> Philip Hallstrom wrote:
> > INSERT INTO table VALUES (0, LAST_INSERT_ID())
> > But instead I get:
> > x y
> > 1 0
> > I know I can follow up my INSERT with an UPDATE, but I'd rather not have
> > to. Is there any way around this?
> Can't see nice workaround. Maybe LAST_INSERT_ID()+1? At least current
> behaviour is correct because usually it's more important to remember
> last id from the past.
Rats. Oh well... LAST_INSERT_ID()+1 won't work for me because in reality
I am only doing *one* query. I just want two columns of my table to have
the auto_increment value (but only sometimes :)
I'll live with the second UPDATE... it's not a high volume query...