2011/12/19 13:55 -0800, Jim McNeely
Anyway, I just thought I would share. BTW I experimented, and innoDB does
updates and fires off update triggers for REPLACE statements, but MyISAM does
delete/inserts.
Thank you. Which version?
Well, then the documentation is wrong: it is i
Not if you are using innoDB tables. For these, you use INSERT and UPDATE
triggers.
Jim McNeely
On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Halász Sándor wrote:
> 2011/12/19 11:30 -0800, Jim McNeely
> In the MySQL documentation, we find this tantalizing statement:
>
> "It is possible that in the c
2011/12/19 11:30 -0800, Jim McNeely
In the MySQL documentation, we find this tantalizing statement:
"It is possible that in the case of a duplicate-key error, a storage engine may
perform the REPLACE as an update rather than a delete plus insert, but the
semantics are the same. There a
With REPLACE, you just set up the query the same as an INSERT statement but
otherwise it just works. With ON DUPLICATE UPDATE you have to set up the whole
query with the entire text all over again as an update. The query strings for
what I'm doing are in some cases pushing enough text in medical
Good to know and good that you took time to read the manual, good approach.
But why bother with REPLACE if you will go with INSERT.ON DUPLICATE KEY
UPDATE?
The storage engine is a property of your table and you can set it and/or
change it, it is the low-level layer (physical) of the database
In the MySQL documentation, we find this tantalizing statement:
"It is possible that in the case of a duplicate-key error, a storage engine may
perform the REPLACE as an update rather than a delete plus insert, but the
semantics are the same. There are no user-visible effects other than a possib
Perfect!! This is the answer I was looking for. Thanks! I didn't know about
this.
Jim McNeely
On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:26 AM, Claudio Nanni wrote:
> Only if you can change the application you could use INSERTON DUPLICATE
> KEY UPDATE instead of REPLACE.
>
> Check Peter's post here: http://
