Thanks,
Reason I ended up trimming, upper, etc. was this come from a dol
spreadsheet, when went to a open office calc spreadsheet which saved to a
dbf table, at which point I processed it, and now I'm converting it to a SQL
insert statement that I can putty to mysql on a small orange host which at
that point, I can then begin working on the google maps code .

Lot of steps, and I'm on a deadline so I guess I'm getting paranoid in my
old age.
Was going to do it in php to save a few steps but when I couldn't figure out
how to quickly do a scan, do while, I said VFP to the rescue


-----Original Message-----
From: ProFox [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard Kaye
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 1:25 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: boy, I'm rusty

Sticking that comma in your search string may have unintended consequences. 

I know it was a one time and you're done but I just can't help myself... :-)


I would dump all that trimming; city and state columns usually aren't so
wide that you need to worry about storage in the DB or the overall width of
the index tag. Also, if you are using the UPPER function in your SEEK or
LOCATE or INDEXSEEK, Rushmore will only kick in if your index is built using
the UPPER function. You can also put a scope on your SCAN.

...untested pseudo-code
... do setup stuff here (i.e. use tables, etc.) SELECT mastfile SCAN WHILE
INDEXSEEK(UPPER(mastfile.mcity) +
UPPER(mastfile.mstate),.t.,[cities],[city])
   REPLACE lat WITH cities.n3 IN mastfile
   REPLACE lng WITH cities.n4 IN mastfile ENDSCAN

--

rk
-----Original Message-----
From: ProfoxTech [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Virgil
Bierschwale
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 12:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: boy, I'm rusty

that is what was happening to me

SAN MARCOSTX was killing it

This is what I ended up with.
I didn't change the city index tag, although I probably should have taken
out the rtrim() in the index.

This was just a quickie one time deal

SELECT 0
USE h-1b_fy14_q4 ALIAS mastfile
SELECT 0
USE us_cities ALIAS cities
SET ORDER TO city
SELECT mastfile
GO top
DO WHILE .not. EOF()
mcity = RTRIM(UPPER(lca_case12))
mstate = RTRIM(UPPER(lca_case13))
SELECT cities
SEEK mcity + ", " + mstate
IF FOUND()
* found it
mlat = n3
mlng = n4
SELECT mastfile
replace lat WITH mlat
replace lng WITH mlng
ENDIF
SELECT mastfile
SKIP
ENDDO
RETURN


On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Tracy Pearson <[email protected]>
wrote:

> John Weller wrote on 2015-01-21:
> >  Better to use IF SEEK(mcity+mstate, 'Cities', 'City').  
> > Mcity+mstate
> must
> >  match index so need to be padded to same length as the index 
> > fields, I  wouldn't index on a trimmed field, others may disagree.
> > Also, suggest
> SCAN
> >  ENDSCAN better than DO WHILE.
> >
> >  Try:
> >
> >  USE h-1b_fy14_q4 ALIAS mastfile in 0  USE us_cities ALIAS cities in
> > 0  SELECT Mastfile  SCAN
> >       IF SEEK(mcity+mstate, 'Cities', 'City')
> >                mlat = n3
> >               mlng = n4
> >       ENDIF
> >  ENDSCAN
> >
> >  Regards
> >
> >  John
> >
>
> I agree with not using trims in indexes.
> >From what I've seen, if your data is similar to
>     Fargo, ND
>     Minneapolis, MN
>
> Your index may be built like
>     FargoND
>     MinneMN
>
> I've actually seen VFP 9 error with a bad index when searching for 
> Minneapolis.
>
> And in John's example, setting mlat and mlng will need Cities.n3 and
> Cities.n4 respectfully.
>
>
>
> Tracy Pearson
> PowerChurch Software
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
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/[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.

Reply via email to