Ah ha! I didn't think about the extra processing and the possibility of joins. It all makes sense to me now.... keep the extra i/o optional.... cool. Thanks Charlie.
> From: "charles arehart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 16:59:15 -0500 > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: [CFTALKTor] Number of records searched > > I see now that I had misread Karl's reference to Verity. Sorry everyone. So > you meant for CFQUERY to return not just how many records were found but how > many records were in the database that was searched. Hmm, no, that's not > something CF provides, and it's probably not really right to expect that > it's something CF should. > > In the case of CFSEARCH, Verity can and does provide an easy number for > CFSEARCH to lookup for that RecordsSearched value, but if you think about it > it's because a) a verity index isn't typically updated all that often and b) > CF uses an API call (under the covers) to get that number that Verity > provides. > > But for a database, it's a more dicey proposition. For one, the interface > between CF and a database is SQL (ok, under the covers there is an API call > between CF and DBMS or database drivers). If the drivers returned such a > record count, then CF could have access to it (though the CFQUERY would have > to be changed by Macromedia to expose that returned value as a CF variable). > > So Gordon's proposal of a SELECT count(*) is the closest you'll come. One > may argue "why doesn't CF go ahead and do that for us and return a > recordssearched value?" Well, even that simple SQL statement does take time > to do (some DBMS's do it faster than others depending on their approach to > finding the answer). I don't know that all CF users would want that extra > I/O to take place if they didn't need the info. In that case, leaving it to > you to do yourself seems the more efficient choice. > > Then, too, consider that if you're doing a search on a joined pair of > tables, which number would you want to be reflected in such a > "recordssearched" variable? The number in one or the other table? The sum? > The highest of the two? And what if there were more tables joined? Would it > instead be better to show the number of records that were joined > successfully? > > These are all reasons why I don't think you'd ever see such a > "recordssearched" number from a CFQUERY. > > /charlie > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > Behalf Of Karl Zarudny > Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 3:06 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [CFTALKTor] Number of records searched > > > Thanks everybody. Gordon you hit the nail bang on, as far as what I was > trying to do. Too bad this is the only way to do it.... Would've thought > that CF being the elegant and efficient language it is, there'd be some way > to pull it out without having to perform the main query and then a > subsequent query to get the total records searched. Guess it's not a highly > demanded or required option. > > Thanks again everybody! > >> From: "Lipp, Gord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 14:33:02 -0500 >> To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Subject: RE: [CFTALKTor] Number of records searched >> >> Hi Karl >> >> I don't think CFquery has anything comparible to recordssearched in > Verity. >> The only thing I can think of is doing >> >> <CFQUERY name="name" datasource="datasource"> >> SELECT Count(*) AS allRecords >> FROM tablename >> </CFQUERY> >> >> Regards >> >> Gordon Lipp >> >> Systems Technician >> Guelph Public Library >> http://www.library.guelph.on.ca >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Karl Zarudny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>> Sent: February 27, 2002 1:55 PM >>> To: CFUG >>> Subject: [CFTALKTor] Number of records searched >>> >>> >>> Hi All. >>> >>> How does one get the total number of records searched from a query? I >>> thought it was simply #queryname.recordssearched# but that >>> kicks back an >>> "error resolving param" message. Odd, since I seem to remember using >>> recordssearched once before but perhaps it worked that time >>> because I was >>> using it with a verity?.... >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Karl >>> >>> - >>> You are subscribed to the CFUGToronto CFTALK ListSRV. >>> This message has been posted by: Karl Zarudny >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To Unsubscribe, Please Visit and Login to http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ >>> Manager: Kevin Towes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >>> http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ >>> This System has been donated by Infopreneur, Inc. >>> (http://www.infopreneur.net) >>> >> - >> You are subscribed to the CFUGToronto CFTALK ListSRV. >> This message has been posted by: "Lipp, Gord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To Unsubscribe, Please Visit and Login to http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ >> Manager: Kevin Towes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ >> This System has been donated by Infopreneur, Inc. >> (http://www.infopreneur.net) > > - > You are subscribed to the CFUGToronto CFTALK ListSRV. > This message has been posted by: Karl Zarudny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To Unsubscribe, Please Visit and Login to http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ > Manager: Kevin Towes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ > This System has been donated by Infopreneur, Inc. > (http://www.infopreneur.net) > > - > You are subscribed to the CFUGToronto CFTALK ListSRV. > This message has been posted by: "charles arehart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To Unsubscribe, Please Visit and Login to http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ > Manager: Kevin Towes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ > This System has been donated by Infopreneur, Inc. > (http://www.infopreneur.net) - You are subscribed to the CFUGToronto CFTALK ListSRV. This message has been posted by: Karl Zarudny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To Unsubscribe, Please Visit and Login to http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ Manager: Kevin Towes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.CFUGToronto.org/ This System has been donated by Infopreneur, Inc. (http://www.infopreneur.net)
