I will do more test with the open/close part. Checking the fetching would be
ok but I'am not sure if after that all keys will be processed. I have a lot
of example's from other components for handeling this problem so this
wouldn't be a problem I think...

It's only slow after opening the window. The window opening is fast because
there is no datatraffic at all... After that when I type the first
letter/number it takes a noticable pause. After that it doesn't matter
anymore, everything is fast. What I could do is after opening the form do a
dummy search without the user noticing or something like that. But that all
depends where the search will be used.

Bram van der Voet / A&V Automatisering
bram@... <mailto:bram@...>
Glasbergenlaan 6
2235 BP VALKENBURG ZH
tel 071 407 6956
fax 071 407 3939


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Svein Erling Tysvær
[mailto:svein.erling.tysvaer@...]
Verzonden: donderdag 18 januari 2001 10:09
Aan: IBObjects@egroups.com
Onderwerp: RE: [IBO] increment search

>This also seems to work. I didn't understand the active/close part you
>added? It doesn't seems to effect the speed so I could leave it out?

I just once had problems when I in a loop opened a cursor but forgot to
close it. If you get the right results without closing it explicitly, I can
see no reason for including this code (maybe ParamByName automatically
closes as well?).

>I changed my example to the zipcode, this seems to works even faster. It
>starts with number (our format is 1234 AA). I get almost instant response

so

>I'am really happy with my incremental search on 500.000 records so far. But
>I still need to iron out some things like not start searching if keys are
>pressed very quickly. And the first search is still a bit slow.

You could try checking for IB_Query2.Fetching (I've never used this myself
though) The reason for your first search being slow is probably because it
has to prepare the statement (or did you mean whenever you typed one
character only?). You cannot avoid such a delay, but if you prepared the
statement upon starting your program maybe your users would feel more
comfortable with a "startup delay"?

Set