Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- From: "Ralph" <nt_consulting64@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:46:04 -0500
"Bob Barrows [MVP]" <reb01501@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e%23GTfoCjIHA.5088@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<snipped>
operation
1. From what I explained, does it feel that I am approaching the
solution in a wrong way?
I probably would not have done it your way. I tend to go for set-based
operations if possible. It takes a lot to convince me a set-based
is not possible. Ican't make heads-nor-tails of your explanation so Icannot
say if a set-based operation is possible in your situation.<snipped>
I'm going to highjack this thread for a moment.
I use the term "set-based solution" a lot, but just now you got me thinking
that maybe I don't know what I'm talking about... <g>
A 'set-based' solution is one where you do all the fetch and filter up front
to retrieve a sack of stuff or at least as much of the stuff as you can that
answers all the requirements. A 'non-set-based' solution is where you grab
various bags or stuff and then enumerate through the bags one or more times
to gleam the information. Or is there more I'm missing? <g>
-ralph
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- From: Bob Barrows [MVP]
- Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- References:
- Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- From: Bob Barrows [MVP]
- Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- Prev by Date: Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- Next by Date: Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- Previous by thread: Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- Next by thread: Re: Nested Updates using SQLCLIENT classes
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|