL | Query | 0| NULL | show processlist | ++---++--+-+--+---+--+ Yes. It's a bug that's likely to be fixed in 4.0.13. Regards, -- Stefan Hinz [EMAIL PROTECTED] iConnect GmbH http://iConnect.de Heesestr. 6, 12169 Berlin (Germany) Telefon: +49 30 7970948-0 Fax: +49 30 7970948-3 [filter fodder: sql, mysql, query] -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
interesting topics including stuff on text boolean search using match
http://www.databasejournal.com/features/mysql/ - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Interesting Challenge
Hi sql query wizards! I need some help. Is there a way I can take this query here = mysql SELECT cell, sector, - sum(att) as att, - sum(lc) as lc, - sum(csh) as csh, - ROUND((SUM( lc + csh ) * 100 ) / (SUM(att) - SUM(tccf + bpp + bpc + suf)),2) AS drops, - sum(tccf) as tccf, - sum(bpp) as bpp, - sum(bpc) as bpc, - sum(suf) as suf, - ROUND(SUM( tccf + bpp + bpc + suf) *100 / SUM(att),2) AS blocks, - sum(mou) as mou - FROM ss - WHERE release=CURDATE() - GROUP BY cell - HAVING sector=1 AND (cell=148 or cell=3); +--++--+--+--+---+--+--+--+--+-- --+--+ | cell | sector | att | lc | csh | drops | tccf | bpp | bpc | suf | blocks | mou | +--++--+--+--+---+--+--+--+--+-- --+--+ |3 | 1 | 734 | 12 |6 | 2.52 | 21 |0 |0 |0 | 2.86 | 1501 | | 148 | 1 | 2746 | 93 | 30 | 4.59 | 63 |0 |0 |1 | 2.33 | 4672 | +--++--+--+--+---+--+--+--+--+-- --+--+ And have it display the two rows as a total sum together in one row? I have been struggling with this and could really use some help. Thanks in advance for any ideas. Regards, Kelly Black Linux was very clearly the answer, but what was the question again? - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Interesting Challenge
mysql SELECT cell, sector, If you only want one row, then selecting cell doesn't make any sense. Cell is different in each row you've selected. If you only want one row, don't select cell. - sum(att) as att, - sum(lc) as lc, - sum(csh) as csh, - ROUND((SUM( lc + csh ) * 100 ) / (SUM(att) - SUM(tccf + bpp + bpc + suf)),2) AS drops, - sum(tccf) as tccf, - sum(bpp) as bpp, - sum(bpc) as bpc, - sum(suf) as suf, - ROUND(SUM( tccf + bpp + bpc + suf) *100 / SUM(att),2) AS blocks, - sum(mou) as mou - FROM ss - WHERE release=CURDATE() - GROUP BY cell Group by cell means Give me a total for each cell. If you only want one row, you don't need a group by at all; if you want one row per sector, you should group by sector. - HAVING sector=1 AND (cell=148 or cell=3); This doesn't belong in the Having clause. This needlessly slows you query down. This can go in the where clause. See http://www.mysql.com/documentation/mysql/bychapter/manual_Reference.html#SELECT. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Interesting Challenge
This simply returns me to the documentation. Thanks -Original Message- From: James Northcott [mailto:jnorthcott;dpmg.com] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 12:13 PM To: Mysql (E-mail) Subject: RE: Interesting Challenge mysql SELECT cell, sector, If you only want one row, then selecting cell doesn't make any sense. Cell is different in each row you've selected. If you only want one row, don't select cell. - sum(att) as att, - sum(lc) as lc, - sum(csh) as csh, - ROUND((SUM( lc + csh ) * 100 ) / (SUM(att) - SUM(tccf + bpp + bpc + suf)),2) AS drops, - sum(tccf) as tccf, - sum(bpp) as bpp, - sum(bpc) as bpc, - sum(suf) as suf, - ROUND(SUM( tccf + bpp + bpc + suf) *100 / SUM(att),2) AS blocks, - sum(mou) as mou - FROM ss - WHERE release=CURDATE() - GROUP BY cell Group by cell means Give me a total for each cell. If you only want one row, you don't need a group by at all; if you want one row per sector, you should group by sector. - HAVING sector=1 AND (cell=148 or cell=3); This doesn't belong in the Having clause. This needlessly slows you query down. This can go in the where clause. See http://www.mysql.com/documentation/mysql/bychapter/manual_Reference.html#SEL ECT. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Interesting Challenge
I know this is not elegant, but have have you tried using a temporary table? It adds up your function column correctly. There was an example of this earlier today from Oyekanmi - Re: getting around a subselect, http://lists.mysql.com/cgi-ez/ezmlm-cgi?1:mss:123911:200211:onbajmklkgifeckohcpa Try create temporary table temp your query here; select sum(cell),sum(sector),sum(att), sum(etc) from temp; John Black, Kelly W [PCS] wrote: Hi sql query wizards! I need some help. Is there a way I can take this query here = mysql SELECT cell, sector, - sum(att) as att, - sum(lc) as lc, - sum(csh) as csh, - ROUND((SUM( lc + csh ) * 100 ) / (SUM(att) - SUM(tccf + bpp + bpc + suf)),2) AS drops, - sum(tccf) as tccf, - sum(bpp) as bpp, - sum(bpc) as bpc, - sum(suf) as suf, - ROUND(SUM( tccf + bpp + bpc + suf) *100 / SUM(att),2) AS blocks, - sum(mou) as mou - FROM ss - WHERE release=CURDATE() - GROUP BY cell - HAVING sector=1 AND (cell=148 or cell=3); +--++--+--+--+---+--+--+--+--+-- --+--+ | cell | sector | att | lc | csh | drops | tccf | bpp | bpc | suf | blocks | mou | +--++--+--+--+---+--+--+--+--+-- --+--+ |3 | 1 | 734 | 12 |6 | 2.52 | 21 |0 |0 |0 | 2.86 | 1501 | | 148 | 1 | 2746 | 93 | 30 | 4.59 | 63 |0 |0 |1 | 2.33 | 4672 | +--++--+--+--+---+--+--+--+--+-- --+--+ And have it display the two rows as a total sum together in one row? I have been struggling with this and could really use some help. Thanks in advance for any ideas. Regards, Kelly Black Linux was very clearly the answer, but what was the question again? - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Interesting Challenge
