Sure -- yours is simple, therefore faster - -in this context better. Which proves that two heads are better than one -- provided they are not on the same set of shoulders.<g>
>Hi Gar,
>
>I've just tested my function vs. your function. My function works much faster.
>
>This is my test program:
>

>********************************************************************
>*  Description.......: Test program to generate Unique Identifier in the SQL statement
>*  Calling Samples...: 
>*  Parameter List....: 
>*  Created by........: Nadya Nosonovsky 05/09/2000 05:44:54 PM 
>*  Modified by.......: 
>********************************************************************
>local lnSec
>lnSec=seconds()
>PRIVATE pIDKey
>pIDKey=0
>set talk on
>ssss='ssss'+sys(3)
>select UniqueIDGen() as RecNum, * ;
>       from PropMstr inner join SiteMstr on PropMstr.PropID=SiteMstr.PropID;
>       where SiteMstr.town='CAMB';
>       into table &ssss
>
>RELEASE pIDKey
>=messagebox( 'Run in '+alltrim(str(seconds()-lnSec,10,5)))
>
>******************************************
>Function UniqueIDGen
>pIDKey=pIDKey+1
>
>return pIDKey-1
>

>
>>One more alternative. I'm not familiar with Craig Berstons KB, but it is probably a variation on a pretty standard method of key generation, incrementing a number stored in a separate table. Calling the this same function in your SQL statement might another way of generating the numbers you need.
>>
>>>Hi again,
>>>
>>>Ok, I'll try and compare the speed difference.
>>>
>>>For unique ID generator in our DBCs, we use the same approach, as in Craig Bernston KB.
>>>
>>>Thanks for your help.
>>>
>>>>>Hi again Gar,
>>>>>
>>>>>As far as I recall from VFP Help, UDFs slow down SQL perfomance and work unpredictable. I'm afraid to put this function into long query (which produces ~ 1mln. records)
>>>>
>>>>Scalar funcitons, which this is are not unpredictable. This should give very solid results. Whether it would slow you down -- again, scalar functions don't neccesarily slow down the results. Give this function a try. I guarantee it will do what you need, and the only way to tell whether it will slow performance is to give it a try.
>>>>>
>>>>>Not sure, that I understand about shared tables. In from clause, of course, I use shared tables. The resulting table isn't shared and it's name is generated unique name.
>>>>
>>>>That is what I mean -- it is an unshared result table. Basically what I am saying is you would not want to use this function as the default value of a key in a table in your shared database -- because the results might not be unique. But in the context of an SQL call the results will be unique and what you are looking for.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks for your help. We'll see, what we can do here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hope th is really does help.