>>>>>>> Also here is another potential problem, if index expression becomes longer than 255 chars...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>More exactly, longer than 240 bytes.
>>>>>
>>>>>Hi Alexander,
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks for your response. Actually I meant not the result of the indexing (it would be 29 chars in my case), but the index expression itself. However, I've tried this new expression right now and it worked just fine. It surely looks complex :)
>>>>>
>>>>>

>>>>>index on ;
>>>>>town+UPPER(PADR(TRIM(IIF(AT("=",OWNER1,2)>0,SUBSTR(OWNER1, ;
>>>>>AT("=",OWNER1)+1,AT("=",OWNER1,2)-AT("=",OWNER1)-1),SUBSTR(OWNER1,AT("=",OWNER1)+1)))+ ;
>>>>>IIF(AT("=",OWNER1)>0,LEFT(OWNER1,AT("=",OWNER1)-1),""),25)) tag name1
>>>>>

>>>>
>>>>It wouldn't be a problem to use getfname(), getlname() etc UDF or this complex expressions if you're sure this schema doesn't get you into trouble :
>>>>
>>>>owner1 = "sammy b=iron"
>>>>owner1 = "ammy b=irons"
>>>>
>>>>Names are fictitious of course but I don't know a combination might exist or not in US names. Keeping the separators sounds to be a better idea to me.
>>>>Cetin
>>>So, you're suggesting to add a space between last name and first name and probably use padr(26) then. That's a good suggestion, thanks. Other than that, I think, this complicated expression is better, than UDFs anyway
>>
>>Might not be. With your udf expression might look like :
>>
>>town+GetLName(namefield)+' '+GetFName(namefield)
>>
>>When you're doing a search or SQL to optimize you'd need an expression to match one existing index. This one would be easier or even I would completely make this a new UDF.
>>Cetin
>
>Hi Cetin,
>
>I have this function:

>*!******************************************************************************
>function GetFLNameWithComma
>*  Description.......: Function returns LastName, First name + Initial
>*  Calling Samples...: GetFLNameWithComma(buyer1)
>*  Parameter List....: tcName
>*  Created by........: Nadya Nosonovsky 08/22/2000 05:10:15 PM
>********************************************************************
>lparameter tcName
>local lcFName, lcLName, lnPosEqual1, lnPosEqual2, lcFullName
>lcLName=alltrim(m.tcName)
>lnPosEqual1=at('=',m.lcLName)
>lnPosEqual2=at('=',m.lcLName,2)
>lcFName=""
>if m.lnPosEqual1>0
>	lcFName=left(m.lcLName,m.lnPosEqual1-1)
>	lcLName=substr(m.lcLName,m.lnPosEqual1+1,;
>		iif(m.lnPosEqual2>0,m.lnPosEqual2-m.lnPosEqual1-1,25))
>endif
>lcFullName=m.lcLName+iif(!empty(m.lcFName),', ','')+m.lcFName
>return m.lcFullName

>
>If I put index on town+padr(GetFLNameWithComma(owner1),26) tag name1 it would mean, what we can use our tables only inside the application or with path set properly to the storage of this function...
>
>Anyway, what in your opinion is better: this UDF or the long complicated expression? (BTW, I already updated our IndxDict with this long expression for all "name" kind of indexes).

Nadya,
Stored procedures move with thair databases.
Cetin