List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Simcha Younger Date:October 7 2010 7:56am
Subject:Re: update and times
View as plain text  
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 17:48:55 -0400
kalin m <kalin@stripped> wrote:

> 
> 
> Simcha Younger wrote:

> >> executing this query didn't update the record.
> >>
> >> why?
> >>     
> > The two values you have here are equal:
> > sample data : 		  12862162510269684
> > query: where unix_time <  12862162510269684
> > and therefore the 'less than' query did not match that row.
> >
> >   
> sorry...  not following....  the value in the table was 
> 12862162385941345. the time in the query was 12862162510269684.

Sorry, I misread your question.

did you check before you ran the query that this is the only matching record for your
condition?
It is possible that the limit 1 is preventing the update because you have more than one
record less than the timestamp in the query.

You might also want to add to your where condition:
AND `updated` = 0; so it will skip rows which have already been updated.

-- 
Simcha Younger <simcha@stripped>
Thread
update and timeskalin m4 Oct
  • RE: update and timesGavin Towey4 Oct
    • Re: update and timeskalin m4 Oct
  • Re: update and timesSimcha Younger5 Oct
    • Re: update and timeskalin m6 Oct
      • Re: update and timesSimcha Younger7 Oct