Thanks!!! I appreciate all the help I can get. I am trying to validate what appears to be a working query, and will post back to the list as soon as I can confirm it works. I think many others will benefit from my working this out.. Thanks again and all my best! ~Kelly W. Black -Original Message- From: James Northcott [mailto:jnorthcott;dpmg.com] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 2:29 PM To: Black, Kelly W [PCS] Subject: RE: Interesting Challenge I have tried with and without having. Neither works. If you try running the query without cell, or sector, the result is an sql query error. I would remove both cell and sector from select, and move the having stuff into the where clause. Why don't you try just: select sum(att) as att from ss where release=CURDATE() and sector=1 AND (cell=148 or cell=3) I will try that link...thanks for the input. ~Kelly W. Black -Original Message- From: James Northcott [mailto:jnorthcott;dpmg.com] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 12:13 PM To: Mysql (E-mail) Subject: RE: Interesting Challenge mysql SELECT cell, sector, If you only want one row, then selecting cell doesn't make any sense. Cell is different in each row you've selected. If you only want one row, don't select cell. - sum(att) as att, - sum(lc) as lc, - sum(csh) as csh, - ROUND((SUM( lc + csh ) * 100 ) / (SUM(att) - SUM(tccf + bpp + bpc + suf)),2) AS drops, - sum(tccf) as tccf, - sum(bpp) as bpp, - sum(bpc) as bpc, - sum(suf) as suf, - ROUND(SUM( tccf + bpp + bpc + suf) *100 / SUM(att),2) AS blocks, - sum(mou) as mou - FROM ss - WHERE release=CURDATE() - GROUP BY cell Group by cell means Give me a total for each cell. If you only want one row, you don't need a group by at all; if you want one row per sector, you should group by sector. - HAVING sector=1 AND (cell=148 or cell=3); This doesn't belong in the Having clause. This needlessly slows you query down. This can go in the where clause. See http://www.mysql.com/documentation/mysql/bychapter/manual_Refe rence.html#SEL ECT. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Interesting innodb activity with 3.23.52
Adrian, - Original Message - From: Adrian Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 6:48 AM Subject: Interesting innodb activity with 3.23.52 Hi, We experienced some interesting things when we upgraded to Mysql-Max 3.23.52 (Red Hat 7.1, 2.4.7-10enterprise). It looked like after a sustained amount of large disk activity, the whole system would slow to a crawl and CPU idle % would go down to 0 for about 30 seconds before it popped back. We tried fiddling around with the configuration files and even tried another kernel (2.4.9-34enterprise) but without any luck. What did work was downgrading our MySQL version to 3.23.49a . Once we downgraded, everything worked fine. Has anyone seen anything like this before? Ideally we'd like to take advantage of all the changes made between .49a and .52. this sounds like the well-known 'thread thrashing' problem in Linux. It also occurs with MyISAM tables. CPU usage increases 100-fold to normal. Small changes in glibc seem to affect this. Some users have got a good version by compiling themselves and linking with the glibc on their own computer. The new Linux O(1) thread schedulers may solve this problem. Adrian Liang Em: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Best regards, Heikki Tuuri Innobase Oy --- Order technical MySQL/InnoDB support at https://order.mysql.com/ See http://www.innodb.com for the online manual and latest news on InnoDB sql query - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Interesting innodb activity with 3.23.52
Hi, We experienced some interesting things when we upgraded to Mysql-Max 3.23.52 (Red Hat 7.1, 2.4.7-10enterprise). It looked like after a sustained amount of large disk activity, the whole system would slow to a crawl and CPU idle % would go down to 0 for about 30 seconds before it popped back. We tried fiddling around with the configuration files and even tried another kernel (2.4.9-34enterprise) but without any luck. What did work was downgrading our MySQL version to 3.23.49a . Once we downgraded, everything worked fine. Has anyone seen anything like this before? Ideally we'd like to take advantage of all the changes made between .49a and .52. Adrian Liang Em: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: [MySQL] interesting find
Clemson Chan wrote: = !-- This HTML file has been created by texi2html 1.52 (hacked by [EMAIL PROTECTED]) from manual.texi on 12 August 2002 -- = Is MySQL creating these documentation using a hacked version of software? Just because it says it's been 'hacked by' doesn't mean it's has been compromised and/or contains vulnerabilities. 'hacked by' could simple mean that person made a few changes to the source (for texi2html) to add better functionality, or something like that. It could mean anything really. (though I tend to put 'screwed with by' whenever I change something grin) -- W | I haven't lost my mind; it's backed up on tape somewhere. + Ashley M. Kirchner mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] . 303.442.6410 x130 IT Director / SysAdmin / WebSmith . 800.441.3873 x130 Photo Craft Laboratories, Inc.. 3550 Arapahoe Ave. #6 http://www.pcraft.com . . .. Boulder, CO 80303, U.S.A. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: interesting find
Clemson Chan wrote: The MySQL 3.23.52-nt (FTP image) I just downloaded from USA [UUNET] (appointed by MySQL.com). http://www.mysql.com/downloads/download.php?file=Downloads/MySQL-3.23/mysql- 3.23.52-win.zip I realized that these two html (manual.html and manual_toc.html) files in the docs folder has this information in the source. = !-- This HTML file has been created by texi2html 1.52 (hacked by [EMAIL PROTECTED]) from manual.texi on 12 August 2002 -- = Is MySQL creating these documentation using a hacked version of software? Uhh, no. It means it's been patched by [EMAIL PROTECTED] to do something different than the stock texi2html (which is open source, btw, see http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~obachman/Texi2html/) Those of us that do work in the non-Microsoft world usually use mostly open-source software, because that's just the way it is. You won't usually find a lot of warez being used by Unix people, because there really isn't that much to crack (which is different than hack btw), because you can get pretty much everything you need/want (including MySQL in most cases) without cost, legally :) It's Friday. Maybe you should go relax a little :) -Mark -- For technical support contracts, visit https://order.mysql.com/?ref=mmma __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Mark Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, Full-Time Developer - JDBC/Java /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Flossmoor (Chicago), IL USA ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: interesting find
