I have a stored procedure that inserts a record that I call from a
PreparedStatement. When I call #getGeneratedKeys it always returns a
null result set. Is that expected behavior?
Robert DiFalco | Chief Technology Officer (Products)
Direct: 503.276.7564
Mobile: 503.890.4994
Charlotte Caswell
blurry when the PKEY is compound.
-Original Message-
From: Olexandr Melnyk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 11:08 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Indices in InnoDB/MySQL
On 4/1/08, Paul DuBois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At 10:01 AM -0700 4/
There is already a primary key index on ID.
-Original Message-
From: Wm Mussatto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:50 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Indices in InnoDB/MySQL
On Tue, April 1, 2008 10:01, Robert DiFalco wrote:
> I've been told
I've been told that an index always contains the primary key. So if I
have a LONG ID that is the primary key of table and create on index on
LONG VALUE, the index on LONG VALUE will actually work as a typical
compound index on ID,VALUE. My question is this, if I don't know that
about MySQL and crea
A while back there was a general consensus that useCursorFetch (with
useServerPrepStmts) was somehow flakey?
Is this still the case? I had heard from someone that MySQL will not
even provide support for customers using these options in the JDBC
driver. Is that true?
TIA,
Robert
--
MySQL Gene
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:00 AM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: Baron Schwartz; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Rollback on a Transaction with No Updates
I realize that wasn't the question, but it does seem like a lot of
trouble to get the equivalent of setAutoCommit
Sure, but that wasn't really the question.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Dykman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 2:56 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: Baron Schwartz; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Rollback on a Transaction with No Updates
If your transa
Is there any difference between calling rollback or commit on a
transaction that did not alter data? For example, not a read-only
transaction but a transaction that only performed read-only selects. Any
difference in performance between calling rollback or commit? I know
they are functionally the s
ing a commit (unless there was an exception but I'm not
analyzing that case).
-Original Message-
From: Baron Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 2:36 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Rollback on a Transaction with No Updat
Could also be the DISTINCT processing depending on the number of dups
and the fields in the result set that must be sorted to perform the
distinct operation. Normally if there were a lot of dupes I would
suggest a sub-query but that is not a great option for MySQL.
-Original Message-
From
Any thoughts?
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 10:10 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: INNER versus OUTER
I'm using the latest MySQL with InnoDB and something is happening I
don't understand. I am going to try
I'm using the latest MySQL with InnoDB and something is happening I
don't understand. I am going to try this first by paraphrasing my
queries since they are complex and have some proprietary info in them.
It seems that when a LEFT OUTER or an INNER join will produce the same
result and other joins
some tuning and debugging.
-Original Message-
From: Baron Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 2:35 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Need confirmation: Subselects are broken with regards to
index usage?
Hi Robert,
The way non-corre
th ON link.parentID=path.decendantId
WHERE (path.ancestorId = 1)
LIMIT 0,100;
Anyone have any ideas why this is the case?
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 1:11 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Need confirmation: Subse
I think I'm discovering that sub-selects in MySQL are broken. Is that
true? It seems like you cannot have a sub-select without doing a table
scan -- even for a constant IN expression -- this because it gets
re-written as an EXISTS that executes for each row.
Is that true? Forcing an index doesn't
Are there any hard and fast rules for this? If someone has already
compiled a list I'd love to see it.
For example:
* When a subselect will eliminate duplicates a join might introduce.
Change:
SELECT DISTINCT Acl.*
FROM Acl
JOIN Link ON Link.childID = Acl.ID
JOIN Paths ON Link.parentID
PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 1:40 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Query Analysis Tool
H. I actually think this would be somewhat difficult to write,
Robert. Parsing the queries would be complex enough given the different
ways one can construct SQL
I'm looking for a tool that could parse a boat load of various queries
using complex joins and subqueries, analyze each, and print out the
optimal covering indices that could be used on each table for each
query. It would have to take into consideration stuff like a WHERE
expression that could not
I have an unavoidable filesort in a very large query. Can someone point
me to references for optimizing filesort? I'm assuming this is going to
be changes to my.ini or the hardware.
TIA,
R.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://
Btw, this is using the InnoDB engine.
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:26 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: References on Optimizing File Sort
I have an unavoidable filesort in a very large query. Can someone point
me to references for
I have some long VARCHAR fields that a user will sometimes sort on. Does
a prefix index in any way help with sorting or just for lookups? Will it
speed up a filesort? I couldn't find this information in "How MySQL uses
indices".
R.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.m
Right, as I understand it the query optimizer in 5.2 will simply rewrite
these sub selects as joins when possible.
-Original Message-
From: Jerry Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 11:45 AM
To: Robert DiFalco; 'Baron Schwartz'
Cc: 'Ric
Then I guess I am not understanding why re-writing the statement as a
JOIN alleviates that need.
