<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 3 ways to maintain rollup tables in SQL</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2006/07/19/3-ways-to-maintain-rollup-tables-in-sql/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2006/07/19/3-ways-to-maintain-rollup-tables-in-sql/</link>
	<description>Stay curious!</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:59:43 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: gavis</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2006/07/19/3-ways-to-maintain-rollup-tables-in-sql/#comment-14143</link>
		<dc:creator>gavis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 07:59:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xaprb.com/blog/?p=161#comment-14143</guid>
		<description>how do i go about maintaining 300  databases which each have 100  tables, to ensure the best performance and to ensure it doesnt crash..?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>how do i go about maintaining 300  databases which each have 100  tables, to ensure the best performance and to ensure it doesnt crash..?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Xaprb</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2006/07/19/3-ways-to-maintain-rollup-tables-in-sql/#comment-1164</link>
		<dc:creator>Xaprb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2006 16:44:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xaprb.com/blog/?p=161#comment-1164</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;That's one way I suppose, depending on the way the tables are built, but I can't see that working well for my current employer's tables.  Finding orphans would involve an exclusion join in our schema, and could be much more involved depending on the schema -- it might be much more difficult than zeroing or one of the other methods I mentioned.  In our case I think it would be much harder on the DB server.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;What would be the advantage of &lt;code&gt;ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE&lt;/code&gt; over &lt;code&gt;REPLACE&lt;/code&gt;, besides that it updates rows in place instead of deleting and inserting? (That's a significant benefit anyway...  I'll look at our rollup queries again)&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s one way I suppose, depending on the way the tables are built, but I can&#8217;t see that working well for my current employer&#8217;s tables.  Finding orphans would involve an exclusion join in our schema, and could be much more involved depending on the schema &#8212; it might be much more difficult than zeroing or one of the other methods I mentioned.  In our case I think it would be much harder on the DB server.</p>
<p>What would be the advantage of <code>ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE</code> over <code>REPLACE</code>, besides that it updates rows in place instead of deleting and inserting? (That&#8217;s a significant benefit anyway&#8230;  I&#8217;ll look at our rollup queries again)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: groditi</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2006/07/19/3-ways-to-maintain-rollup-tables-in-sql/#comment-1158</link>
		<dc:creator>groditi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:10:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xaprb.com/blog/?p=161#comment-1158</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Why not just use &lt;code&gt;ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE&lt;/code&gt; and then run a delete for orphans at the end of the job?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why not just use <code>ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE</code> and then run a delete for orphans at the end of the job?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
