Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Features implementation request / plans |
---|---|
Author | Lester Caine |
Post date | 2004-08-24T06:35:47Z |
clementdoss wrote:
people will expect it to work across machines ;)
transaction that accesses it, and only you know how you are counting
records. As well as a total count ( or just SUM sub totals ) it is very
useful to keep sub-total counts for different groups of records, and
only you know how to do that :)
In my own case I have CLIENT records that contain duplicates ( old
address details ) and so the total count can be adjusted.
Point is again, the simple case is probably not worth the effort, most
of the time people want more.
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services
> I have just finished importing a 19 Gbytes database to Firebird 1.5From What ?
> (over 70 milions records). Yes it's a real world application. And
> yes, all the queries runs in under one second.
> Another feature that would be great: Linking Database.If the files are on the same machine then it could be feasible, but then
> if we could just link Firebird databases on the same server, for
> example,DatabaseA and DatabaseB. From DatabaseA, I would write
> something like : select * from DatabaseB.Owner.TableName.
> Using joins, writing exists, using views,..., etc . That would be
> great.
people will expect it to work across machines ;)
> Although I am trying to avoid using it, select count(*) from table,That IS the correct way to do it. The count is only valid for the
> should really be improved :-(
> Sometimes my customers would like to have an idea of the database
> size, and this beast must run. For now, I just update a table with
> the record count during the update process, and instead of running
> the query, I display the correct field from that database.
transaction that accesses it, and only you know how you are counting
records. As well as a total count ( or just SUM sub totals ) it is very
useful to keep sub-total counts for different groups of records, and
only you know how to do that :)
In my own case I have CLIENT records that contain duplicates ( old
address details ) and so the total count can be adjusted.
Point is again, the simple case is probably not worth the effort, most
of the time people want more.
--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services