On 2011-04-25 20:00, Leonardo Francalanci wrote:<br /><span style="white-space: pre;">>> The amount of data loss
ona big table will be <1% of the data<br /> >> loss caused by truncating the whole table.<br /> > <br />
>If that 1% is random (not time/transaction related), usually you'd<br /> > rather have an empty table. In other
words:is a table that is not<br /> > consistant with anything else in the db useful?<br /> > </span><br />
Dependson the application, if it serves for pure caching then it is fully acceptable and way<br /> better than dropping
everything.<br/><br /> -- <br /> Jesper<br /><br />