Privet!
What is faster: UNION or temporary table or something else ?
Sometimes MERGE tables could be used, but the speed difference between
UNION solution and MERGE is rather low. The temporary table for sorting
(ORDER clause causes this) should be created in all cases. So, if you
have
Hello
BM Are you looking to compare a few last records in each table or ??
BM Can I get a little bit more details?
I have 10 similar tables. 3 years ago it was one big table. Now I
split it to 10 tables.
3 years ago I could write:
SELECT * from BigTable WHERE date_col$some_date ORDER BY
Monashev
Sent: Jul 19, 2005 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: Multitable selection
Hello
BM Are you looking to compare a few last records in each table or ??
BM Can I get a little bit more details?
I have 10 similar tables. 3 years ago it was one big table. Now I
split it to 10 tables.
3 years ago I could
Hello
Now I use temporary table, but I can`t use SQL_CACHE in queries, which
contain temporary table :-( In theory 90% queries can be cached.
Sincerely,
Michael,
http://xoib.com/ http://3d2f.com/
http://qaix.com/ http://ryxi.com/
http://gyxe.com/ http://gyxu.com/
http://xywe.com/
Hello
GP If you have faster solution (in several times) please introduce it. I've
GP seen similar issues at archives at:
GP http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
I find it in docs :-) :
(SELECT a FROM table_name WHERE a=10 AND B=1 ORDER BY a LIMIT 10)
UNION
(SELECT a FROM table_name WHERE a=11 AND B=2
You have not tried merge?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 5:46 AM
To: Peter J Milanese; mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Multitable selection
Hello
Now I use temporary table, but I can`t use SQL_CACHE in queries, which
Hi Mihail,
We have nightly process that creates a summary table from multiple tables in
the similar situation.
Best,
Mihail Berman
-Original Message-
From: Михаил Монашёв [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2005 3:41 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Multitable
