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
After setting innodb_autoinc_lock_mode=0 it seems to start working as
expected for me:
mysql> show variables like 'innodb_autoinc_lock_mode';
+--+---+
| Variable_name| Value |
+--+---+
| innodb_autoinc_lock_mode | 0 |
+---
Nevermind, I've found the bug:
http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=57643
I'm gonna subscribe for it and see if it's gonna be resolved.
Many thanks guys for all your assistance!
2013/3/13 spameden :
> 2013/3/13 Rick James :
>> AUTO_INCREMENT guarantees that it will not assign the same number twice.
2013/3/13 Rick James :
> AUTO_INCREMENT guarantees that it will not assign the same number twice.
> That's about all it is willing to guarantee.
>
> With InnoDB, if a transaction starts, uses an auto_inc value, then rolls
> back, that id is lost.
True, but if you do not specify START TRANSACTIO
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
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 |
+-
AUTO_INCREMENT guarantees that it will not assign the same number twice.
That's about all it is willing to guarantee.
With InnoDB, if a transaction starts, uses an auto_inc value, then rolls back,
that id is lost.
When you have multiple threads loading data into the same table, diff values of
Also, forget to quote from the docs
(http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/innodb-auto-increment-handling.html)
"With innodb_autoinc_lock_mode set to 0 (“traditional”) or 1
(“consecutive”), the auto-increment values generated by any given
statement will be consecutive, without gaps, because the t
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