Thanks. I will try to relax now. But I didn't do any work today. :) --Clemson Do you know the answer to my BLOB/TEXT question I posted earlier. I altered a BLOB column to TEXT, but FULLTEXT still thinks it's a BLOB. What do I do to use this column in FULL TEXT? Thanks. -Original Message- From: Mark Matthews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 3:27 PM To: Clemson Chan Cc: Mysql Subject: Re: interesting find Clemson Chan wrote: The MySQL 3.23.52-nt (FTP image) I just downloaded from USA [UUNET] (appointed by MySQL.com). http://www.mysql.com/downloads/download.php?file=Downloads/MySQL-3.23/mysql- 3.23.52-win.zip I realized that these two html (manual.html and manual_toc.html) files in the docs folder has this information in the source. = !-- This HTML file has been created by texi2html 1.52 (hacked by [EMAIL PROTECTED]) from manual.texi on 12 August 2002 -- = Is MySQL creating these documentation using a hacked version of software? Uhh, no. It means it's been patched by [EMAIL PROTECTED] to do something different than the stock texi2html (which is open source, btw, see http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~obachman/Texi2html/) Those of us that do work in the non-Microsoft world usually use mostly open-source software, because that's just the way it is. You won't usually find a lot of warez being used by Unix people, because there really isn't that much to crack (which is different than hack btw), because you can get pretty much everything you need/want (including MySQL in most cases) without cost, legally :) It's Friday. Maybe you should go relax a little :) -Mark -- For technical support contracts, visit https://order.mysql.com/?ref=mmma __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ / Mark Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, Full-Time Developer - JDBC/Java /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ Flossmoor (Chicago), IL USA ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: RE: Interesting
Nick, Monday, July 15, 2002, 5:58:31 PM, you wrote: NM I'm using version 3.23.53 on Win 2k. NM The same things happens to me. NM I've also noticed that if you don't specify a WHERE clause and you have a NM Auto-incrementing ID field, it is reset to zero and the next record you NM create starts at 1 again. Because MySQL simply re-create table in this case, that is why auto_increment field starts at 1 again. NM Surely this is wrong as well? In Other RDBMS's after DELETE * Table. The ID NM field still remembers the last ID so the next (first) record after NM performing a delete all, will increment from the last ID. NM BTW, I've just installed MySQL-Front. It got me up and running in no time! NM :-) -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Interesting
I did a select * as such: mysql select * from Sqs; +-+-++ | RecordState | Sqs | SqsKey | +-+-++ | L | unknown | 1 | +-+-++ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) Then, look at the message that delete from gives me '0 rows affected' mysql delete from Sqs; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.02 sec) However, it did indeed delete one row, since now I get an empty set when I do a select *. mysql select * from Sqs; Empty set (0.00 sec) Anybody knows why, then, delete gave me a '0 rows affected' message instead of saying '1 row affected'? Mysql version 3.23.49 Regards, Bhavin. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case
Hi, Since subqueries are not allowed in MySQL, this is what I would do: Create a temporary table with the id's containing multiple dates. Inner join your table with the temporary table. Even if MySQL allowed subqueries, this is what will probably happen behind the scene. Bye and Good Luck! --- Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :) Is this some sort of a joke? I am grouping using event_id, which makes your query useless because it will return just the first time row per each event_id. Thanks anyway. I may have to use second query... :-( Mihail - Original Message - From: Bhavin Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 10:51 PM Subject: Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case How about: SELECT event_id, time, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 - Original Message - From: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 2:58 PM Subject: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case Greetings, I am stuck with this problem: I have the following table: event_id time 1002000-10-23 1002000-10-23 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I need to know all event_id's that have multiple times + time columns. Is it possible to get that result in just one query? The result should be something like this: event_id time 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I managed to get all event_id's that have multiple times, but I don't know how to get the time column in the same query. Here is my current query: SELECT event_id, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 Please help me to find a single query that will return the time column as well. Mihail - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes http://autos.yahoo.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Interesting
Hello! Whenever deleting without a WHERE clause, there's always this '0 rows affected' message. I consider that a bug. Greetings Ralf Bhavin Vyas wrote: I did a select * as such: mysql select * from Sqs; +-+-++ | RecordState | Sqs | SqsKey | +-+-++ | L | unknown | 1 | +-+-++ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) Then, look at the message that delete from gives me '0 rows affected' mysql delete from Sqs; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.02 sec) However, it did indeed delete one row, since now I get an empty set when I do a select *. mysql select * from Sqs; Empty set (0.00 sec) Anybody knows why, then, delete gave me a '0 rows affected' message instead of saying '1 row affected'? Mysql version 3.23.49 Regards, Bhavin. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php -- Ralf Narozny SPLENDID Internet GmbH Co KG Skandinaviendamm 212, 24109 Kiel, Germany fon: +49 431 660 97 0, fax: +49 431 660 97 20 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.splendid.de - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case
Hello! Francisco Reinaldo wrote: Hi, Since subqueries are not allowed in MySQL, this is what I would do: Create a temporary table with the id's containing multiple dates. Inner join your table with the temporary table. Even if MySQL allowed subqueries, this is what will probably happen behind the scene. Bye and Good Luck! --- Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :) Is this some sort of a joke? I am grouping using event_id, which makes your query useless because it will return just the first time row per each event_id. Thanks anyway. I may have to use second query... :-( Mihail - Original Message - From: Bhavin Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 10:51 PM Subject: Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case How about: SELECT event_id, time, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 - Original Message - From: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 2:58 PM Subject: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case Greetings, I am stuck with this problem: I have the following table: event_id time 1002000-10-23 1002000-10-23 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I need to know all event_id's that have multiple times + time columns. Is it possible to get that result in just one query? The result should be something like this: event_id time 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I managed to get all event_id's that have multiple times, but I don't know how to get the time column in the same query. Here is my current query: SELECT event_id, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 How about SELECT event_id, time FROM events GROUP BY event_id, time HAVING count(*) 1 ; ??? -- Ralf Narozny SPLENDID Internet GmbH Co KG Skandinaviendamm 212, 24109 Kiel, Germany fon: +49 431 660 97 0, fax: +49 431 660 97 20 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.splendid.de - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Interesting
That syntax will always report zero rows affected, but it is very fast. If you want to know how many rows were deleted, use something like DELETE * FROM Sqs WHERE 1=1. The latter query will be much slower, as it examines each record. Nick -Original Message- From: Bhavin Vyas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 9:40 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Interesting I did a select * as such: mysql select * from Sqs; +-+-++ | RecordState | Sqs | SqsKey | +-+-++ | L | unknown | 1 | +-+-++ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) Then, look at the message that delete from gives me '0 rows affected' mysql delete from Sqs; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.02 sec) However, it did indeed delete one row, since now I get an empty set when I do a select *. mysql select * from Sqs; Empty set (0.00 sec) Anybody knows why, then, delete gave me a '0 rows affected' message instead of saying '1 row affected'? Mysql version 3.23.49 Regards, Bhavin. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
AW: Interesting
This is a known problem, not a bug in mysql. You can get the affected rows by entering this sql statement: delete from Sqs where 10 Greetings, Richard -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Ralf Narozny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Gesendet: Montag, 15. Juli 2002 16:16 An: Bhavin Vyas Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: Interesting Hello! Whenever deleting without a WHERE clause, there's always this '0 rows affected' message. I consider that a bug. Greetings Ralf Bhavin Vyas wrote: I did a select * as such: mysql select * from Sqs; +-+-++ | RecordState | Sqs | SqsKey | +-+-++ | L | unknown | 1 | +-+-++ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) Then, look at the message that delete from gives me '0 rows affected' mysql delete from Sqs; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.02 sec) However, it did indeed delete one row, since now I get an empty set when I do a select *. mysql select * from Sqs; Empty set (0.00 sec) Anybody knows why, then, delete gave me a '0 rows affected' message instead of saying '1 row affected'? Mysql version 3.23.49 Regards, Bhavin. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php -- Ralf Narozny SPLENDID Internet GmbH Co KG Skandinaviendamm 212, 24109 Kiel, Germany fon: +49 431 660 97 0, fax: +49 431 660 97 20 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.splendid.de - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Interesting
- Original Message - From: Ralf Narozny [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Bhavin Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 9:16 AM Subject: Re: Interesting Bhavin Vyas wrote: [snip] Hello! Whenever deleting without a WHERE clause, there's always this '0 rows affected' message. I consider that a bug. Greetings Ralf MySQL optimizes DELETEs with no where clause to a truncate-style operation. Because of this, it does not know the number of rows that were deleted. It does this, because it does it in a much faster way than having to delete row-by-row. (see http://www.mysql.com/documentation/mysql/bychapter/manual_Reference.html#DEL ETE) It is usally good practice to never issue DELETEs without WHERE clauses, as they can be disasterous, and in most cases it is not what you want to do. If you want to have a row count, you can put in a bogus WHERE clause that evaluates to true, e.g: DELETE FROM blah WHERE 1=1 -Mark - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Interesting
http://www.mysql.com/doc/D/E/DELETE.html In MySQL 3.23, DELETE without a WHERE clause will return zero as the number of affected records. Alain Fontaine Consultant developer VAlain S.A. http://www.valain.lu/ -Message d'origine- De : Bhavin Vyas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Envoyé : lundi 15 juillet 2002 18:40 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Interesting I did a select * as such: mysql select * from Sqs; +-+-++ | RecordState | Sqs | SqsKey | +-+-++ | L | unknown | 1 | +-+-++ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) Then, look at the message that delete from gives me '0 rows affected' mysql delete from Sqs; Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.02 sec) However, it did indeed delete one row, since now I get an empty set when I do a select *. mysql select * from Sqs; Empty set (0.00 sec) Anybody knows why, then, delete gave me a '0 rows affected' message instead of saying '1 row affected'? Mysql version 3.23.49 Regards, Bhavin. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Interesting
I'm using version 3.23.53 on Win 2k. The same things happens to me. I've also noticed that if you don't specify a WHERE clause and you have a Auto-incrementing ID field, it is reset to zero and the next record you create starts at 1 again. Surely this is wrong as well? In Other RDBMS's after DELETE * Table. The ID field still remembers the last ID so the next (first) record after performing a delete all, will increment from the last ID. BTW, I've just installed MySQL-Front. It got me up and running in no time! :-) Nick : -Original Message- : Anybody knows why, then, delete gave me a '0 rows affected' : message instead : of saying '1 row affected'? - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Interesting
