On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 07:34:14PM -0800, Steven Roussey wrote:
>
> In honor of Jeremy:
> MySQL 3.23.47-log: up 5 days, processed 595,464,211 queries (1,350/sec.
> avg)
> :)
Very nice!
Fast and using a recent version. I really need to upgrade one of
these days. I keep meaning to get my slaves
> Is this just something we have to live with or does
> MySQL 4 handle this better?
Something to live with. Someday, I'm sure MySQL will optimize this case.
Conceptually its not that hard. You split it into multiple queries that
track an index. If it is a select, you also UNION the results back
in your query MySQL must scan the entire table for either id
being 644122 or thread being 644122.
thanks,
-- Andrew
-Original Message-
From: Brian Moon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Slow updates with two keys in where
for either id being 644122 or thread
being 644122.
thanks,
-- Andrew
-Original Message-
From: Brian Moon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Slow updates with two keys in where.
I have pasted below some queries and a table
I have pasted below some queries and a table structure that I am finding to
be very slow.
As you can see, if I or the two keyed fields, the query takes ~7 seconds.
If I just run them by themselves, it takes no measurable time.
Is this something we just have to live with? Or, is there something
