Search the MySQL manual:

1.9.1 New Features Planned For 4.1

The features below are not yet implemented in MySQL 4.1, but are planned for implementation before MySQL 4.1 moves into its beta phase. For a list what is already done in MySQL 4.1, see section 1.6.1 Features Available in MySQL 4.1.

Development of other things has already shifted to the 5.0 tree.

User Comments

Posted by Federico Razzoli on Wednesday September 18 2002, @3:08pm[Delete] [Edit]

You are implementing and planning to implement very useful
functions/features. But BEFORE THAT I think you should
implement some powerful Sql instructions: all Join types,
INTERSECT, MINUS and EXCEPT. You also should focus on
speed, because complex Sql queries could be slow. Anyway,
subselects and derived tables are great.

Posted by Bernhard Lukassen on Tuesday May 6 2003, @1:30am[Delete] [Edit]

If you are implementing the GROUP BY ROLLUP please do not forget the GROUP BY CUBE! Also provide a function that the aggregation levels in the result set can be marked and found. E.g. the function GROUPING_ID() like in Oracle. Also some Analysis function like RANK(), DENSE_RANK(), LAG() LEAD(), ... may be usefull.

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday May 18 2003, @7:12pm[Delete] [Edit]

When using replication, sometimes you want to know if two databases are the same. It would be nice to be able to compare two databases, and produce a diff.

To save network bandwidth, it would be nice to be able to get checksums of tables and/or rows.

select id, sha1(*) from employees;

Or from a set of rows:

select id, sha1(*) from employees where id >= 0 and id < 20;

Or maybe from an entire table:

sha1 (select * from employees);

I'm no sql expert so I'm not sure if that's the correct way of doing this.

A program (mysqldiff?) could then connect to two databases, compare the tables row-for-row or table-for-table (or N rows at a time).

The output could simply be SQL; a set of insert/update/delete statements which would make the first database the same as the second.

Posted by Ben Margolin on Monday June 2 2003, @4:54am[Delete] [Edit]

Stuff I think is more important (more important than OLAP--if you need OLAP, buy something heavy duty--you can probably justify the cost.)...

- SPs. *Versionable*. Yes, I know it's coming in 5.0... I'd love it to have (a) pluggable syntax (php would be first choice after the ansi syntax) and (b) easily-controlled with cvs or other rev control. So needs to support "SHOW PROCS LIKE *", "DESCRIBE PROC", etc. in addition to the usual stuff.

- XML resultsets. Nothing too fancy, don't need schemas yet, etc. But basic XML results. HOWEVER, please make it efficient--the actual text tags should NOT be sent back--compress them and send the compression tree back, and have the client do the expansion. I believe sql server 2000 sp2(?) is now doing this, and it's a cool feature, and not just for XSL'ing the results for the web (although great for that, of course.) Ideally you want to be able to apply a XML schema to the data to transform it as it query is sent back, but I can wait on that one.

Posted by q q on Tuesday July 22 2003, @10:54am[Delete] [Edit]

community need REPLICATION, like merge, or transactional mostly

Add your own comment.