On Sep 11, 2007, at 12:24 PM, Michael J. Babcock, MCP wrote:
> IAC, I thought I had heard that doing a SET ORDER TO on a network
> table
> was slow or caused a performance hit, especially since all we want
> to do
> is use the index to check for the existence of a condition that could
> nowadays be done with the SEEK(a,b,c) function. While refactoring,
> should
> this be done (...replacing the old SET ORDER plus SEEK command with
> the
> SEEK function instead)?
You should know the answer by now: test both versions under actual
network conditions. There is a good chance that the current code is
not noticeably slower than the proposed new code; if so, you've just
saved a bunch of rewriting.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
