Well, if your particular problem has a well defined maximum minimum and minimum
maximum (Ie the max(q) < 4294967296, because q is a 32 bit unsigned int, and
min(q)> -1) then you can do it without any extra joins or sub selects.
select
a,
b,
min(IF(date <100, q, 4294967296)) as min_q,
max(IF
I'm guessing you are adding a semi-colon (;) to the end of the statement. Its
unnecessary with the \G
- Original Message
From: Jeff Mckeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: MySql
Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2007 12:19:22 PM
Subject: Error: No query specified
When I run a "Show slave status \
Use smaller transactions that don't have 140 million rows. When attempting an
action with important data, make sure you can survive the actions failure. If
you can't, then you need to think of a different way of doing it that will
allow a recoverable failure.
- Original Message
From:
If you are going to rely on obfuscation to protect valuable data, you might
want to consider not posting the particular method you will use on a public
mailing list.
I think any method you implement will lower the overall security of the system.
But, if you must search for encrypted text, you
** WE ROLL BACK TRANSACTION (2)
Can
anyone explain whats going on? Is there a limit for the number of
concurrent transactions, before looking at the lock graph becomes too
expensive? Is that documented somewhere?
Thanks,
ssage
From: Baron Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: William Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 12:05:41 PM
Subject: Re: Full Innodb Table Locks deadlocking with AUTO_INC locks.
Hi William,
William Newton wrote:
> Hello List,
>
&g
Hello List,
I discovered an unusual problem with the way Innodb handles the AUTO_INC lock
with a full table lock. I was wondering if this is a known issue, or I'm doing
something completely wrong. I'm working with MYSQL Server version:
5.0.42-debug-log on Gentoo Linux.
So lets say I have this
