In the MySQL documentation, we find this tantalizing statement:
"It is possible that in the case of a duplicate-key error, a storage engine may perform
the REPLACE as an update rather than a delete plus insert, but the semantics are the
same. There are no user-visible effects other than a possible difference in how the
storage engine increments Handler_xxx status variables."
Does anyone know what engine this is? I can't seem to find any info via google. If I could
live with the choice of engine, I could make this work with no extra programming at all.
On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:26 AM, Claudio Nanni wrote:
> Only if you can change the application you could use INSERT....ON DUPLICATE
> KEY UPDATE instead of REPLACE.
> Check Peter's post here: http://kae.li/iiigi
> 2011/12/17 Jim McNeely <jim@stripped>
>> Here is a fun one!
>> I have a set of tables that get populated and changed a lot from lots of
>> REPLACE statements. Now, I need an ON UPDATE trigger, but of course the
>> trigger never gets triggered because REPLACES are all deletes and inserts.
>> The trigger is going to populate another table as a queue for a system to
>> do something whenever a particular field changes.
>> SO, does anyone have some slick idea how to handle this little dilemma? I
>> have an idea but I have a feeling there is something better out there.
>> Jim McNeely
>> MySQL General Mailing List
>> For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
>> To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql