>Walter
>
>>I know you're obsessed with these kind of optimizations, but what is optimized really depends on the population. For only two records having an index lookup really means LESS performance compared to a table scan.

>Obsessed has a bad connotation. You seem to be obsessed with arguing these points. I used the word optimal because the change I suggest is the best way I can see to do it.

I might be obsessed with these because you're driving too far IMO.

>Index or not LOCATE FOR UPPER(FIELD) = variable will be better than LOCATE FOR UPPER(FIELD) = UPPER(VARIABLE) and certainly better than UPPER(OBJECT.PROPERTY).

In all except a few very few cases, this is totally irrelevant from a perfromance POV. If you're concerned about processing thousands and millions of records, then make sure the expression is rushmore optimizable, so that the right argument is evaluated only once in the comparison, or use SEEK()

>I did say "even if you have no indexes". If the table gets larger, he could always add the index later. That is certainly better than going back to change code, which requires potentially huge re-testing. It takes no more time to do it like that. I suggested the optimal way for this situation.

>>As all in software development. If there is a performance problem, try to take it out. It really does not make sense to spend a lot of time to optimize each and every program line in a project.
>
>It it better to avoid performance problems by not creating them in the first place.

Sure, but that does not mean you want to squeeze out every ms out of a routine that does not need it.. Wether a user has to wait 1 or 2ms for a dialog to pop up, the user really does not care.

>>Programming from a performance pov is only neccesary if you expect that piece of software to be susceptible to performance problems. Otherwise don't bother, your time is not worth it.

>No customer I've ever met agrees with you. They want the best software and they actually believe that is what we will give them.

A customer does not know much about programming, and really does not understand the statement I made above. My statement means.

I can either give you maximum performance on all parts of the system and it will costs you $10.000 or I can program for maximum performance on parts that are important to you and this will cost you $5.000.

I think the customer will understand what I'm saying with the above. B.T.W. If I was to program for maximum performance all the time, I'll be programming assembly...... Think about it.


Walter,