On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 13:44 -0600, Dave Smith wrote: > Because performance would be poor on large tables. In order to find when > a table was last modified, MySQL would have to scan every row in every > table. I would also have to modify all my existing tables to include a > timestamp column. The trigger-based solution has a constant time > complexity (in terns of each table's row count) for timestamp lookups, > while your solution appears to be linear (read: long-term problems down > the road). The trigger-based solution also requires no change to the > existing tables' schema. Seems superior to me. You?
Bah, in the real nobody needs triggers or sub-selects or... Yeah, I
guess this comment is flamebait. But if I still haven't forgiven KDE for
choosing a non-free library, why should I forgive MySQL for not being a
real database?
--
Stuart Jansen e-mail/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
google talk: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at
the results." -- Winston Churchill
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
/* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
