> Would you be willing to tackle any of these other questions? : > > - Is T-correlative smart enough to do the same caching as TRANS()? > > - The caching is only 1 record & 1 file deep, > just one single file&record combo gets cached, right? > > - Does T-correlative use the same underlying code as TRANS()? > I would guess T-corrs resolve to TRANS() under the covers.
These were dealt with by another responder. > - Compare UD & other MV_DBMSs to UV: Do any of themcache records like > UV's TRANS()? I can only reliably talk about QM. We do not treat TRANS() records as a special case but use a general record cache which "knows" whether another user may have updated the record, invalidating the cache. We also have a file level cache that eliminates much of the overheads of the apparent continual opening and closing of files by a series of TRANS() operations regardless of whether they originate in the query processor or a user application. Martin Phillips Ladybridge Systems 17b Coldstream Lane, Hardingstone, Northampton NN4 6DB +44-(0)1604-709200 ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
