Re: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-13 Thread spameden
2013/3/13 Reindl Harald : > > > Am 12.03.2013 22:34, schrieb spameden: >> NOTE: AUTO_INCREMENT is 32768 instead of 17923 ! So next inserted row >> would have pc_id=32768. >> >> Please suggest if it's normal behavior or not > > what do you expect if a PRIMARY KEY record get's removed? > re-use the s

Re: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread Reindl Harald
Am 12.03.2013 22:34, schrieb spameden: > NOTE: AUTO_INCREMENT is 32768 instead of 17923 ! So next inserted row > would have pc_id=32768. > > Please suggest if it's normal behavior or not what do you expect if a PRIMARY KEY record get's removed? re-use the same primary key? this is not the way a

Re: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread spameden
t;> If you DELETE the _highest_ id, then restart the server, that id will be >>>> reused. (This is irritating to some people.) Otherwise, a deleted id >>>> will not be reused. >>> >>> I didn't DELETE anything! The only actions I did: >>> &

RE: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread Rick James
, 2013 2:46 PM > To: Rick James > Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com > Subject: Re: auto_increment field behavior > > 2013/3/13 Rick James : > > What settings? (innodb_autoinc_lock_mode comes to mind, but there > may > > be others.) > Hi, Rick. > > Many thanks for t

Re: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread spameden
2013/3/13 Rick James : > What settings? (innodb_autoinc_lock_mode comes to mind, but there may be > others.) Hi, Rick. Many thanks for the quick answer here is my settings: mysql> show variables like '%inc%'; +-+---+ | Variable_name | Value | +-

RE: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread Rick James
What settings? (innodb_autoinc_lock_mode comes to mind, but there may be others.) It is acceptable, by the definition of AUTO_INCREMENT, for it to burn the missing 15K ids. > -Original Message- > From: spameden [mailto:spame...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:34 PM > To: m

Re: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread spameden
o:spame...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:46 PM >> To: Rick James >> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com >> Subject: Re: auto_increment field behavior >> >> 2013/3/13 Rick James : >> > What settings? (innodb_autoinc_lock_mode comes to mind, but the

Re: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread spameden
The only actions I did: > > 1. Created the TABLE > 2. used LOAD FILE only via command line (1 thread) > > So is it normal or should I fill a bug? >> >> There may be more. Most of those are covered here: >> http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/ricksrots >> >&

Re: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread spameden
he TABLE >> 2. used LOAD FILE only via command line (1 thread) >> >> So is it normal or should I fill a bug? >>> >>> There may be more. Most of those are covered here: >>> http://mysql.rjweb.org/doc.php/ricksrots >>> >>> >>>

Re: auto_increment field behavior

2013-03-12 Thread spameden
Furthermore I've tested on 133K records and AUTO_INCREMENT field in the end had the value of 234076. mysql> select count(*) from billing.phone_codes; +--+ | count(*) | +--+ | 12 | +--+ 1 row in set (0.02 sec) AUTO_INCREMENT=234076 So it basically means If I have lar