Bhavin, Monday, July 15, 2002, 7:39:52 PM, you wrote: BV I did a select * as such: BV mysql select * from Sqs; BV +-+-++ BV | RecordState | Sqs | SqsKey | BV +-+-++ BV | L | unknown | 1 | BV +-+-++ BV 1 row in set (0.00 sec) BV Then, look at the message that delete from gives me '0 rows affected' BV mysql delete from Sqs; BV Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.02 sec) BV However, it did indeed delete one row, since now I get an empty set when I BV do a select *. BV mysql select * from Sqs; BV Empty set (0.00 sec) BV Anybody knows why, then, delete gave me a '0 rows affected' message instead BV of saying '1 row affected'? Because you are using DELETE statement without WHERE clause. It's described in the MySQL manual: http://www.mysql.com/doc/D/E/DELETE.html In this case MySQL simply re-creates table. -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case
:) Is this some sort of a joke? I am grouping using event_id, which makes your query useless because it will return just the first time row per each event_id. Thanks anyway. I may have to use second query... :-( Mihail - Original Message - From: Bhavin Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 10:51 PM Subject: Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case How about: SELECT event_id, time, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 - Original Message - From: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 2:58 PM Subject: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case Greetings, I am stuck with this problem: I have the following table: event_id time 1002000-10-23 1002000-10-23 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I need to know all event_id's that have multiple times + time columns. Is it possible to get that result in just one query? The result should be something like this: event_id time 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I managed to get all event_id's that have multiple times, but I don't know how to get the time column in the same query. Here is my current query: SELECT event_id, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 Please help me to find a single query that will return the time column as well. Mihail - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case
How about: SELECT e1.event_id, e1.time, count(distinct e2.time) FROM events e1 LEFT JOIN events e2 USING (event_id) GROUP BY e1.event_id, e1.time, e2.event_id HAVING count(e2.time_id) 1 ; I don't know if this one does it too (might work in strange MySQL SQL ;-) ) SELECT event_id, time FROM events GROUP BY event_id, time HAVING count(time) 1 ; Mihail Manolov wrote: :) Is this some sort of a joke? I am grouping using event_id, which makes your query useless because it will return just the first time row per each event_id. Thanks anyway. I may have to use second query... :-( Mihail - Original Message - From: Bhavin Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 10:51 PM Subject: Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case How about: SELECT event_id, time, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 - Original Message - From: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 2:58 PM Subject: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case Greetings, I am stuck with this problem: I have the following table: event_id time 1002000-10-23 1002000-10-23 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I need to know all event_id's that have multiple times + time columns. Is it possible to get that result in just one query? The result should be something like this: event_id time 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I managed to get all event_id's that have multiple times, but I don't know how to get the time column in the same query. Here is my current query: SELECT event_id, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 Please help me to find a single query that will return the time column as well. Mihail - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php -- Ralf Narozny SPLENDID Internet GmbH Co KG Skandinaviendamm 212, 24109 Kiel, Germany fon: +49 431 660 97 0, fax: +49 431 660 97 20 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.splendid.de - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case
Greetings, I am stuck with this problem: I have the following table: event_id time 1002000-10-23 1002000-10-23 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I need to know all event_id's that have multiple times + time columns. Is it possible to get that result in just one query? The result should be something like this: event_id time 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I managed to get all event_id's that have multiple times, but I don't know how to get the time column in the same query. Here is my current query: SELECT event_id, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 Please help me to find a single query that will return the time column as well. Mihail - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case
How about: SELECT event_id, time, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 - Original Message - From: Mihail Manolov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 2:58 PM Subject: Help - query suggestion needed - interesting case Greetings, I am stuck with this problem: I have the following table: event_id time 1002000-10-23 1002000-10-23 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I need to know all event_id's that have multiple times + time columns. Is it possible to get that result in just one query? The result should be something like this: event_id time 1012000-10-24 1012000-10-25 I managed to get all event_id's that have multiple times, but I don't know how to get the time column in the same query. Here is my current query: SELECT event_id, count(DISTINCT time) AS Ranges FROM events GROUP BY event_id HAVING Ranges 1 Please help me to find a single query that will return the time column as well. Mihail - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Interesting problem with Alter table and foreign keys on 3.23.51
Below is an example of a problem I'm having when issuing an alter table command to create a foreign key in mysql version 3.23.51. I am running the max version and the tables exist in the innodb table space. Thoughts? Comments? Criticism? Carl McNamee Systems Administrator Billing Concepts (210) 949-7282 mysql alter table Table2 add constraint foreign key (par_id) references Table1 (id); ERROR 1005: Can't create table './test/#sql-6b2e_f.frm' (errno: 150) mysql show create table Table1\G *** 1. row *** Table: Table1 Create Table: CREATE TABLE `Table1` ( `id` int(11) NOT NULL default '0', PRIMARY KEY (`id`) ) TYPE=InnoDB 1 row in set (0.00 sec) mysql show create table Table2\G *** 1. row *** Table: Table2 Create Table: CREATE TABLE `Table2` ( `name` char(10) NOT NULL default '', `par_id` int(11) NOT NULL default '0', PRIMARY KEY (`name`) ) TYPE=InnoDB 1 row in set (0.00 sec) mysql - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Interesting problem with Alter table and foreign keys on 3.23.51
Carl, Tuesday, June 18, 2002, 5:30:31 PM, you wrote: CM Below is an example of a problem I'm having when issuing an alter table CM command to create a foreign key in mysql version 3.23.51. I am running the CM max version and the tables exist in the innodb table space. CM Thoughts? Comments? Criticism? par_id column in the Table2 must be indexed. CM Carl McNamee CM Systems Administrator CM Billing Concepts CM (210) 949-7282 [skip] CM Create Table: CREATE TABLE `Table2` ( CM `name` char(10) NOT NULL default '', CM `par_id` int(11) NOT NULL default '0', CM PRIMARY KEY (`name`) CM ) TYPE=InnoDB CM 1 row in set (0.00 sec) -- For technical support contracts, goto https://order.mysql.com/?ref=ensita This email is sponsored by Ensita.net http://www.ensita.net/ __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Victoria Reznichenko / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ /_/\_, /___/\___\_\___/ MySQL AB / Ensita.net ___/ www.mysql.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Interesting datetime problem
Hi. I meant the system environment variable. I do not really believe that it causes the problem, because it shouldn't be able to shift by a whole day. But this is the only thing I know of which may influence time values. On second thought, I really think it isn't TZ, because that influences only the value of NOW(), but not of constant values. So please post an example (i.e. INSERT and SELECT), which shows the problem you describe and a DESCRIBE for the table in question. Bye, Benjamin. On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 06:20:04PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You could be correct about the time zone problem in this sql. I'm somewhat of a MySQL newbie -- do you mean the system environment variable or is there a MySQL environment variable for TZ? [...] Maybe your TZ (timezone) environment variable is set to a strange value? If not, could you provide a full example, so that we can try to reproduce it and see whether this is a local behaviour of your machine or a common MySQL behaviour. [...] I have an interesting problem when updating columns of type DATETIME. It seems that exactly one day is subtracted from the DATETIME value that I submit in an update query. Has anyone encountered this? Any ideas? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Interesting datetime problem
Hi, I have an interesting problem when updating columns of type DATETIME. It seems that exactly one day is subtracted from the DATETIME value that I submit in an update query. Has anyone encountered this? Any ideas? Kevin - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Interesting datetime problem
Hi. Maybe your TZ (timezone) environment variable is set to a strange value? If not, could you provide a full example, so that we can try to reproduce it and see whether this is a local behaviour of your machine or a common MySQL behaviour. Bye, Benjamin. On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 01:27:18PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have an interesting problem when updating columns of type DATETIME. It seems that exactly one day is subtracted from the DATETIME value that I submit in an update query. Has anyone encountered this? Any ideas? Kevin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Interesting datetime problem
You could be correct about the time zone problem in this sql. I'm somewhat of a MySQL newbie -- do you mean the system environment variable or is there a MySQL environment variable for TZ? Thanks, Kevin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Benjamin Pflugmann Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 6:19 PM To: Kevin Carlson Cc: Mysql Subject: Re: Interesting datetime problem Hi. Maybe your TZ (timezone) environment variable is set to a strange value? If not, could you provide a full example, so that we can try to reproduce it and see whether this is a local behaviour of your machine or a common MySQL behaviour. Bye, Benjamin. On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 01:27:18PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have an interesting problem when updating columns of type DATETIME. It seems that exactly one day is subtracted from the DATETIME value that I submit in an update query. Has anyone encountered this? Any ideas? Kevin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Interesting Problem
* Yoed Anis Hi... I have an interesting problem I don't know which way to solve. I tried posting this on the PHP site (since I'm coding with PHP and mysql) but they said I might want to try my odds here.. since they suggested I go with the mysql solution, but I'm clueless where to start. So I'll shoot it out to you guys and see what you might offer. I have two databases, say X, and Y: CREATE TABLE X( Id int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, Dep_Date date, Return_Date date, Cat1_Status varchar(100), Cat2_Status varchar(100), Cat3_Status varchar(100), Cat4_Status varchar(100), PRIMARY KEY (Id)); CREATE TABLE Y( Id int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, Dep_Date date, Return_Date date, A_Status varchar(100), B_Status varchar(100), C_Status varchar(100), D_Status varchar(100), E_Status varchar(100), PRIMARY KEY (Id)); Now what I am trying to do is get it to display on one page one listing in Chronoligical order based on the Dep_Date from BOTH of these tables. Trying something simple like mysql_query(SELECT Id, Dep_Date, Return_DateFROM X,Y WHERE Dep_Date LIKE '%$SelectDate%' OR Return_Date LIKE '%$SelectDate%' ORDER BY Dep_Date); Will give you a ton of errors, and I'm not very fimilar with JOIN and SQL and how that works. My idea was to create two querys, but the results in somesort of array, and then order the array by date... I was wondering though if this is a good efficient way or if you guys have any better suggestions as to what I should do. You can do it using a temporary table and three separate sql statements: CREATE TEMPORARY TABLE t1 SELECT Id, Dep_Date, Return_date FROM X WHERE Dep_Date LIKE '%$SelectDate%' OR Return_Date LIKE '%$SelectDate%'; INSERT INTO t1 SELECT Id, Dep_Date, Return_date FROM Y WHERE Dep_Date LIKE '%$SelectDate%' OR Return_Date LIKE '%$SelectDate%'; SELECT * FROM t1 ORDER BY Dep_Date; (The temporary table is automatically deleted when the connection is closed.) -- Roger - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Interesting Problem
