Re: Problem with SMALL function and multiple same values
- From: Bernd P <bplumhoff@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 16:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
Hello Biff,
You are right with your count of references, I think. But the
comparison of the runtime of our approaches depends on how many calls
to SMALL you have to add to your (admittedly, quick) formula, I guess.
For 1,000 cells your formula would only need 1 msec (on my 2 GHz dual
core) but 1,000 calls to SMALL (or one corresponding array formula)
would need 350 msec. My formula would need 220 msec, plus 1,000 INDEX-
MATCH calls would add 25 msec. BTW: Your RANK-COUNTIF approach would
need only 120 msec...
If the number of SMALL calls is low and if distances are given with
less than 7 decimals (10 was wrong) then your approach seems to be
preferrable.
Regards,
Bernd
.
- References:
- Problem with SMALL function and multiple same values
- From: Ryan
- Re: Problem with SMALL function and multiple same values
- From: T. Valko
- Re: Problem with SMALL function and multiple same values
- From: Bernd P
- Re: Problem with SMALL function and multiple same values
- From: T. Valko
- Problem with SMALL function and multiple same values
- Prev by Date: Re: Default Font
- Next by Date: Re: Indirect concatenated link doesn't work with UNC
- Previous by thread: Re: Problem with SMALL function and multiple same values
- Next by thread: Date
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading