Dennis Mulder wrote:

>Hi Alexandre,
>
>Of course your select worked pretty well ;-)
>Only the time it took.... I tested it on a table of 4 million records.
>It took way too long.
>I thought there was maybe a way (or trick) for a fast count (and select
>for that matter).
>And yes Nigel, I need the count. Need it for a result set like Google.
>Always wondered how they do it. But that's probably way of topic here. I
>suspect they set up their tables and indices totally different then I, a
>mere mortal, am doing.
>
>Dennis
>
>
>

hummm

I think it will be faster than using the subselect :-(

But I am far away from Set and Arno on making other's selects fly ;-)

I think that is because of the join between the 4 million records table :-(

I though that the where clause (T1.X1 = Y1) would be restrictive, but I
think it's not the case.

see you !

--

Alexandre Benson Smith
Development
THOR Software e Comercial Ltda.
Santo Andre - Sao Paulo - Brazil
www.thorsoftware.com.br



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.2 - Release Date: 28/02/2005