Re: mysql_affected_rows inaccurate?
| From: | Richard Lynch | Date: | Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:12:41 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: mysql_affected_rows inaccurate? | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-248940@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, February 15, 2007 10:06 am, altendew wrote:
>
> Hi a long time ago I stopped using mysql_affected_rows because I
> believed it
> was giving me an inaccurate number. Now I was not very knowledged then
> so it
> could of been my own fault. Is this function safe and functional?
> Could it
> possibly give me the row result of a previous query I did and not the
> latest?
Works for me.
It only counts rows that ACTUALLY CHANGED and not the number of rows
that fit your WHERE clause.
This can be confusing at first, but is quite useful, particularly for
marking records "dirty" when you want to re-publish a record only if
it really really changed in a large database -> static publishing
setup.
http://php.net/mysql_affected_rows
--
Some people have a "gift" link here.
Know what I want?
I want you to buy a CD from some starving artist.
http://cdbaby.com/browse/from/lynch
Yeah, I get a buck. So?