On Nov 8, 2007 4:08 PM, Stut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I've inherited a PHP app that uses a MySQL database. The following query
is extremely slow and I've been battling for a couple of days on an off
to try and get a combination of indexes to optimise it. Any help would
be greatly
Hi Rob,
Thanks for your reply.
Rob Wultsch wrote:
On Nov 8, 2007 4:08 PM, Stut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I've inherited a PHP app that uses a MySQL database. The following query
is extremely slow and I've been battling for a couple of days on an off
to try and get a combination of
On Nov 12, 2007 7:57 AM, Stut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Rob,
Thanks for your reply.
Rob Wultsch wrote:
On Nov 8, 2007 4:08 PM, Stut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I've inherited a PHP app that uses a MySQL database. The following query
is extremely slow and I've been battling
On Nov 12, 2007 9:22 AM, Afan Pasalic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have to deal with it again consider using a bunch of unions
instead of the 'IN'. Not prettiest thing, but it should fix your
performance issue.
Could you please give me more details about your statement that mysql deals
Hi,
there's very much information about how transactions and locking works
in InnoDB, but maybe there's also a simple and understandable answer to
my simple question:
When I start a transaction, then find the maximum value of a column and
use that + 1 to write a new row into the table, how do
Hello Yves,
there's very much information about how transactions and locking works
in InnoDB, but maybe there's also a simple and understandable answer to
my simple question:
When I start a transaction, then find the maximum value of a column and
use that + 1 to write a new row into the
On Nov 12, 2007 1:25 PM, Yves Goergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I start a transaction, then find the maximum value of a column and
use that + 1 to write a new row into the table, how do transactions
protect me from somebody else doing the same thing so that we'd both end
up writing a new
Okay, I feel like I need to clarify some things.
I do have a UNIQUE INDEX constraint on those columns, so the other user
won't actually write the same value another time, but it will fail at a
level which it should not.
I don't want to use AUTO_INCREMENT because it's not portable. My
application
We have tables in our database that, in addition to primary key
constraints also have unique() constraints of several columns in the
table:
CREATE TABLE Test (
COL1INT UNSIGNED AUTO_INCREMENT PRIMARY KEY,
COL2VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL,
COL3VARCHAR(10) NOT NULL,
I need help writing what is probably a rather simple query.
I have two tables. The first contains several columns, but most importantly
an id column.
The second is has two columns, an id that corresponds with the id in the
first table, and a value.
For every row in the first table I'd
On Nov 12, 2007 2:43 PM, Yves Goergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table WHERE name = ?
-- a short delay which is long enough for a concurrent request :(
UPDATE table SET name = ? WHERE id = ?
I think that even with SERIALIZABLE isolation level, this won't lock
anything if it
On 12.11.2007 20:43 CE(S)T, Yves Goergen wrote:
I'll have a look at those isolation levels though. Maybe it's what I'm
looking for.
Not quite. But I'm going the LOCK TABLES way now. Locking a single table
exclusively for those rare moments seems to be the best solution.
I could also implement
I tried this but it is not working. I'm not very
familiar with subqueries as you can see.
insert into table_2 ( id, value ) values ( (select id from table_1), '1' );
insert into table_2 (id,value)
select id,1 from table_1;
PB
Ben Wiechman wrote:
I need help writing what is probably a
Hey guys,
I do run MySQL on a high traffic Server with approximately 10k
databases. Since some time MySQL is has become very sluggish.
When I look at my processlist it shows more than 25 processes (sometimes
of the same table) with status Opening tables. Some processes also
show closing
On 12.11.2007 22:16 CE(S)T, Yves Goergen wrote:
Since I only need these locks for
a very short time and a single table with no transaction support, this
works fine for me.
Damn, I found out that I need table locking *and* transactions. I'm lost...
Maybe I'm really better off using a sequence
Hi
Is there any way to restrict access to the tcp port on mysql. I only
want my 5 class C's to be able to access the port but it is a public
server.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Kelly
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To
On Nov 12, 2007 5:24 PM, Yves Goergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Damn, I found out that I need table locking *and* transactions.
What makes you say that?
Maybe I'm really better off using a sequence (like the one PostgreSQL
offers and like it is available as an add-on for Perl [1]).
That Perl
On 12.11.2007 23:31 CE(S)T, Perrin Harkins wrote:
On Nov 12, 2007 5:24 PM, Yves Goergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Damn, I found out that I need table locking *and* transactions.
What makes you say that?
BEGIN TRANSACTION
SELECT MAX(id) FROM table
INSERT INTO table (id) VALUES (?)
INSERT INTO
On Nov 12, 2007 5:58 PM, Yves Goergen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BEGIN TRANSACTION
SELECT MAX(id) FROM table
INSERT INTO table (id) VALUES (?)
INSERT INTO othertable (id) VALUES (?)
COMMIT
First I find a new id value, then I do several INSERTs that need to be
atomic, and especially roll back
Hi All,
I don't know whether it is correct group or not. Just a hope that I may get
solution.
I have installed DBI and when I run the following perl script;
--SCRIPT
use strict;
use warnings;
use DBI;
my $DSN=DBI:mysql:database=faculte;host=localhost;port=3306;
my
On Nov 12, 2007 6:42 PM, Lev Lvovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have tables in our database that, in addition to primary key
constraints also have unique() constraints of several columns in the
table:
CREATE TABLE Test (
COL1INT UNSIGNED AUTO_INCREMENT PRIMARY KEY,
COL2
21 matches
Mail list logo
