<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"><channel><title>WanTianwen 爱上你CSDN 专栏 - </title><link>category/381978.aspx</link><description /><dc:language>zh-CN</dc:language><lastUpdateTime>Wed, 07 May 2008 01:30:54 GMT</lastUpdateTime><ttl>60</ttl><item><dc:creator>WanTianwen</dc:creator><title>InnoDB和MyISAM的差别及性能测试</title><link>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/05/07/2405362.aspx</link><pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 01:31:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/05/07/2405362.aspx</guid><wfw:comment>comments/2405362.aspx</wfw:comment><comments>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/05/07/2405362.aspx#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>comments/commentRss/2405362.aspx</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://tb.blog.csdn.net/TrackBack.aspx?PostId=2405362</trackback:ping><description>InnoDB和MyISAM是在使用MySQL最常用的两个表类型，各有优缺点，视具体应用而定。基本的差别为：MyISAM类型不支持事务处理等高级处理，而InnoDB类型支持。MyISAM类型的表强调的是性能，其执行数度比InnoDB类型更快，但是不提供事务支持，而InnoDB提供事务支持已经外部键等高级数据库功能。&lt;img src ="aggbug/2405362.aspx" width = "1" height = "1" /&gt;</description></item><item><dc:creator>WanTianwen</dc:creator><title>SQL2000附加SQL2005数据具体方法</title><link>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/05/03/2366084.aspx</link><pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 01:33:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/05/03/2366084.aspx</guid><wfw:comment>comments/2366084.aspx</wfw:comment><comments>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/05/03/2366084.aspx#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>comments/commentRss/2366084.aspx</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://tb.blog.csdn.net/TrackBack.aspx?PostId=2366084</trackback:ping><description>如题，若使用SQL2000附加SQL2005的数据库时在附加时会出现了错误602，提示“对sysindexes运行DBCC CHECKTABLE”因为数据库附加到2005的时候, 数据库文件已经自动升级到2005, 所以在2000下是无法再附加的(没有向上兼容的)&lt;img src ="aggbug/2366084.aspx" width = "1" height = "1" /&gt;</description></item><item><dc:creator>WanTianwen</dc:creator><title>insert into 和select * into的性能比较</title><link>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/04/24/2319652.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 03:29:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/04/24/2319652.aspx</guid><wfw:comment>comments/2319652.aspx</wfw:comment><comments>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/04/24/2319652.aspx#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>comments/commentRss/2319652.aspx</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://tb.blog.csdn.net/TrackBack.aspx?PostId=2319652</trackback:ping><description>有朋友说两者之间存在很大的性能差异，是由于数据库的日志模式不一样，simple和完整的会导致差异。&lt;img src ="aggbug/2319652.aspx" width = "1" height = "1" /&gt;</description></item><item><dc:creator>WanTianwen</dc:creator><title>一个SQL大牛提的一个sql优化小测试</title><link>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/04/24/2319651.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 03:26:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/04/24/2319651.aspx</guid><wfw:comment>comments/2319651.aspx</wfw:comment><comments>http://blog.csdn.net/WanTianwen/archive/2008/04/24/2319651.aspx#Feedback</comments><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss>comments/commentRss/2319651.aspx</wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://tb.blog.csdn.net/TrackBack.aspx?PostId=2319651</trackback:ping><description>大家如果对SQL优化感兴趣的话,可以进来看看，挑战挑战。&lt;img src ="aggbug/2319651.aspx" width = "1" height = "1" /&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>