i know it is large. the user must do his own calculations to determine if
he can substitute eliminate for postpone.
this is his call; not mine nor yours.
At 09:57 AM 7/8/01 +0307, you wrote:
>tj marlin wrote:
>
>
>>you can postpone this problem for a very long time by using an unsigned
>>bigint
tj marlin wrote:
> you can postpone this problem for a very long time by using an unsigned
> bigint (0 - 2**64-1)
> note i said postpone, not eliminate.
Have you done calculations, how long it takes to reuse all id-s? I have
done :). I bet that auto_increment field will be still young, fresh
there is a way:
delete the column
add the column
then the auto increment will start from 1 up to the number of records.
be careful! if there are records in other tables which refer the records
in this table - the one being modified - those records WILL NOT BE UPDATED.
and now your database i
Thank goodness this is the position. If the capability of
reordering the auto_increment existed, we could potentially
have all of our databases broken by some inadvertant finger trouble.
As you mentioned, there are better ways to handle this perceived
"problem", which appears that the auto_incre
Kif wrote:
> Hi
> ANy idea how i can get my auto_increment fields to renumber themselves after
>deletion of records so that they all get re-ordered and run consecutively from 1 to
>whatever without any numbers missing ?
> Please help if you know how to do this
I think we never will implemen
Hi
ANy idea how i can get my auto_increment fields to renumber themselves after deletion
of records so that they all get re-ordered and run consecutively from 1 to whatever
without any numbers missing ?
Please help if you know how to do this
Thanks
Keith White
