Slow updaterecord loop

[Claudius Sailer]

Hi Jon,

Am 21. Apr 2005 um 21:38 Uhr schrieb jda:

> Thanks for the suggestion. It may be a few ticks faster, but no more. 
> Still about 20 seconds. The problem is with the size of the cursor, I 
> guess, not minor improvements in looping.

Thats true. For-Next only help a little bit.


> Parenthetically, the reason I retrieve 61 fields is  because this is 
> an SQL search being done directly by users, and if they do "ORDER BY" 
> I need all my sortmethod fields available (it's too painful and prone 
> to error to parse their SQL to try to see what might be needed). 
> If/when the ability to sort on fields and methods that are NOT 
> retrieved in the search, as discussed on this list, would make this 
> entirely unnecessary.

So your users can build own SQL-Statement!
Do you have a chance to reproduce and build out of it an own 
SQL-Statement like:

UPDATE table ......

I am not sure, but it could be that this will be faster? Ruslan, would 
this be a solution for speed?
IMHO V4RB2 need a lot more speed to be faster or as fast as V4RB1 
...... This is my experience at the moment. When all my SQL-problems 
are fixed at the moment I can't make new application version because 
application is now by using SQL in V4RB2 between 2 and 3 times slower. 
I hope this will be a major point -> performance..

bye


Claudius

-- 
G4/733 QS / MacOS X 10.3.8de / RB 5.5.3de/ Valentina 1.10.0 & 2.0.3
Homepage	http://www.ClaSai.de
iChat		ryhoruk
RealBasic ListBoxes: [ I feel the need...the need for speed!!! ]