>>>>> "list" == list <list@stripped> writes:
list> This has probably been asked before, but is it possible to not make a
list> REPLACE use a new value for an auto_increment field when that field is not
list> supplied in the query.. so:
list> CREATE TABLE test (
list> id INT UNSIGNED NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,
list> name VARCHAR(32) NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
list> KEY (id)
list> );
list> REPLACE INTO test (NAME) VALUES ('test');
list> results in the following table:
list> +----+------+
list> | id | name |
list> +----+------+
list> | 0 | test |
list> +----+------+
list> when doing another replace:
list> REPLACE INTO test (NAME) VALUES ('test');
list> the result is:
list> +----+------+
list> | id | name |
list> +----+------+
list> | 1 | test |
list> +----+------+
list> and when I got
list> +----+------+
list> | id | name |
list> +----+------+
list> | 1 | test |
list> | 2 | abcd |
list> +----+------+
list> and do a
list> REPLACE INTO test (NAME) VALUES ('test');
list> I end up with
list> +----+------+
list> | id | name |
list> +----+------+
list> | 3 | test |
list> | 2 | abcd |
list> +----+------+
list> ...
list> But this is probably according to SQL standards, but due to this, I am
list> required to do an select + insert/update instead of only 1 replace, which
list> probable is slower.
Hi!
The SQL standard doesn't have AUTO_INCREMENT or REPLACE INTO...
I agree that it would be nicer if REPLACE used an old auto_increment
value in this case; I will put this on my TODO...
Regards,
Monty
