Monty Taylor wrote:
Jim Starkey wrote:
Brian Aker wrote:
Hi!
I don't see us removing INSERT IGNORE, there are too many good use
cases. The only thing we need to figure out is what to do about
behavior where we could end up with a NULL in a NOT NULL.
Same with LOAD DATA INFILE... though we should come up with a better
bulk protocol.
I just don't get it. Why would anyone want to do an operation where
they couldn't tell if it failed, why it failed, or what it did? If it
logged the failures, I wouldn't mind. I can also understand why
somebody might want it for a non-transactional engine (though not why
someone would *want* a non-transactional fine) where there was going to
be partial data load whether they liked it or not. But a legitimate
transactional system being asked -- yea directed -- to lose unknown
quantities of data, well, I just don't get it.
Click-tracking is one of the places I can think of off the top of my
head. You want to record clicks, but if you miss a few it's ok, because
the volume of clicks you're dealing with is such that a few failures is
simply a rounding error. Also, the click tracking may be an also-ran to
the main purpose of the page. So, important thing #1 is to keep the
latency of the operation to an absolute minimum. With that in mind, you
build a system that should, in most cases, be able to handle the load
and situation, but if it hiccups, you just don't care. In fact, caring
would cost you more in dollars spent thinking about it than you would
gain by either actually gathering every datum, or by knowing about
missed ones. Which brings it down to a cost thing - saving an individual
piece of data always comes with a cost, and for some things the cost of
actually treating it as precious is too high.
It like the difference between $100 bills and grocery lists written on
post-its. You might stick the $100 in a safe. Both have their use, but
most of the time, you probably aren't going to keep your grocery list in
the safe.
I still don't get it. Are you suggesting that somebody would be against
himself and put a unique index on the click time? If a unique index was
really necessary, a combined click-time and click-count would work like
a charm and wouldn't lose the critical information of how and why the
site suddenly went nuts in burst of activity.
--
Jim Starkey
President, NimbusDB, Inc.
978 526-1376
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
