× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Eric,

This I would expect from two files.  The only thing was, I had only one file
I was selecting from.  The exact SQL statement I used was:
SELECT * FROM INP95 WHERE URID95 = 'PRISM     '

I just can't figure out how SQL got so confused to look at each record 200+
or so times each to figure out if it was 'PRISM     ' or not.  Perhaps SQL
was using some weird logical file it had found.  I just don't know.

Regards,

Jim Langston

From: "DeLong, Eric" <EDeLong@Sallybeauty.com>

I've seen this a lot when using sub selects in a statement.  Consider:

Select * from item_master
where vendor in (select vnd
                        from vndmst
                        where crt_date = current_date)

I believe (conjecture based on observation) that if the sub-query returns a
small result set, say 30 rows, then the SQL optimizer will just scan the
result set for a match on each item_master record.  For 1 row of
item_master, if it did not find a match in the sub-query, the number of
records process would show 31.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.