On 7/3/2007 7:43 PM, Steve Singer wrote:
> 
> Is there anything we can do for 2.0 to improve DDL use cases?
> 
> I had sent out a patch a while back that lets EXECUTE SCRIPT take a list of 
> tables to lock (thus not locking everything).  I never did get any feedback 
> on the patch.  If there is interest I can try to bring it up to the current 
> 2.0 head and resend it.
> 
> Do the new was of disabling triggers have any effect on the dangers of doing 
> alter tables outside of an execute script? Is there anything we can do to 
> improve that (at least for DDL where the order it is applied on doesn't need 
> to match on the slaves)

They do indeed have an effect on precisely that, because now the system 
catalog is clean and you actually can do arbitrary DDL without going 
through EXECUTE SCRIPT at all. Whether doing so makes sense or not and 
eventually screws up your data because the commands affect different 
sets of rows is another question.

Since this also means that EXECUTE SCRIPT does not lock any tables by 
itself, one can issue the required LOCK TABLE statements at the 
beginning of the script, so I don't think such a patch is required any 
more. Unless I am missing something, that is.


Jan

-- 
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck at Yahoo.com #