| Subject | Re: How to mix ascending and descending fields in one index |
|---|---|
| Author | kokok_kokok |
| Post date | 2009-10-09T10:14:35Z |
First of all, I want to say that I am really happy with this database engine.
I am sorry that my thread has derived in a non-technical question.
Martijn, your proposed solution does not work for me, it is possible to have many records with the same score.
I am sorry but I did not read in a clear way that Ann wrote that the mixed index cannot be created. Maybe it is my broken english but it has been an understood, I am sorry. I only read alternative solutions that did not work for me as using a natural plan, using a derived table, or create two separate indexes. None of the above solutions work for me.
Certainly I think that responses like "Everybody with even a vague recollection of a computer science course knows...". do not help and are too condescend. Also I do not care the theory about the database index, I need results. Ann proposed to read the entire table arguing the cost, solution absolutely unviable, I only needed the first records.
Dimitry, you wrote "And exactly because of that people with lesser knowledge have a choice: a) To increase their knowledge by reading documentation and making
experiments; b) To hire somebody who already has done a)."
Well, I read the mess of manuals, in reality the information is distributed in a lot of small pieces of information. . I am reading FB information from the past 8 years. I agree that FB is excellent engine but the documentation lacks, but I thought that this "friendly" forum was precisely for solving questions that somebody cannot find in a manual. If other user (not necessarily an expert) has had the same problem, he/she can solve my problem in few seconds. I thought that it was the spirit of a support forum, instead to recommend read manuals or hire somebody.
From my vast experience using FB in the past 8 years and in 2000 customers, I can say that FB is a very robust engine, easy to install by the end user, maintenance not required, and small footprint. Cons: maybe it is not the faster database, but the most important problem is the documentation and the support. It is really a mess. Also, the design of the FB webs do not seem a solid project, or at least, they do not transmit it.
In any case, as I said, I will continue using FB because I consider that it is an excellent engine.
By the way, I solved the problem calculating the score in the inverse way, so now I can use "order by score, name". Now it works fine.
I am sorry that my thread has derived in a non-technical question.
Martijn, your proposed solution does not work for me, it is possible to have many records with the same score.
I am sorry but I did not read in a clear way that Ann wrote that the mixed index cannot be created. Maybe it is my broken english but it has been an understood, I am sorry. I only read alternative solutions that did not work for me as using a natural plan, using a derived table, or create two separate indexes. None of the above solutions work for me.
Certainly I think that responses like "Everybody with even a vague recollection of a computer science course knows...". do not help and are too condescend. Also I do not care the theory about the database index, I need results. Ann proposed to read the entire table arguing the cost, solution absolutely unviable, I only needed the first records.
Dimitry, you wrote "And exactly because of that people with lesser knowledge have a choice: a) To increase their knowledge by reading documentation and making
experiments; b) To hire somebody who already has done a)."
Well, I read the mess of manuals, in reality the information is distributed in a lot of small pieces of information. . I am reading FB information from the past 8 years. I agree that FB is excellent engine but the documentation lacks, but I thought that this "friendly" forum was precisely for solving questions that somebody cannot find in a manual. If other user (not necessarily an expert) has had the same problem, he/she can solve my problem in few seconds. I thought that it was the spirit of a support forum, instead to recommend read manuals or hire somebody.
From my vast experience using FB in the past 8 years and in 2000 customers, I can say that FB is a very robust engine, easy to install by the end user, maintenance not required, and small footprint. Cons: maybe it is not the faster database, but the most important problem is the documentation and the support. It is really a mess. Also, the design of the FB webs do not seem a solid project, or at least, they do not transmit it.
In any case, as I said, I will continue using FB because I consider that it is an excellent engine.
By the way, I solved the problem calculating the score in the inverse way, so now I can use "order by score, name". Now it works fine.