>That would depend on how many records are selected in the first phase, right? I suspect that if many records are selected in the first phase, it might get quite slow. I believe you have managed to avoid this.

Yes, I avoided that by sorting my array, as I wrote. Anyway, my solution is generic, so I have made a function out it, I use this function many places in my systems. It has saved me a lot of time of programming, and my searches are always at least partially optimized.
>
>I think that creating a single query with a combined condition would be still faster, but quite often, it is better to do whatever is fastest to program.
>
>>No, on the contrary, it's very fast! Notice that the first search is fully optimized, and the next searches are done in RAM. In my case I have a table with about 6 million records, and the search is always immidiate. In reality the total speed depends on how many records you get in the first SELECT. In my system I have a function to sort the laCondition array so the longest condition is in the first element, since this condition normally will get fewest records which is a plus.