Thanks Johnny,
In this case I wouldn't be able to insert a completely new row but
replace the existent one, so row count would stay the same.
This is a storage table with the only unique constraints on:
dda_debits_id column.
the test data is very small, so I would've noticed any duplicates and
they
Low Priority Lock
Hello was wondering if anybody would have some input:
This will be on the same table.
Client (A) acquires a READ lock;
immediately thereafter a large amount of clients wait for a read lock as
well, and client(B) requests a LOW PRIORITY insert.
Another surge of clients reques
That's what is bad of SP in MySQL, debugging.
Just out of the blue,
can you try to disable query cache?
*SET GLOBAL query_cache_size = 0;*
*
SET GLOBAL query_cache_type = 0;
*
it could be a bug
Claudio
2011/7/9 Johnny Withers
> It seems to me that your insert statement is trying to inser
It seems to me that your insert statement is trying to insert duplicate rows
into the storage table. This is why insert ignore and replace work.
On Jul 9, 2011 3:49 AM, "Igor Shevtsov" wrote:
Hi all,
I can't explain strange behaviour of the INSERT statement in the stored
procedure.
The idea is t
Hi all,
I can't explain strange behaviour of the INSERT statement in the stored
procedure.
The idea is to generate a list based on the output of 3 INNER JOIN of
regularly updated tables.
Something like :
INSERT INTO storage
(column list)
SELECT
column list
FROM t1 JOIN t2
ON t1.x=t2.y
JOIN t3
ON t
