× 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.



I would argue that the CHAIN would operate more efficiently in general
(provided it's happening more frequently than pages are swapped out).  But
in particular, in this application, it's hard to know with the information
given.

If your array has a large (a relative term, I know) dimension, then the
amount of time spinning through the array to find the same entry over and
over again would seem like wasted effort.  (If you need this particular
entry, why is it in an array in the first place????)

If the record is in memory when the CHAIN operation takes place, it will
likely be more efficient to point to it than to scan an array.

So, as with any other performance question, I can give you an exact answer:
"it depends."

HTH
Dennis





MWalter@hanoverwire.com@midrange.com on 11/22/2002 09:21:53 AM

Please respond to midrange-l@midrange.com

Sent by:    midrange-l-admin@midrange.com


To:    midrange-l@midrange.com
cc:
Subject:    Re: %lookup vs. chain



Since no disk access would be required, and the %lookup BIF, I believe,
does a binary search, that the %lookup method would be much faster.






As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


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.