Hi doug,

I would prefer,

SET ORDER TO
SEEK ...
SCAN WHILE ...

or even better

SCAN WHILE .... FOR ....

which enables you to filter out unwanted values based on another colum

Walter,


>Walter,
>
>Another technique is to do the following:
>
>1) SET ORDER TO >2) SEEK
>3) DO WHILE
>
>This can be even faster if it meets your needs. For example, if you have a lot of line items for a customer. SEEK the Customer ID and DO WHILE the table's Customer ID is what you need.
>
>
>
>>Hi glenn,
>>
>>I know i'm stepping on ice, but when seeking records on more than one criteria, a SET FILTER in combination with SEEK can be far faster than a optmizable LOCATE. However, performance depends on the selectivity of the FILTER.
>>
>>Walter,
>>
>>>Seek cannot be beat for data retrieval based upon a single index expression. If you need to retrieve data based upon multiple optimized expressions the use either locate or SQL-Select.
>>>
>>>ie. Locate for state='MI' and city='TRAVERSE' or
>>>Selecte * from MyTable where state='MI' and city='TRAVERSE'
>>>
>>>Glenn
>>>
>>>
>>>>Moises,
>>>>
>>>>As Alex has said Locate can be as effective as Seek, however, you need to be very careful and ensure that your statement is Rushmore optimised or you will have a performance hit.
>>>>
>>>>Locate is powerful in that it will sequentially read through a table if it can't use Rushmore, however the downside is that it can be very slow.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>Aaron