vinita bansal wrote:
> Oh Sorry!!
> I gave a wrong example for update. It includes "where clause" as well
> which esentially mean that not all the rows will be modified each time.
> If suppose I already know (assuming that I can find out which rows will
> bw accessed) is there a way to organize the table data such that updates
> and selects become fast.
>
> We cannot make changes to the application to handle such a situation (by
> creating two different tables one for active and another for inactive
> data) wherein it will access active data mostly and access inactive data
> from other table only when required since it is very complex and
> changing it will require lots of effort.
OK - so show one or more typical queries and their EXPLAIN ANALYSE
outputs and we can see where the bottleneck is.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd