Message
From
28/09/2006 17:22:29
Dragan Nedeljkovich
Now officially retired
Zrenjanin, Serbia
 
 
To
27/09/2006 17:08:10
Mike Yearwood
Toronto, Ontário, Canada
General information
Fórum:
Visual FoxPro
Category:
Programação, sintaxe e comandos
Environment versions
Visual FoxPro:
VFP 6 SP5
OS:
Windows XP
Network:
Novell 5.x
Database:
Visual FoxPro
Miscellaneous
ID da thread:
01157669
ID da mensagem:
01157992
Views:
39
>Hi all.
>
>I'm wondering if you'd consider this an architectural issue or something else. Please tell me what you'd call it.
>
>I found a piece of code in an otherwise multi-user environment that builds a .IDX on a shared file. The IDX was filtered and used to access a subset of 5 million records. It took several minutes to build, but the users didn't mind that.
>
>I tripped over this issue while debugging. I only needed to change the code to SET FILTER using existing keys instead of INDEX ON to get the same effect in seconds.

Fifteen years ago I did great with temp indexes - in mFoxPlus and FP1.0x. That was the poor man's SQL of the time. I even had over-the-shoulder indexes, i.e. indexing on a field in a related table plus a field in the current table. This was for reporting only, and I took care to kill the temporary idx afterwards, and to give it a nonconflicting name (probably went to a local temp directory, don't really remember).

But all that was gone when I laid my hands on 2.0 and the internal SQL syntax. All the reporting code where I used temp indexes just shrank by 60%.

So... maybe you have a case of a predecessor who just likes to do it the way it was once done?

back to same old

the first online autobiography, unfinished by design
What, me reckless? I'm full of recks!
Balkans, eh? Count them.
Previous
Next
Responder
Mapa
View