Have a query that consists of 10 unions. For a period of time it will
constantly return with an error 12. Moments later it might actually
work once or twice. I can find nothing in any logs or whatever. The
odd thing is that when it isn't working, simply reducing the unions to 8
or less returns
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/INSERT_SELECT.html
" Do not use DELAYED with INSERT ... SELECT. "
With respect to the table structure...can you explain how when you have
to read every single row regardless how the structure (assuming you are
going down the path of idexes) affects the query?
C
I must have done a poor job at explaining this. I already have all
those primary keys, etc. If you are required to do a full table scan on
the table, as I am in my example, please explain to me how an index even
matters in that case. There is _no_ "where" clause in the query so how
will an ind
Benjamin Pflugmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello.
>
> First, key_buffer=16M seems a bit low for me with 13 million rows
> (well, depends on the indexes, and how much free memory you have, of
> course).
1 gig, plenty free.
> If I am not mistaken, sort_buffer/tmp_table_size are the one mo
I have one query, that basically reads from one table of 13 million rows,
groups it by two fields, and inserts into a rollup table. The result set
ends up being about 31,000 rows. This runs in about 2 minutes which is
acceptable. However, I add an additional group by field, which will probably
Hope this makes sense
I'm seeing random hung reads() after a mysql insert that appears to be
related to a sig alarm race condition. The basic workflow of this program
is
while (1)
recvfrom() /* few hundred packets a sec */
parse packet
insert into sql
However, once per second a sig a
> Have you tried:
> HAVING
> ( Avg_Xmit < 28800 )
> AND ( Samples >= 10 )
>
> ?
>
> Cliff Daniel wrote:
>
> > I'm having some difficulting on 3.23.38, linux x86... When I write
> > the following query the HAVING clause is only listening to the 'A
I'm having some difficulting on 3.23.38, linux x86... When I write
the following query the HAVING clause is only listening to the 'AND
Samples >= 10' and displas all Avg_Xmit regardless if it's less than
or equal to 28800.
If I remove the 'AND Samples >= 10' I get the correct results, but of
cou
