I hate to pry (snoop) but my curiosity is just going nuts! If this is a
sensitive issue, please ignore my questions....
What are you doing that requires you to mass-replace so many records so
often? Are they design or processing requirements (or both) that require
this kind of bulk exchange of records? How open are you to the idea of
possibly changing the way you deal with these records? I would feel
horrible if after all this time and all of the brains that subscribe to
this list that you would end this thread without some kind of improvement
to your situation.
Respectfully,
Shawn Green
Database Administrator
Unimin Corporation - Spruce Pine
matt ryan <matt_lists@stripped> wrote on 08/13/2004 03:26:57 PM:
> matt ryan wrote:
>
> >
> >> Replace does a delete followed by an insert.
> >>
> > Ahh, I'm testing innodb on our tables with this problem
> >
> Doh another problem
>
> innodb has no merge option, I have too much data, and the only way to
> deal with it, is partition the data and then tie it together with merge
> views.
>
> Unfortunatly innodb will not work for me :(
>
>
> Anybody know if SQL Server desktop supports what I need? I know oracle
> does, but the cost is an issue, maxdb costs too much too.
>
> --
> MySQL General Mailing List
> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
> To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql?unsub=1
>
