On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <regmeplease@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 22:13:15 hai scritto: > > On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <regmeplease@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Il Tuesday 06 November 2007 19:43:38 Scott Marlowe ha scritto: > > > > On 11/6/07, Reg Me Please <regmeplease@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > That seems not to be the case. > > > > > The last line has a \. by its own and the last but one is > > > > > well formed. > > > > > > > > (Please don't top post...) > > > > > > > > Got a self contained test case you can post? > > > > > > Back to the original topic ... > > > > > > I'm trying to understand what and where. > > > The point is that I have this 29M+ lines script telling me there's a > > > problem somewhere. > > > > > > A self contained test, at the moment, would be that long! > > > > > > I'm considering a "branch and bound" approach ... but it'd be quite long > > > and tedious as the program generating the script has not been written > > > to do such things. > > > > Split it in half, with the appropriate sql on each end so the data > > still works, and see which half causes a problem. Keep splitting the > > one that causes a problem in half until you have a small one with the > > problem still. > > > > I'm guessing the problem will become obvious then. > > That's the "branch and bound". Editing 29M+ lines file takes some time. > But this is the way I'm going to go right now. Oh, we called it half-splitting in the military. Using something like head / tail in unix to do it. Should be fairly fast, especially if you keep cutting it in half after the first test. I can't imagine editing something that large even in vi being very fast. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
