Re: SQL question

Rick,

That is a good point. I did not try that. Maybe it retrieves a page
worth of records at a time and tht's why the first query was faster.

Ravi

Rick Baird wrote:
> 
> Ravi,
> 
> I assume this displayed the records selected on the screen?
> If so, did you type "B" and enter to get the last record selected?
> I'm guessing that this would have taken a long time.
> 
> short of that, I don't have a clue.
> 
> Ravi wrote:
> >
> > Howdy folks,
> >
> > I have a file with about 1/2 million records on our development
> > machine (V4R2).
> >
> > I ran a SQL query from ISQL:
> > -  Select distinct FIELD from FILE.
> > The query ran in about 2 minutes and gave me the result set with
> > about 200,000 records. FIELD is not a key field.
> >
> > I ran another query from ISQL over the same file/field:
> > - Select count(distinct FIELD) from FILE.
> > This query ran for over 10 minutes and returned the count.
> > Why would this query take so much longer than the first query? I ran the
> +---
> | This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
> +---
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---