>>Where are you running the SQL? When I query 500,000 records to my hard drive, it takes less than 2 seconds on average. Something doesn't seem right with your query...
>
>No, that's about right. But I momentarily get the hourglass when using the SELECT statement, with about a one second delay, while the SEEK followed by COPY TO ARRAY is instantaneous.
>
>My guess is that my particular situation demonstrates the overhead of using SQL statements (i.e., the internal housekeeping) vs the other method. In other words, SQL won't query a 1000 record database in 1/100th the time of a 100,000 record database, all other things being equal. The bigger the source table, and the bigger the resultant set, the better SQL operates compared to other methods.
Yes, I think that makes good sense. You can sort of "feel" the SQL overhead especially on small tables where you might expect instantaneous results.
The Anonymous Bureaucrat,
and frankly, quite content not to be
a member of either major US political party.