-Original Message-
From: Baron Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 11:35 AM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: Rick James; mysql@lists.mysql.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject
Yup, innodb_locks_unsafe_for_binlog=1 fixes the problem and so does your
suggestion of using a JOIN instead of a subselect.
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 8:54 AM
To: Baron Schwartz; Rick James
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Baron Schwartz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:39 PM
To: Rick James
Cc: Robert DiFalco; mysql@lists.mysql.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Innodb Locks
There is a detailed write-up on how locking works in the manual:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/i
y, October 03, 2006 1:39 PM
To: Rick James
Cc: Robert DiFalco; mysql@lists.mysql.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Innodb Locks
There is a detailed write-up on how locking works in the manual:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/innodb-transaction-model.html
If you are not doing replication,
Anyone here know enough about how the optimizer works to explain why it is use
the "less optimal" index in this case?
-Original Message-
From: Christian Hammers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 2:54 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
S
Thanks, I had seen that but I don't have a lot of flexibility for adding
database specific extensions on a query by query basis.
-Original Message-
From: Dan Buettner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 2:30 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Su
Scratch that, the only way to have the optimizer "choose" the correct
index is to remove all compound indices that start with "NodeID" or move
NodeID so that it is not the first column specified in the compound
index. Ugh. Any ideas?
-Original Message-
From: Robert Di
Here's an odd one.
I have a table called Elements and another table called ElementNames.
The ElementNames table has a unique ID and a VARCHAR display name. The
Elements table has a ElementName.ID, a node ID, a rule ID and some other
stuff.
I have an index on the NameID, NodeID, and RuleID. I have
: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Innodb Locks
On 10/2/06, Robert DiFalco wrote:
> Is there a detailed source for when innodb creates row or table locks?
The sourcecode.
> I have a situation where one thread is performing this in one
> transaction:
>
> UPDATE SomeTable
Any thoughts on this? Should SomeTable be locked when performing the
UPDATE on AnotherTable?
---
Is there a detailed source for when innodb creates row or table locks?
I have a situation where one thread is performing this in one
transaction:
UPDATE SomeTable SET WHERE SomeTab
Is there a detailed source for when innodb creates row or table locks?
I have a situation where one thread is performing this in one
transaction:
UPDATE SomeTable SET WHERE SomeTable.id = N;
This is invoked after another thread has kicked off this long running
query in another tran
For us the querying of trees is more important than the speed of writing them.
So each time we add a child or change a parent or whatever, we trigger a stored
procedure that updates a paths table. Then our query for children is pretty
simple:
SELECT Node.*
FROM Node
JOIN Paths
: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 7:15 AM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Updating two fields from an aggregate query
Robert, you might give "insert ... select ... on duplicate key update" a
try:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/insert-select.html
something
I have two tables that are related:
Parent
LONG id
LONG childCount
LONG maxChildAge
...
Child
LONG parentId
LONG age
...
There can be thousands of parents and millions of children, that is why
I have denormalized "childCount" and "maxChildAge". The values are too
expensive t
Something else you may or may not want to consider. You may want to have
both users and user-groups be principles. Something like the following:
Principle (ID, NAME, PERMS)
User (P_ID, PASSWORD, ... )
UserGroup (P_ID, ... )
PrincipleLink (PID, CID) -> Many to Many (parent, child)
Also consid
]
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 11:51 AM
To: Robert DiFalco; mysql@lists.mysql.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Performance: LIMIT 1 with UPDATE
Maybe it is the tiny extra time to parse the unnecessary " LIMIT 1"?
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:
-
From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 9:06 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Performance: LIMIT 1 with UPDATE
Does using LIMIT 1 with UPDATE provide a performance improvement when
the WHERE condition is on a unique index or primary key?
R.
--
MySQL
Does using LIMIT 1 with UPDATE provide a performance improvement when
the WHERE condition is on a unique index or primary key?
R.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What connection pool code are you using? My guess is that the problem is
in your code somewhere. Either transactions are not being closed (i.e.
because of a connection pool flaw maybe?) or you have two threads trying
to update the same row at the same time (in which case this would be
expected beha
P.ID = L.parentID AND SV.f_val LIKE 'bar'
)
AND
EXISTS
(
SELECT null
FROM StringType ST
WHERE ST.ID = 1 AND ST.defaultVal LIKE 'bar'
)
)
)
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco
Sent:
No takers?
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:03 PM
To: Robert DiFalco; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: More query help for user-defined values
One simple solution is to denormalize a little and take the refTypeID
column out of StringValue and
LL AND ST1.defaultVal LIKE 'foo' ) )
AND
( SV2.f_val LIKE 'bar' OR
( SV2.val IS NULL AND ST2.defaultVal LIKE 'bar' ) )
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 8:43 AM
To: m
To support user defined properties I have the following tables:
TABLE StringType
LONG ID PKEY
VARCHAR name
...
