First make it work; then take out the slow bits. :-) Refactoring is good. How many more cycles you think you can squeeze out by using shorter column names? ;-) If you can do that you maybe you can stick with the CURSOR approach. Of course, Uncle Ted will tell you that you need to do your testing/benchmarking with data that matches your production environment... :-)
-- rk -----Original Message----- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of MB Software Solutions General Account Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 10:45 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Why can't I ALTER TABLE on a cursor? On Fri, July 12, 2013 10:17 am, Richard Kaye wrote: > I noticed in the DISP STRU output of my little test that the > underlying temp file name changed after each structure change. I guess > using a long field name means the alter table code takes a different > path that makes it fail. I was just trying to stay with the CURSOR approach for the sake of (what I was hoping would be) faster processing. Plus for each imported file, I'm saving the filename and timestamp so I know where it came from and when. These import files can be millions of rows, so hence the desire to tighten this as much as I could. Plus you know some of us just get so fixated on making it as fast as possible (but still easy to maintain...nothing insane like low level Assembler code). lol _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/DF1EEF11E586A64FB54A97F22A8BD0442284263B96@ACKBWDDQH1.artfact.local ** 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.
