Am 14.05.2012 23:05, schrieb Nicolas Rannou:
> *1* to create 3 tables:*
> user - info about a user
> images - info about an image
> user_image_mapping
>
> *2* to create 2 tables*
> user - info about a user
> -> a field would contain a list which represents the ids of the images
> the user can
you mail like to find it by your self. simply use : explain
re,
wh
Yong Lee schrieb:
All,
Just curious as to which query would be better in terms of performance:
select * from (select * from a union select * from b) as c;
versus
select * from a union select * from b;
or would these
At 10:47 PM 11/23/2006, John Kopanas wrote:
That is awesome... thanks. I still am not sure exactly though why
this take 2 seconds while my methond took over a minute for the same
amount of rows. In essence don't the two methods do the same things?
No. Your approach was executing the subquery
At 09:47 PM 11/23/2006, John Kopanas wrote:
That is awesome... thanks. I still am not sure exactly though why
this take 2 seconds while my methond took over a minute for the same
amount of rows. In essence don't the two methods do the same things?
The Group By executes in one operation. I may
That is awesome... thanks. I still am not sure exactly though why
this take 2 seconds while my methond took over a minute for the same
amount of rows. In essence don't the two methods do the same things?
On 11/23/06, mos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 05:50 PM 11/23/2006, you wrote:
>I have the
In the last episode (Nov 23), John Kopanas said:
> I have the following query:
>
> UPDATE companies c
> SET
>total_annual_service_charge =
> (
>SELECT SUM(annual_service_charge)
>FROM purchased_services ps WHERE ps.company_id = c.id
> );
At 05:50 PM 11/23/2006, you wrote:
I have the following query:
UPDATE companies c
SET
total_annual_service_charge =
(
SELECT SUM(annual_service_charge)
FROM purchased_services ps WHERE ps.company_id = c.id
);
It takes 1s to run when I ha
Hello.
Usually the CHAR type is fastest, although it wastes more space.
>Hi all
>
> Suppose that I want to create a table with a column named
> "DETAILS" that
> will contain textual data. Performance-wise, does it matter if I
> represent
> this column wit
You may have to increase the size of the table cache, and you will most
probably need to do something about
ensuring that the mysqld process can open about 1 billion files at the
same time. There was a discussion along these
lines not so long ago focusing on having massive numbers of tables that
In the last episode (Dec 15), Jeremy Zawodny said:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 02:31:16PM -0800, Rob Brackett wrote:
> > How hard would it be to modify the MySQL code, and what sort of
> > performance hits would I take, if I was to try to run a hundred
> > thousand MySQL DBs on the same server? Obvi
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 02:31:16PM -0800, Rob Brackett wrote:
> How hard would it be to modify the MySQL code, and what sort of
> performance hits would I take, if I was to try to run a hundred thousand
> MySQL DBs on the same server? Obviously, some tweaks would be necessary
> to be able to break
> I am writing a serverside application in Java which needs to query/search
> 200 000 rows and update affected records once every 2 minutes.
> As performance/speed is of importance here - and this Table only contains
> 5-10 Columns of Integer numbers, I figured that using a HEAP type of table
>
> Thats a pretty nifty speed. PHP have a considerable overhead compared to new
> versions of Java. (I use both languages... I prefer PHP for webpage
> generation, but Java for serverside applications)
And both have a significantly larger overhead than C. Have you tried Escapade? It's
a simple,
> I am hesitant to dig into C++ just to solve this problem, so I am as far as
> possible trying to solve the performance issues within Java and MySQL. I
> will probably rewrite the code countless of times just to see if I can do
> it, and last resort would be C++.
Why dig into C++? MySQL has a p
---
-Original Message-
From: Ed Carp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 06 October 2002 21:08
To: Peter Lovatt; Robert H.R. Restad; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Performance Question.
> I am running php/mysql on 2x PIII 1 GHz / 512MB RAM / S
> I am running php/mysql on 2x PIII 1 GHz / 512MB RAM / SCSI and can run
> queries on datasets of 220,000
>
> SELECT * FROM `Tablename` WHERE `Prod_code` LIKE 'A43611109%' in less time
> than I can count (0.1 sec at a guess)
>
> The insert/update bit is the bit which will dictate the speed - how
Hi
I am running php/mysql on 2x PIII 1 GHz / 512MB RAM / SCSI and can run
queries on datasets of 220,000
SELECT * FROM `Tablename` WHERE `Prod_code` LIKE 'A43611109%' in less time
than I can count (0.1 sec at a guess)
The insert/update bit is the bit which will dictate the speed - how many
reco
Raf Geusens writes:
> Hi,
>
> I know I've allready posted this question but it's rather important for my
> final work. I'll add some extra information at the bottom.
> I've got a question 'bout the number of number of writes a MySQLserver can
> handle in a second. I've written a program w
18 matches
Mail list logo
