Hi Michael, > Would it be better to create a compound index and simply do a SEEK instead?
That should be faster. In a network scenario LOCATE can be faster to locate a single record when you repeatedly access a record in the same index block and no-one is changing the index. That's because LOCATE uses cached rushmore bitmaps that do not time out very quickly. SEEK, on the other hand, accesses the server frequenrly. You have a view, though, which is an exclusively opened cursor and the index is local. Caching doesn't have the same impact here. As SEEK requires less work, less memory and less disk accesses than LOCATE it should be faster here. -- Christof _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] 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.
