Re: Data Type question / Sort
From: Marston (marston_gould_at_mac.com)
Date: 08/13/04
- Next message: ForSale: "Re: Another Outlook question"
- Previous message: Marston: "Re: URGENT: Alan Beban - SubArray not working - any thoughts?"
- In reply to: Tom Ogilvy: "Re: Data Type question / Sort"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 12 Aug 2004 20:39:08 -0700
I'm trying a similar but slightly different approach now.
Rather than try and turn my values from text to numbers (something
caused by our ERP query tool)
I'm concatenating the values with &s in the order that I want things
sorted and dumping
that to a new column in the array then sorting on it.
Unfortunately, I think the size of the values being sorted must matter
because when I used the quick sort tool that from John Walkenbachs
book (similar to the one I got from Alan Bedan) it sorted an array of
over
300,000 variables in a little over 10 seconds. But with the array I'm
trying to
sort, the strings are very long and I suspect that is slowing the sort
down.
I left it running at work with a timer on it and will see how long it
takes
to run, hopefully not some ridiculous amount.
On the good side though - it does provide a way for sorting across
multiple columns.
One thought though - my original array was 350,000 x 10 - but the
sorting
value uses 6 of the 10 values. Would it be faster to drop those 6
(plus the new one)
to end up sorting on a single column within a 350,000 x 5 array?
"Tom Ogilvy" <twogilvy@msn.com> wrote in message news:<ux$#$bKgEHA.556@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>...
> A long can store numbers in this range: 2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647
>
> A double can store numbers in this range: -1.79769313486231E308
> to -4.94065645841247E-324 for negative values and from 4.94065645841247E-324
> to 1.79769313486232E308 for positive values. But only approximately 15
> significant digits.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Tom Ogilvy
>
> "Marston" <marston_gould@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:4a0545c6.0408111645.2689633@posting.google.com...
> > Hi
> >
> > I'm trying to prep some values for a multi-column sort in an array.
> > The array contains something like 300,000 by 10 values
> > I've seen quick sort routines that can sort on a single value, but not
> > perform sorts within the initial sort.
> >
> > My idea was to concatenate all my values into a single value and then
> > sort on it. The problem I'm facing is that my numbers would have to be
> > on the order of ~10E+18-1 long
> >
> > The way the routine works is it looks at the numbers in each column
> > whose length is fixed and never has a situation where there are
> > leading zeros to cause problems.
> >
> > Col 1 Col 2 Col 3 Col 4 Col 5 Col 6
> > Row x: aaa bbb cc ddddd e fff
> >
> > I only need to arrange based on these 6 columns not the entire 10 in
> > the array
> >
> > My problem is when I create a number like aaabbbccdddddefff it appears
> > to have
> > problems with the "efff" portion. I checked each individual component
> > (which I'm multiplying by some 1nnnn where n is some number of zeros -
> > and they all work fine, its just once I tried to add things. Its like
> > it drops values off.
> > I have the variables defined as Double which I thought would work.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
- Next message: ForSale: "Re: Another Outlook question"
- Previous message: Marston: "Re: URGENT: Alan Beban - SubArray not working - any thoughts?"
- In reply to: Tom Ogilvy: "Re: Data Type question / Sort"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|