MySQL的replace使用分析

这个我之前没有研究过,看名字就是替换。 因为我实在想不出我现在业务场景中会用到它。

  • 没想到还有开发人员居然去使用。
  • 从名字解析可能类似Oracle的merge into update的做法

先实验看看实际效果

  • 为了观察binlog,新刷新一个。

    mysql> truncate table t1;
    Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.02 sec)

    mysql> truncate table t2;
    Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.03 sec)

    mysql> flush logs;
    Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.01 sec)

    mysql> insert into t1 values (1,1,1, CURRENT_TIMESTAMP);
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.01 sec)

    mysql> replace into t2 select * from t1;
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec)
    Records: 1 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0

    mysqlbinlog binlog.000021 --base64-output=DECODE-ROWS -v |grep 'z.'
    #260107 14:45:44 server id 1 end_log_pos 366 CRC32 0x716ebe5f Table_map: z.t1 mapped to number 594

    INSERT INTO z.t1

    #260107 14:45:45 server id 1 end_log_pos 658 CRC32 0x74681c7f Table_map: z.t2 mapped to number 595

    INSERT INTO z.t2

  • 从这里可以看出来,我现在t1表写了一条数据,然后执行replace into。效果是把t1表的数据复制过去了。

  • 类似insert into select。

  • 日志的end_log_pos 366和658记录了这两行。

  • 接下来看一下不同的。在t1表继续写入一条数据。

  • 再次执行replace into

    mysql> insert into t1 values (2,2,2, CURRENT_TIMESTAMP);
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.01 sec)

    mysql> replace into t2 select * from t1;
    Query OK, 2 rows affected (0.00 sec)
    Records: 2 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0

    mysql>
    mysql> select * from t1;
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | id | m | n | t |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 14:45:44 |
    | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2026-01-07 14:47:00 |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    2 rows in set (0.00 sec)

    mysql>
    mysql> select * from t2;
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | id | m | n | time |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 14:45:44 |
    | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2026-01-07 14:47:00 |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    2 rows in set (0.00 sec)

    mysqlbinlog binlog.000021 --base64-output=DECODE-ROWS -v |grep 'z.'
    #260107 14:45:44 server id 1 end_log_pos 366 CRC32 0x716ebe5f Table_map: z.t1 mapped to number 594

    INSERT INTO z.t1

    #260107 14:45:45 server id 1 end_log_pos 658 CRC32 0x74681c7f Table_map: z.t2 mapped to number 595

    INSERT INTO z.t2

    #260107 14:47:00 server id 1 end_log_pos 953 CRC32 0x04894dd3 Table_map: z.t1 mapped to number 594

    INSERT INTO z.t1

    #260107 14:47:00 server id 1 end_log_pos 1245 CRC32 0x8d00490e Table_map: z.t2 mapped to number 595

    INSERT INTO z.t2

  • 从效果看,在刚才的t1和t2的end_log_pos 366和658后面新多了2行953和1245的两个insert。

  • 其中一个是insert t1的一个是insert t2的。

    #260107 14:47:00 server id 1 end_log_pos 1245 CRC32 0x8d00490e Table_map: z.t2 mapped to number 595

    has_generated_invisible_primary_key=0

    at 1245

    #260107 14:47:00 server id 1 end_log_pos 1301 CRC32 0x103947fd Write_rows: table id 595 flags: STMT_END_F

    Extra row info for partitioning: partition: 1

    INSERT INTO z.t2

    SET

    @1=2

    @2=2

    @3=2

    @4='2026-01-07 14:47:00'

    at 1301

    #260107 14:47:00 server id 1 end_log_pos 1332 CRC32 0xc183a77b Xid = 649006
    COMMIT/!/;

  • 具体位置的信息是这样的,看上去通过对比把第二行写入了。第一行没动。

  • 这里并没有删除,更加不是全部删除,全部新增的粗暴做法。

  • 下面试试改一行以后,会如何?

    mysql> update t1 set m=11 where id=1;
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec)
    Rows matched: 1 Changed: 1 Warnings: 0

    mysql> select * from t1;
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | id | m | n | t |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | 1 | 11 | 1 | 2026-01-07 14:45:44 |
    | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2026-01-07 14:47:00 |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    2 rows in set (0.00 sec)

    mysql>
    mysql> replace into t2 select * from t1;
    Query OK, 3 rows affected (0.00 sec)
    Records: 2 Duplicates: 1 Warnings: 0

    mysql> select * from t2;
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | id | m | n | time |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | 1 | 11 | 1 | 2026-01-07 14:45:44 |
    | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2026-01-07 14:47:00 |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    2 rows in set (0.00 sec)

    mysqlbinlog binlog.000021 --base64-output=DECODE-ROWS -v |grep 'z.'
    #260107 14:45:44 server id 1 end_log_pos 366 CRC32 0x716ebe5f Table_map: z.t1 mapped to number 594

    INSERT INTO z.t1

    #260107 14:45:45 server id 1 end_log_pos 658 CRC32 0x74681c7f Table_map: z.t2 mapped to number 595

    INSERT INTO z.t2

    #260107 14:47:00 server id 1 end_log_pos 953 CRC32 0x04894dd3 Table_map: z.t1 mapped to number 594

    INSERT INTO z.t1

    #260107 14:47:00 server id 1 end_log_pos 1245 CRC32 0x8d00490e Table_map: z.t2 mapped to number 595