Hi... I have an interesting problem I don't know which way to solve. I tried posting this on the PHP site (since I'm coding with PHP and mysql) but they said I might want to try my odds here.. since they suggested I go with the mysql solution, but I'm clueless where to start. So I'll shoot it out to you guys and see what you might offer. I have two databases, say X, and Y: CREATE TABLE X( Id int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, Dep_Date date, Return_Date date, Cat1_Status varchar(100), Cat2_Status varchar(100), Cat3_Status varchar(100), Cat4_Status varchar(100), PRIMARY KEY (Id)); CREATE TABLE Y( Id int(11) NOT NULL auto_increment, Dep_Date date, Return_Date date, A_Status varchar(100), B_Status varchar(100), C_Status varchar(100), D_Status varchar(100), E_Status varchar(100), PRIMARY KEY (Id)); Now what I am trying to do is get it to display on one page one listing in Chronoligical order based on the Dep_Date from BOTH of these tables. Trying something simple like mysql_query(SELECT Id, Dep_Date, Return_DateFROM X,Y WHERE Dep_Date LIKE '%$SelectDate%' OR Return_Date LIKE '%$SelectDate%' ORDER BY Dep_Date); Will give you a ton of errors, and I'm not very fimilar with JOIN and SQL and how that works. My idea was to create two querys, but the results in somesort of array, and then order the array by date... I was wondering though if this is a good efficient way or if you guys have any better suggestions as to what I should do. Thanks for your time and help, Yoed - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Nusphere is spamming me (Interesting Stuff)
If you use MySQL I respectfully ask to to avoid NuSphere. Do not support spammers. Here Here !!! This really ticks me off, I mean really ticks me off big time. Have they no shame? Wait until you read this. For a long time now Nusphere has been treading on far too many peoples toes (who do they think they are) not only are they annoying MySQL users with their exasperating antics they are also trying to steal MySQL from the very people that actually wrote the software. Dont forget,they have registered http://www.mysql.org for some very bizzare reasons. You don't have to take my word for it either there is some info about it at http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid13_gci75904 5,00.html Also, http://www.linuxgram.com/156/ states that NuSphere, the MySQL start-up and offshoot of Progress Software, has hired itself a president. NuSphere, the MySQL start-up ??? whats that all about. http://boston.internet.com/people/article/0,1928,2041_593741,00.html has this to say; NuSphere was founded in June and is a subsidiary of Progress Software (NASDAQ:PRGS). Its products include MySQL, an open source Web development platform. Come on guys who do they think they are trying to fool. And finaly, the distributor of MySQL is complaining about the antics of Microsoft, oh dear. http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2781638,00.html?chkpt=zdnnp1tp 02 Microsoft can't beat us technically, so they've decided to strangle us in legal paperwork, said Lorne Cooper, president of NuSphere, distributor of the MySQL open source database system. So, what do you think we should do about all this. Regards Andy Woolley. - Original Message - From: Michael A. Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 11:55 PM Subject: Nusphere is spamming me This e-mail address is brand new. I used it to subscribe to the MySQL list. I sent one e-mail to the MySQL list. I used it to send two e-mails to my web hosting provider. I used it to send one e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's it! No others yet. I know my web hosting provider did not sell my e-mail address to nusphere. I know that php.net did not. They got my brand spanking new e-mail address of of the one post I made to this list. I'm sure that is a violation, it is with most mail lists. If you use MySQL I respectfully ask to to avoid NuSphere. Do not support spammers. This really ticks me off, I mean really ticks me off big time. Have they no shame? If someone at mysql.com would like the e-mail they spammed me with for further investigation, I would be happy to provide it. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Nusphere is spamming me (Interesting Stuff)
Andy Woolley wrote: For a long time now Nusphere has been treading on far too many peoples toes (who do they think they are) not only are they annoying MySQL users with their exasperating antics they are also trying to steal MySQL from the very people that actually wrote the software. Dont forget,they have registered http://www.mysql.org for some very bizzare reasons. yeah, i unsubscribed from that list, after that jillwotshername? given in the temptation of publishing a rant of her colleague(?!?!?!) a rant that is easily verified as bogus and false,im terms of chronology and matter. i believe someone from Mysql.com has posted a quite objective reply. After that i did investigate what fact's are available (wonder of the internet:) ) and i have to say, i find the Nusphere people and their apparent businessmotives a wee bit of suspicious. --By the way, i can't remember ever to subscribe to their list, but got flood by mails after visiting www.mysql.org You don't have to take my word for it either there is some info about it at http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid13_gci75904 5,00.html Also, http://www.linuxgram.com/156/ states that NuSphere, the MySQL start-up and offshoot of Progress Software, has hired itself a president. NuSphere, the MySQL start-up ??? whats that all about. http://boston.internet.com/people/article/0,1928,2041_593741,00.html has this to say; NuSphere was founded in June and is a subsidiary of Progress Software (NASDAQ:PRGS). Its products include MySQL, an open source Web development platform. Come on guys who do they think they are trying to fool. And finaly, the distributor of MySQL is complaining about the antics of Microsoft, oh dear. http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2781638,00.html?chkpt=zdnnp1tp 02 Microsoft can't beat us technically, so they've decided to strangle us in legal paperwork, said Lorne Cooper, president of NuSphere, distributor of the MySQL open source database system. So, what do you think we should do about all this. Regards Andy Woolley. shun them utterly janB - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Interesting results
