terriertech wrote:

> Thanks for your reply. However, this is not a valid solution for us
> for three reasons.
>
> 1. I do not believe this issue is related to the SQL execution speed,
> since it works FAST using IBX. Even if I just search for the last
> name, the improvement in speed using IBO is marginal.

OK What are you actually using to search?

> 2. In many cases, we have fields that we need to do the same thing
> for, but cannot be logically separated for an incremental search.
> Example: business names or driver license numbers.

Incremental search can be applied to any field. You just select the
'sort' by selecting the heading of the column you want and search on that.

> 3. The DB structure with first/last name in one field is already
> deployed, and conversion of customers' legacy systems is not really
> justified (a mixture of IBO/IBX would cause less disruption and is
> certainly a solution we are considering).

Fine, that was not clear, but I've had complaints from customers where
the surnames are not properly formated and so the combined name gave a
funny ordering.

> My own feeling is that this is some type of buffering issue, which I
> thought would be solved using MaxRows, but apparently isn't.

I'm using incremental search on 200k tables and the response is FAST. So
what are you using that is slow?

--
Lester Caine
-----------------------------
L.S.Caine Electronic Services