The second link for me did take a noticeably longer time to load than the first. The first kind of came up almost immediately.
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 03:12:12 -0000, Paul Vernon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Not knowing what your query is doing and also not knowing what the original > query result set is and its properties makes this a difficult question to > answer. Both of the links you provided seem to generate on html output so I > can't see any debug info but what I will say is that they both took around 2 > seconds to complete. > > I believe that the QofQ code has had extensive work done on it for MX7 and > that it derives its types for the column data in a different way from that > in MX 6.x. This in itself is a good thing although I would guess that it > introduces an overhead because of the extra data scanning that must be done > to ensure a good datatype fit on a per column basis... > > It would follow that the overhead will increase with the size of your > original recordset but at the moment all of this is conjecture on my part > because of a lack of detail regarding the question and the internals of the > new QoQ code... > > Paul > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a client with Logware today. Try it for free with a 15 day trial account. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=67 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:193523 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