Hello All, I came accross an interesting delima today after working on a client's database, they are using MySQL 3.23.32 on a linux box. The database had 12 tables in it, and almost all of them where displaying the corrupted table handler error, these where ISAM tables. Now I used isamchk to repair one them, but was unable to fully restore back, so on a hunch, I changed all the tables to MYISAM types and, low-and-behold, all the tables came back, working perfectly, except the one table that lost it's data. they had no backups, but all the other corrupted tables, including the data, all came back without running either isamchk or myisamchk utilities! I just thought I'd pass this on. :) Mike(mickalo)Blezien =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Thunder Rain Internet Publishing Providing Internet Solutions that work! http://www.thunder-rain.com Tel: 1(225)686-2002 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
An interesting SELECT problem
I've been creating a site for someone using MySQL and PHP4. Basically the table concerned is structured like this; id int(5) UNSIGNED Noauto_increment Primary ship varchar(50) NoIndex year varchar(15) NoIndex voyage varchar(50) Yes sex varchar(50)Yes notes text Yes Everthing is working fine except the ship order in which the pages are generated. For example, the following are ships names and yes the records do show the voyage date (they are in official records that way and I can change them. I prudently added the year field and the year is put in that field as well. Some ships don't have this date after their name, sometimes they have just a voyage number. Henrietta Henry Henry Porcher Hibernia Hindostan (1) Hindostan (2) Hyderabad (1) Hyderabad (2) Hyderabad (3) Marian Watson (08-06-1842) Marian Watson (28-10-1841) Marion Watson (08-03-1842) Here in lies the problem, these records have been entered at different times so their id's are all over the place When I get these records and display them, they will be in the correct alphanumeric order except for the ones with the date after them. they will only display in the order they were entered. I've tried the following SELECTs $result = mysql_query(SELECT * FROM ships ORDER BY ship,$db) $result = mysql_query(SELECT * FROM ships ORDER BY ship, year,$db) but they dont sort the way we want them to (in year order) as per below Henrietta Henry Henry Porcher Hibernia Hindostan (1) Hindostan (2) Hyderabad (1) Hyderabad (2) Hyderabad (3) Marian Watson (28-10-1841) Marion Watson (08-03-1842) Marian Watson (08-06-1842) Anyone got any ideas? Thanks in advance Howard Picken [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Database, SQL, Query etc... - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: An interesting SELECT problem
I've been creating a site for someone using MySQL and PHP4. Basically the table concerned is structured like this; id int(5) UNSIGNED Noauto_increment Primary ship varchar(50) NoIndex year varchar(15) NoIndex Sir, change the type of this column to Date, which stores the date as -mm-dd. This will allow you to order the records by the date. You can display the date in a different format using Date_format(). Using a 15 character varchar field for data that is exclusively dates and requires a maximum of 10 characters is an invitation for trouble. Also, since the column contains the full date of the voyage, change the name of the column from year (it's not the year, it's the date) to something like sail_date or embarked. voyage varchar(50) Yes sex varchar(50)Yes How do you determine the sex of a voyage? And why does it take 50 characters to specify it? :-) notes text Yes Everthing is working fine except the ship order in which the pages are generated. For example, the following are ships names and yes the records do show the voyage date (they are in official records that way and I can change them. I prudently added the year field and the year is put in that field as well. Some ships don't have this date after their name, sometimes they have just a voyage number. Henrietta Henry Henry Porcher Hibernia Hindostan (1) Hindostan (2) Hyderabad (1) Hyderabad (2) Hyderabad (3) Marian Watson (08-06-1842) Marian Watson (28-10-1841) Marion Watson (08-03-1842) Here in lies the problem, these records have been entered at different times so their id's are all over the place When I get these records and display them, they will be in the correct alphanumeric order except for the ones with the date after them. they will only display in the order they were entered. I've tried the following SELECTs $result = mysql_query(SELECT * FROM ships ORDER BY ship,$db) $result = mysql_query(SELECT * FROM ships ORDER BY ship, year,$db) but they dont sort the way we want them to (in year order) as per below Henrietta Henry Henry Porcher Hibernia Hindostan (1) Hindostan (2) Hyderabad (1) Hyderabad (2) Hyderabad (3) Marian Watson (28-10-1841) Marion Watson (08-03-1842) Marian Watson (08-06-1842) Anyone got any ideas? Thanks in advance Howard Picken [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Hall Know thyself? Absurd direction! Bubbles bear no introspection. -Khushhal Khan Khatak MySQL list magic words: sql query database - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
interesting problem
I have a form on a webpage for a simple trouble ticket system. When requesting a computer be fixed, software be installed, etc...a faculty member can go to this website and type in the info via an HTML form. My problem is, the form needs to be submitted to two different tables. All of the faculty info(name, email, etc) goes into a faculty table. The actual description of the request goes into a request table. But I also need to insert the unique id that is given to the faculty member in the faculty table INTO the request table. Because this is how I've related the two tables. In the request table I have a foreign key(called requested_by) that is the primary key of the faculty table. Is it possible for me to get the primary key of the faculty table and insert it into the request table through the same HTML form? Thanks, chriz - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
