Geographical indexing

[Ruslan Zasukhin]

On 4/28/09 9:51 AM, "Thomas Flemming" <tf at ttqv.com> wrote:

>> 1) INSERT INTO T(f1, ...f8) VALUES (1,2,...8)           32 sec
>> 
>> 2) INSERT INTO T VALUES (1,2,...8)                      23 sec
>> 
>> 3) INSERT INTO T(f1, ...f8) VALUES (:1,:2,...:8)       7.5 sec
>> 
>> 4) API way, Table.AddRecord                            1.4 sec
>> 
> Interesting, I hope that the Find*-Methods are the same factor faster then the
> select-statements once the memoryleak is fixed.
> Currently they are almost the same speed then sql for me.

This also can be!

SQL Query is
    a) parser time
    b) preprocess time
    c) execution time   ==== FindRange or FindValue


If point C is 90-95% itself
I.e. Search on huge table,

Then relative time of a and b go to zero.
So you do not see difference between SQL and API.

> When I summarize all what you said until now, they must be faster, its also
> logical!

Yes, but factor depends on task.
    single insert is very fast.
    So SQL parser time matter.

> Currently they are almost the same speed then sql for me.

-- 
Best regards,

Ruslan Zasukhin
VP Engineering and New Technology
Paradigma Software, Inc

Valentina - Joining Worlds of Information
http://www.paradigmasoft.com

[I feel the need: the need for speed]