Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- From: "David" <David.Aman@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 17 Apr 2005 16:26:10 -0700
Thanks to all for your help. Here is some additional information:
Code page for the two tables in the SQL Select statement is set to
1252.
Default code page is 1252.
Default collation sequence is set to "MACHINE".
SQL Select does not use STR().
No records marked for deletion.
Free tables.
No indexes.
=============
Here are the results of SYS(3054,11) for the same SQL select statement:
------
VFP9 (Time for completion: 6 minutes)
-----
Rushmore optimization level for table TABLE1: none
Rushmore optimization level for table TABLE2: none
Joining table TABLE1 and table TABLE2 (Cartesian product)
===========
Next, VFP8 (Time for completion: Less than 1 second -- too fast to
time)
-----
Rushmore optimization level for table TABLE1: none
Rushmore optimization level for table TABLE2: none
Joining table TABLE1 and table TABLE2 using temp index
====
Any suggestions?
Thanks again!
David
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- From: David Frankenbach
- Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- From: Dan Freeman
- Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- References:
- SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- From: David
- Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- From: David
- Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- From: Sergey Berezniker
- SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- Prev by Date: Re: Can I login in a 2000 server in runtime in vfp?
- Next by Date: Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- Previous by thread: Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- Next by thread: Re: SQL Select: Very Fast in VFP8, Very Slow in VFP9
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading