I never knew that multiple SELECTS were so popular. I truly have not run into them before except at my doing. Mark. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 2:49 PM Subject: RE: [U2] PICK Assembler Language
> I think the basic concept here has very little to do with any kind of > low-level tweaking or variations on versions. Let me explain by example: > > Software I used to work in had a financial ledger for material > transactions that could get to be VERY large. If I wanted to run a > Account analysis for a particular period it was always faster to do an > initial select based on date (particularly if you indexed that field :) ), > then doing the additional selects and sorts on the lesser record pool. > > My rules were to try and do non-sorted selects first on fields that are > indexed and/or do not involve wild cards. Then do the any additional > selects and the sorting in a stacked statement. > > Rich Taylor | Senior Programmer/Analyst| VERTIS > 250 W. Pratt Street | Baltimore, MD 21201 > P 410.361.8688 | F 410.528.0319 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.vertisinc.com > > Vertis is the premier provider of targeted advertising, media, and > marketing services that drive consumers to marketers more effectively. > > "The more they complicate the plumbing > the easier it is to stop up the drain" > > - Montgomery Scott NCC-1701 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 2:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [U2] PICK Assembler Language > > With one exception, I agree with Charlie. Just because the hardware > speeds allow us to write crap doesn't mean we should. There is, of > course, a limit to cycle-tweaking. I am not going to spend my time > looking for the fastest way to prepend a floating dollar sign, for > example. If I have a case of a large number of transactions triggering > secondary reads (code file lookup, for example), I will certain take a > few minutes to 'ask the system' if a dynamic array cache with locate > would be worthwhile. > > The exception I mention is "done once in the development cycle." What > was efficient at release x may not be efficient at release y. Thus I am > a big proponent of constant refactoring. > > -- > > Regards, > > Clif > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > W. Clifton Oliver, CCP > CLIFTON OLIVER & ASSOCIATES > Tel: +1 619 460 5678 Web: www.oliver.com > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Just because we have a quadrillion microseconds to play with, instead of > a > >50 millisecond timeslice, doesn't mean we have to waste them. A few > moments to > >consider performance, done once in the development cycle, will pay > benefits > >every time a more efficient program is run. I have to believe that Adm > Grace > >Hopper is smiling down on you both. > > > >Regards, > >Charlie Noah > ------- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > ------- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
