Hi Stewart,
On Dec 15, 2009, at 6:27 AM, Stewart Smith wrote:
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 07:50:40PM -0800, Brian Aker wrote:
On Dec 14, 2009, at 4:34 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
Right, but this is NOT what Stewart has proposed for the
AlterTable statement. Stewart (and Stewart, correct me if I'm
wrong)
would like to send the *actions* that the master executed for the
Alter Table. I am opposed to this (see link above for the ML post
with my reasons why)
Agreed, I would not want to send the actions. That would be
completely unportable.
How so?
You can go from actions to SQL easily.
You can also use the actions to simply write code that does the alter
on non-sql systems (e.g. an applier that just uses Embedded InnoDB)
I agree that comparing a before and after image to find out what
changes is a tricky thing in general. And, if we have to take into
account structural changes of the images then most engines will have
to give up and use the default method if the version of the structure
changes.
Can you give an example of what the actions would be?
Are you thinking of things like ADD COLUMN, ALTER COLUMN TYPE, etc. or
something else.
--
Stewart Smith
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
--
Paul McCullagh
PrimeBase Technologies
www.primebase.org
www.blobstreaming.org
pbxt.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