VARCHAR defaultValue
TABLE StringValue
LONG parentID
LONG typeID
VARCHAR val
Assume the correct indices are in place. Different string value types
ca
27; OR (NST.VAL = 'Fred' AND NSV.REF_ID IS NULL)
)
How do I generally simplify this?
R.
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 4:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: Query Help for Loosely Coupl
e-
From: Jay Pipes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2006 9:37 AM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Query Help for Loosely Couple Properties
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 16:23 -0700, Robert DiFalco wrote:
> The question is, how do I query this? Say I w
They are user defined properties.
-Original Message-
From: Jay Pipes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 8:11 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Query Help for Loosely Couple Properties
On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 16:23 -0700, Robert DiFalco
I have a table that contains properties that can be associated with any
table whose primary key is a LONG. Lets say that there is just one kind
of property. The table looks something like this:
TABLE StringVal
REF_ID BIGINT// row to associate property with
TYPE_ID BIGINT
FWIW, IMO LOB handling is really where MySQL lags behind all other
enterprise database solutions. Firebird, DB2, Oracle, et al all are able
to stream LOB data to and from disk so that it does not all need to be
loaded in memory (multiple times for a single LOB). I would call this a
bug but others w
Why not store them in separate columns? You could then have the domain
field be a foreign key into another table.
-Original Message-
From: Ferindo Middleton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 2:14 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: how to extract common text string f
No problem, just didn't want to jump the gun if it was a known issue or
if it were clear from the posted traces that I was doing something
wrong.
-Original Message-
From: Stewart Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 10:54 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: [
Version 5.0.19.
We have no autogenerate keys. We perform a single insert and get a lock
timeout. The insert is done with a stored procedure with a single line.
The lockup happens VERY rarely and we have no idea how to reproduce it.
Here's the hostname.err data:
Alarm status:
Active alarms:
TECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 3:16 PM
To: 'Jeremy Cole'; Robert DiFalco
Cc: 'Sergei Golubchik'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: Streaming LOB Data
Related inequalities:
Given a blob of N bytes:
max_allowed_packet > N
innodb_log_file_size > 10 *
nt: Sunday, May 07, 2006 6:14 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Backups with MySQL/InnoDB
On Sunday, 7 May 2006 at 9:27:31 -0700, Robert DiFalco wrote:
> What are people doing for backups on very large MySQL/InnoDB
databases?
> Say for databases greater than 200 G
What are people doing for backups on very large MySQL/InnoDB databases?
Say for databases greater than 200 GB. Curious about the backup methods,
procedures, and frequency.
From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 9:49 AM
To: Sergei Golubchik
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: Streaming LOB Data
Thanks Sergei, it's nice to know for sure. Do you know if there is any
documentation on how memory is used to stor
ay 01, 2006 1:27 PM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Optimizing DISTINCT searches
On 2006-05-01 1:14 PM, "Robert DiFalco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would you need the DISTINCT if you change the query like so?
>
> SELECT Site.Site_ID, Site, Status, Type FROM Site J
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: FW: Optimizing DISTINCT searches
On 2006-05-01 11:55 AM, "Robert DiFalco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, normally a DISTINCT has to do a type of sort and is slower than
> non-DISTINCT queries. Each field of the result set is considered i
Well, normally a DISTINCT has to do a type of sort and is slower than
non-DISTINCT queries. Each field of the result set is considered in the
DISTINCT logic. Can you modify the query so that it does not require the
DISTINCT? Can you post the query?
R.
-Original Message-
From: Stephen P. F
ssage-
From: Sergei Golubchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 9:34 AM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Streaming LOB Data
Hi!
On Apr 28, Robert DiFalco wrote:
> It appears (for InnoDB at least) that while INSERTing a LOB that al
It appears (for InnoDB at least) that while INSERTing a LOB that all LOB
data must be loaded into memory before it is written to disk. Or is it
just the size of the combined log files? Looking at Task Manager, it
looks like it DOES try to load the whole thing into memory before
streaming it to disk
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 11:31 AM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Out of memory (Needed xxx ...
As far as i remember you must set that variable in order to send huge
blobs, and the error message can vary because it can means
It's not set, but I am streaming the LOG to the server, would max packet
impact this situation? Also, wouldn't I get a different error, i.e.
Packet Too Large?
From: Carlos Proal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 4:59 PM
To: Robe
: Out of memory (Needed xxx ...