    INSERT INTO z.t2

    #260107 14:48:11 server id 1 end_log_pos 1541 CRC32 0x5c8ff983 Table_map: z.t1 mapped to number 594

    UPDATE z.t1

    #260107 14:48:11 server id 1 end_log_pos 1852 CRC32 0xf82e7121 Table_map: z.t2 mapped to number 595

    UPDATE z.t2

  • 通过日志发现end_log_pos的1541和1852行各有一处更新。最终把更新的数据覆盖过来了。

接下来就是问题的点了。现实中t1和t2表,没有这么理想化。

复制代码
mysql> flush logs;
Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.01 sec)

mysql> create table d1 (id int primary key ,m int,n int ,t datetime);

Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.02 sec)

mysql> 
mysql> create table d2 (id int ,m int ,n int,time datetime default CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, PRIMARY KEY (id,time))
    -> PARTITION BY RANGE(TO_DAYS (time))
    -> (
    -> PARTITION p1 VALUES LESS THAN (TO_DAYS('2026-01-01')),
    -> PARTITION p2 VALUES LESS THAN (TO_DAYS('2026-02-01')),
    -> PARTITION p3 VALUES LESS THAN (TO_DAYS('2026-03-01')));

Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.03 sec)
  • 看到这里想必都明白了吧。d2表的主键是(id,time) d1表的主键是id。这又是会怎么样的火花?

  • 顺便说一下这就是一个非分区表改成分区表的一个迁移,只迁移最近的就行的这种。

    mysql> insert into d1 (id,m,n) values (1,1,1);
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.01 sec)

    mysql> replace into d2 (id ,m,n) select id ,m,n from d1;
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec)
    Records: 1 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0

    mysql> select * from d1;
    +----+------+------+------+
    | id | m | n | t |
    +----+------+------+------+
    | 1 | 1 | 1 | NULL |
    +----+------+------+------+
    1 row in set (0.00 sec)

    mysql> replace into d2 (id ,m,n) select id ,m,n from d1;
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.01 sec)
    Records: 1 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0

    mysql> select * from d2;
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | id | m | n | time |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 16:15:16 |
    | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 16:15:38 |
    +----+------+------+---------------------+
    2 rows in set (0.00 sec)

  • 然后再次执行replace into 发现逻辑和之前的不一样了。

  • 这就是出问题的点。

  • 这里由于d2表的time列是有默认值的,所以这样就会产生重复数据了。

  • 其实在这种前提下,d2表是 id+time的联合主键,那么d1表时间只要改变,那么送过来的数据都会重复的落在d2表中。

  • 具体看下面的实操。

复制代码

mysql> select * from d1;

±---±-----±-----±-----+

| id | m | n | t |

±---±-----±-----±-----+

| 1 | 1 | 1 | NULL |

±---±-----±-----±-----+

1 row in set (0.00 sec)

mysql> update d1 set t='2026-01-07 00:00:00' ;

Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec)

Rows matched: 1 Changed: 1 Warnings: 0

mysql> select * from d1;

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

| id | m | n | t |

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 00:00:00 |

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

1 row in set (0.00 sec)

mysql> replace into d2 (id ,m,n,time) select id ,m,n,t from d1;

Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec)

Records: 1 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0

mysql> select * from d2;

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

| id | m | n | time |

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 00:00:00 |

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 16:15:16 |

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 16:15:38 |

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 16:30:34 |

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

4 rows in set (0.00 sec)

mysql> update d1 set t='2026-01-08 00:00:00' ;

Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec)

Rows matched: 1 Changed: 1 Warnings: 0

mysql> select * from d1;

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

| id | m | n | t |

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-08 00:00:00 |

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

1 row in set (0.01 sec)

mysql> replace into d2 (id ,m,n,time) select id ,m,n,t from d1;

Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec)

Records: 1 Duplicates: 0 Warnings: 0

mysql> select * from d2;

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

| id | m | n | time |

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 00:00:00 |

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 16:15:16 |

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 16:15:38 |

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-07 16:30:34 |

| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2026-01-08 00:00:00 |

±---±-----±-----±--------------------+

5 rows in set (0.01 sec)

复制代码
# 主要是实在没想过会有人去这样用replace into。
相关推荐
2601_949833391 天前
flutter_for_openharmony口腔护理app实战+意见反馈实现
android·javascript·flutter
峥嵘life1 天前
Android 16 EDLA测试STS模块
android·大数据·linux·学习
TheNextByte11 天前
如何打印Android手机联系人?
android·智能手机
泡泡以安1 天前
Android 逆向实战:从零突破某电商 App 登录接口全参数加密
android·爬虫·安卓逆向
2501_944525541 天前
Flutter for OpenHarmony 个人理财管理App实战 - 预算详情页面
android·开发语言·前端·javascript·flutter·ecmascript
清蒸鳜鱼1 天前
【Mobile Agent——Droidrun】MacOS+Android配置、使用指南
android·macos·mobileagent
2501_915918411 天前
HTTPS 代理失效,启用双向认证(mTLS)的 iOS 应用网络怎么抓包调试
android·网络·ios·小程序·https·uni-app·iphone
峥嵘life1 天前
Android EDLA CTS、GTS等各项测试命令汇总
android·学习·elasticsearch
Cobboo1 天前
i单词上架鸿蒙应用市场之路:一次从 Android 到 HarmonyOS 的完整实战
android·华为·harmonyos
天下·第二1 天前
达梦数据库适配
android·数据库·adb