|
|
Posted by frizzle on 02/07/06 14:22
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> frizzle wrote:
> > Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> >
> >>frizzle wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hi there,
> >>>
> >>>I have a mySQL system with a news publishing part in it:
> >>>Admins can create new items with text in it, and they have an option to
> >>>create 'fulltexts', so you'd get "read more ..." on the front page,
> >>>click it and read the fulltext.
> >>>
> >>>Is there a possibility for mySQL (query) to check if 'fulltext' is
> >>>empty or not, and only return true or false, so i don't have to put the
> >>>whole fulltext into the mysql_fetch_array() to decide wether or not to
> >>>show 'read_more', or should i create an extra boolean field in the DB
> >>>saying fulltext y/n ?
> >>>
> >>>Greetings Frizzle.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Put it in a separate table with just the article's id and the text. If
> >>the id exists in the second table, there is more text.
> >>
> >>--
> >>==================
> >>Remove the "x" from my email address
> >>Jerry Stuckle
> >>JDS Computer Training Corp.
> >>jstucklex@attglobal.net
> >>==================
> >
> >
> > This would have me quering against an extra table. Would'nt it be
> > quicker to add an extra boolean field then?
> >
> > Frizzle.
> >
>
> Why? Joins are quick. Probably a lot faster than unnecessarily
> processing empty text fields in the first table.
>
> --
> ==================
> Remove the "x" from my email address
> Jerry Stuckle
> JDS Computer Training Corp.
> jstucklex@attglobal.net
> ==================
I understand what you're saying. I think i'm underestimating the speed
of Joins (mySQL)
Not to be a nag, but would it still be faster to add an extra field to
the original table, 'fulltext_available' tinyint(1), which tells me to
look for it or not?
And, am i wrong believing that if i use 'SELECT fieldname1, name2 etc.'
in the query, it leaves the unmentioned fields unbothered, thus not
being influenced by their size/contents ?
Frizzle.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|