MB Software Solutions General Account wrote: > (VFP9SP1) > > This legacy code has several instances like this: > > SELECT MyTableOnLAN > SET ORDER TO MyOrder > SEEK MyValue > IF FOUND() ... > > > I can't recall where, but I thought I had heard long ago that there was a > performance penalty of sorts for doing a SET ORDER TO <index> like that. > It'd be easy to replace these with IF > SEEK(MyValue,"MyTableOnLAN","MyOrder") logic, but of course I don't want > to make changes on stuff that may not be broken or things that may not > contribute to bugs. > > Does anyone recall if there was a performance penalty for doing a SET > ORDER TO call, explicitly setting the index on a LAN table? > No but are you thinking of SELECT (SQL) and Rushmore - for which I believe it is recommended that no order should be set for any tables in the FROM clause ...
Paul Newton _______________________________________________ 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.
