Hi all anyone know how to.

Ducan: If they **** for normal php pages that connect and die

Korns: There should be a case where they are better, no?

Correl: Lucyfx: That blog post says it quite clear when stored procedures make sense

Splatt: From what you tell, they just plain **** for every case?

Casana: Yeah I read that part

Cabe: Hence, I said long running process with persistent connection

Correl: Lucyfx: Considering how easy is to debug and maintain them and how many bugs are still reported for them I’d say they **** for every case

Lungsford: Lucyfx: “Long running process” is really meaningless. It just depends what your application plans to do across that connection. In most long running processes, one procedure could not possibly do the work, since there are often multiple request based on data not contained in the database. One procedure is often not able to handle something like that, easily, or at all.

Savers: Salle: I know there’s some kinda voodoo going on to make DISTINCT work against the SLELECT clause but I’m still trying to understand it haha

Paniccia: Salle: in any event this is pretty cool

Gochenour: Ugh. the created code by phpmyadmin to create a definer does add the trigger, but when i run this code manually it doesn’t work a error, again

Correl: Lucyfx: My personal opinion is that stored procedures are relic from the distant past – Client-Server era in 1980s. Nowadays there is at least one more server layer between the database and the client and the bussiness logic belongs to these layer not to the database server. That’s just me indeed :

Correl: Lucid: Voodoo? DISTINCT is one of the simplest things in SQL :

Holderby: Salle: I mean the spooky action you’ve got going on at a distance

Correl: Lucid: SELECT DISTINCT whatever FROM .; tells the server “give me distinct rows”

Poovey: Even the sample code directly from the manual page isn’t working, what is this for bs?

Cohan: Salle: sure but the DISTINCT is in the outer query!

Radsek: Its still very strange to m

Correl: Lucid: SELECT DISTINCT a FROM .; returns distinct values of a

Correl: Lucid: SELECT DISTINCT a, b FROM .; returns distinct pairs of a and b

Ardizone: Salle: sure so you’re getting distinctvalues for x

Mysinger: Salle: but using procedures wouldn’t mean having everything on same server, no? you can still have them on separate servers, whats the difference?

Correl: Lucid: SELECT DISTINCT a, b, c FROM .; returns distinct triples of a, b and c and so on

Gerner: Salle: but how does that make last_y and second_last_y their respective iterative past n times values?

Correl: Lucyfx: stored procedures on separate server? What does that mean?

Vanleeuwen: When you said “one more server layer between database and client”, I mean what difference does this make for procedures?

Correl: Lucid: That was your approach. I thought you understand it

Lotze: They look usable in both cases, no ?

Wollin: Salle: I understand what you’re doing, but not how it’s happening. DISTINCT is within a derived query so t1.x only selected val is always distinct

Camire: Salle: but up in the select you’re using the same exact query twice and not getting the same value! so it’s somehow iterating over t1

Correl: Lucid: SELECT DISTINCT x FROM ts; gives me distinct values of x instead of all values of x. In my case thats 10 vs 2 million

Blomberg: I don’t understand why last_y isn’t always the same as second_last_y

Correl: 11, but that deosn’t matter

Oflaherty: What you have here doesnt work

Correl: Lucid: Yes because i made stupid typo as you could see

Correl: Lucid: The second one should be LIMIT 1,1 not 0,1

Pee: When I looked at first I thought you were showing me up with something that did it with the same query twice

Correl: Lucid: http://pastie.org/10434500

Kotschevar: Hi all anyone know how to install 5.6 mysql on ubuntu? the apt-get install install the version 5.2