It's probably no more complicated than IBX doesn't use an hourglass and IBO
does.
Bound it with a call to BeginBusy( false ) and EndBusy so that the cursor
will not flicker at all and stay a nice and consistent hourglass.

You can also control various aspects of how the update is performed. One way
does a prepared statement and another way figures out a unique statement for
each post. Be sure you are comparing apples to apples.

Regards,
Jason Wharton

----- Original Message -----
From: "james_027" <james_027@...>
To: <IBObjects@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [IBO] is it my ib_query or ib_grid is slow?


> Can anyone address to this issue?
>
> thanks
>
>
> -- In IBObjects@yahoogroups.com, "james_027" <james_027@y...> wrote:
> > Recently I made made a test. Using ibx with db_grid vs ibo with
> > ib_grid. Scrolling from first to last record(on the first instance)
> > ibx is about 400% faster. It took about 1 sec compare to 4 seconds
> on
> > ibx. I have about 50,000 records. I have my second testing which
> uses
> > this code both on ibo and ibx.
> >

transaction.beginbusy( false )
try

> > table.first;
> > while not table.eof do
> > begin
> > table.edit;
> > table.fieldbyname('fielda').asinteger:=table.fieldbyname
> > ('fielda').asinteger+100;
> > table.post;
> > table.next;
> >
> > end
> > table.ib_transaction.commitretaining; // for ibo
> > table.transaction.commitretainning; // for ibx

finally
transaction.endbusy;
end

> > Sad to say that the result is not favor to ibo. It took 4mins
> 15sec
> > on ibx and 10 min 23 secs on ibo.