You know the sort: lots of rows to change and no downtime available. The advantage is that lots of small UPDATE statements won't prevent the site running normally.
Wade.
Dumb SQL question
- (drook)
- (12)
- April 13, 2010, 08:38:58 AM EDT
My lazy way
- (crazy)
- (3)
- April 13, 2010, 11:23:53 AM EDT
You have ...
- (beepster)
- (2)
- April 13, 2010, 01:26:55 PM EDT
Depends
- (crazy)
- (1)
- April 13, 2010, 02:05:59 PM EDT
Maybe not so simple then
- (drook)
- April 13, 2010, 03:10:33 PM EDT
Did you try a self-join?
- (static)
- (1)
- April 13, 2010, 08:17:00 PM EDT
Not yet, but about to
- (drook)
- April 13, 2010, 09:23:05 PM EDT
And then there is the (ugly) semi-manual way
- (CRConrad)
- (5)
- Sept. 15, 2010, 08:07:41 PM EDT
This is also good for invasive updates.
- (static)
- Sept. 15, 2010, 08:14:45 PM EDT
That's my kind of ugly
- (drook)
- (2)
- Sept. 15, 2010, 09:12:21 PM EDT
It's also an interesting lesson in pragmatism.
- (static)
- (1)
- Sept. 15, 2010, 09:17:00 PM EDT
I've done round trips mySQL -> vim -> PHP -> mySQL
- (drook)
- Sept. 15, 2010, 09:27:26 PM EDT
Another batching method
- (jay)
- Sept. 15, 2010, 11:25:34 PM EDT