Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 01:40:32PM +0200, Feite Brekeveld wrote:
> > > Well, an index speeds it up, but that times 80,000 will still take a while.
> > > Is there any trickery or will this work?
> > >
> > > update accounting set status = 'C';
> > >
> > > If so, that
On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 01:40:32PM +0200, Feite Brekeveld wrote:
> > Well, an index speeds it up, but that times 80,000 will still take a while.
> > Is there any trickery or will this work?
> >
> > update accounting set status = 'C';
> >
> > If so, that will be much faster.
>
> No that will not w
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 01:08:29PM +0200, Feite Brekeveld wrote:
> > Now this table has about 80,000 records. I need to update 74,000 status
> > fields. So I made a dump, and hacked the dump into SQL statements like:
> >
> > update accounting set status = 'C' where
On Fri, Aug 17, 2001 at 01:08:29PM +0200, Feite Brekeveld wrote:
> Now this table has about 80,000 records. I need to update 74,000 status
> fields. So I made a dump, and hacked the dump into SQL statements like:
>
> update accounting set status = 'C' where seqno = 1566385;
>
> and the other
Hi,
I have a table with no relations to other tables. It has a sequence
number field (integer) and a status field being a char.
There is a unique index on the seqno field.
Now this table has about 80,000 records. I need to update 74,000 status
fields. So I made a dump, and hacked the dump into
