On 8/4/06, Chris White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 04 August 2006 04:04 am, Kaushal Shriyan wrote:
> mysql -u kaushal -h example.com -p drupal <
> /home/kaushal/drupal/new/a-l.sql and then do
> mysql -u kaushal -h example.com -p drupal <
> /home/kaushal/drupal/new/m-s.sql
Better would be:
mysql -u kaushal -h example.com -p drupal < ~/drupal/new/a-l.sql &&
mysql -u kaushal -h example.com -p drupal < ~/drupal/new/m-s.sql
Couple of things, first off ~/ expands to /home/kaushal assuming you're
running this as the kaushal user. If root, you can do ~kaushal/ to achieve
the same effect. Next is && which means "run the next command only if the
first command finishes successfully". To answer what I think was your
original question, no, m-s.sql wouldn't interfere with a-l.sql's insertions
because they run in sequence, first a-l, then m-s. The only time I'd really
see this as an issue is if you were trying to run both at once, which in my
opinion is a Bad Idea(tm).
What if each .sql contains a "DROP TABLE IF EXISTS" statement at the
start? Something to be carefull if its the program that generated the
backup likes to add this tags.
--
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
