On 02/15/2011 12:45 PM, Jon Olav Hauglid wrote:
> On 02/15/2011 12:32 PM, Jorgen Loland wrote:
>>> I think it would be good to also cover the behavior of an InnoDB table
>>> without a primary key.
>>
>> InnoDB always has primary keys. If you don't provide one explicitly,
>> InnoDB creates one on an autogenerated column. Is this a request anyway?
>
> My thought was just to show that not all multi update statements on an
> InnoDB table which uses the table twice, are disallowed.
Ok, I will do that in a final patch after Mattias' review.
>
>>> Is this change really needed anymore?
>>
>> No, but I got the impression from Mattias that this was something that
>> was forgotten. I figured there could be other SQL statements that could
>> also get into this error code. I don't have a strong opinion either way
>> - remove or keep?
>
> I vote to keep handler.cc unchanged, but I'm open to arguments to the
> contrary.
Lets see what Mattias thinks :)
--
Jørgen Løland | Senior Software Engineer | +47 73842138
Oracle MySQL
Trondheim, Norway
