MySQL last table alteration time

Stuart Jansen sjansen at
Wed Mar 28 13:50:21 MDT 2007

On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 13:44 -0600, Dave Smith wrote:
> Because performance would be poor on large tables. In order to find when 
> a table was last modified, MySQL would have to scan every row in every 
> table. I would also have to modify all my existing tables to include a 
> timestamp column. The trigger-based solution has a constant time 
> complexity (in terns of each table's row count) for timestamp lookups, 
> while your solution appears to be linear (read: long-term problems down 
> the road). The trigger-based solution also requires no change to the 
> existing tables' schema. Seems superior to me. You?

Bah, in the real nobody needs triggers or sub-selects or... Yeah, I
guess this comment is flamebait. But if I still haven't forgiven KDE for
choosing a non-free library, why should I forgive MySQL for not being a
real database?

Stuart Jansen              e-mail/jabber: sjansen at
                           google talk:   stuart.jansen at

"However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at 
the results." -- Winston Churchill
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : 

More information about the PLUG mailing list