Hi Arnaud, I have split out the longitudes into a text and real component. I have formatted the longitudes as “000” and if west of GMT prefixed with “-“ and if east prefixed with “+“. I'll do something similar with latitudes and then try building some radial searches and see.
Since all string is text is there a still a way to tell 4D that a field and thus an index is a fixed size? Anyway we shall see if theory and implementation matches! Appreciate, John… > On Apr 14, 2020, at 12:00 PM, 4d_tech-requ...@lists.4d.com wrote: > > From: Arnaud de Montard <arn...@init5.fr <mailto:arn...@init5.fr>> > Subject: Re: Longitude Index: B-Tree or Cluster > Date: April 14, 2020 at 2:23:26 AM PDT > To: 4D iNug Technical <4d_tech@lists.4d.com <mailto:4d_tech@lists.4d.com>> > > > >> Le 13 avr. 2020 à 19:36, Bernard Escaich via 4D_Tech <4d_tech@lists.4d.com >> <mailto:4d_tech@lists.4d.com>> a écrit : >> >> Hi John, >> >> From the top of my head, indexes on long are less efficient than on text >> values ; I have a doubt, perhaps only for updating. > > I'd think the opposite, an index based on a "fixed length" field is always > more efficient (search, update…) than one based on a "variable length" field. > > -- > Arnaud de Montard ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com **********************************************************************