Hi Robert, are you using the extended parameters to increase the jvm
heap memory ?
ie.
java -Xms256m -Xmx512m
Carlos
On 4/26/06, Robert DiFalco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Getting this error from JDBC while inserting a VERY large VARBINARY
Getting this error from JDBC while inserting a VERY large VARBINARY or
MEDIUMTEXT field, ~250MB. I'm guessing this is an error from the server?
Is there a way to have the server start streaming to disk sooner with a
LOB? Is there a property I'm not setting?
TIA,
R.
--
MySQL General Mailing L
Can you tell us more about the use case? Why does this need to be in a
single row? Maybe instead of figuring out how to get this into a single
row we could instead figure out how to solve the problem that requires
it to be in a single row.
-Original Message-
From: Peter Lauri [mailto:[EMA
For me the argument is a little pedantic. The contract of the descriptor
table is that it must reference a name; there is code and constraints to
enforce this. I am happy to have the query return nulls to indicate a
programming error that can be quickly addressed. _If_ (after buffer
tuning et al) a
Martjin,
Of course one should use the right JOIN for the job. But let me ask you,
which join would you use here?
You have a table called Descriptors, it has a field called nameID which
is a unique key that relates to a Names table made up of a unique
identity and a VARCHAR name. I think most peop
I apologize if this is a naive question but it appears through my
testing that a RIGHT JOIN may out perform an INNER JOIN in those cases
where they would produce identical result sets. i.e. there are no keys
in the left table that do not exist in the right table.
Is this true? If so, it this pecu
I need some help with improving INSERT performance. I am using JDBC. I
have minimized my indices as much as I can, changed to use batching, and
setup a thread pool for each transacted batch. Note that I am only using
InnoDB.
Now I am wondering what can be tweaked in the server properties. Right
no
Interesting, that seems like an optimization the query optimizer could
do itself when it sees a <> operator on a indexed numeric.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 8:01 AM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mys
Shawn,
Any performance gains for specifying "type > 0" than "type <> 0" ?
R.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 6:37 AM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re
In a previous database engine I was using an IN was more optimal than a
<>. So, for example:
SELECT * FROM table WHERE table.type IN (1,2,3);
Where the possible values of type are 0-3, was appreciably faster than:
SELECT * FROM table WHERE table.type <> 0;
I've been playing with the
make deletes faster. But every
database engine handles this stuff differently.
R
-Original Message-
From: David Turner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2006 10:13 AM
To: Robert DiFalco; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: InnoDB Indices
- Original Message
I have some questions regarding InnoDB indices.
Say I have a table with millions of records. On of the fields is a type
field that has a possible value of 1,2,3, or 4. I sometimes query by the
type field and may at other times order on it.
Do queries benefit from an index with this low of a sel
SELECT DISTINCT can be kind of slow if there are many result values,
specifically if those result values include large VARCHARs. Furthermore,
some database engines cannot support a SELECT DISTINCT if any LOBs are
included in the result values.
I'm trying to find a general way to optimize SELECT DI
Is there a command to regenerating the selectivity statistics of indices
with MySQL? Or does MySQL not have a cost based optimizer and this would
make no difference?
R.
-Original Message-
From: Robert DiFalco [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 9:33 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Why do these transactions show table locks?
My understanding is that innodb should not be using table locks for
insert, update, or
My understanding is that innodb should not be using table locks for
insert, update, or delete. However, the following transactions are
showing table locks. What's up?
R.
---TRANSACTION 0 4573, ACTIVE 1 sec, OS thread id 3112 setting table
lock
mysql tables in use 1, locked 0
LOCK WAIT 2 lock stru
If I am testing for performance, I make sure to have one schema for each
database server. When I want to tear down the data and restart (possibly
with new settings). I first DROP the database I am working on. Then I
shutdown the server and in the /data directory, I delete all the
files there. It se
I'm doing about 200,000 inserts, collecting them into batches of 500,
and queuing them into a thread pool with 6 threads.
R.
-Original Message-
From: Ady Wicaksono [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 8:36 PM
To: Robert DiFalco
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subjec
level locking, and foreign keys for MySQL
InnoDB Hot Backup - a hot backup tool for InnoDB which also backs up
MyISAM tables http://www.innodb.com/order.php
- Original Message -
From: ""Robert DiFalco"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: mailing.database.myodbc
Sent: M
Concurrent inserts (there also may be concurrent reads going on) are
intermittently causing:
java.sql.SQLException: Lock wait timeout exceeded; try
restarting transaction
I noticed that adding innodb_table_locks=0 in my.ini fixes the problem.
Looking through the manual however, this shou
What is the best (most optimal) way to perform a case-insensitive search
for a VARCHAR column with COLLATE utf8_bin?
I'm assuming the answer is not:
SELECT *
FROM MyTable
WHERE UPPER(MyColumn) LIKE Upper('%pattern%');
Tia!
R.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list ar
85 matches
Mail list logo
