If the "extra fields" are computed from other fields in the SQL query
and/or external data (known at the time of the query), you might
consider computing these fields as part of the SQL query itself...
using scalar functions or T/SQL statements (SQL Server).
From what I have heard/read/experienced, the SQL engine can probably
do this a lot more efficiently that any CF routines you could write.
Dick
At 10:10 AM +1000 6/1/2000, Nick Slay wrote:
>ok... so when it comes to performance, it's better to use strutctures than
>arrays and both of those are better than lists. But what about
>queries? Queries that are generated using QueryNew as opposed to SQL
>statements.
>
>I have a SQL Query result set that I need to loop through, calculate a
>bunch of extra fields, and then store that off for looping through later.
>
>At the moment I create a new query, take the fields I want from the SQL
>result set, and add them, plus the new fields into a new query. There are
>probably more efficient ways of doing this...
>
>Does anyone know whether creating another query, and looping through it
>later is going to be better or worse than creating an array of structures
>and looping through those instead? For that matter would I be better to
>add a column to the query that I got from SQL Server, and then loop through
>that again?
>
>Thanks for any feedback!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.eGroups.com/list/cf-talk
To Unsubscribe visit
http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk or send a
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
