It seems as if that's one area where they may be a benefit (try it and see) - another may be if you had a large, complex query with many joins that took a long time to execute - once that dataset is in memory it may be quicker to extract smaller subsets via QoQ. Of course it may not; if you use bind parameters on the initial query, the execution plan is cached by the DB system and the indexing is good (e.g. gathered stats are up-to-date, if using Oracle), the initial query may still perform really well on subsequent tries.
On 11/26/05, Billy Jamme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So by that rational only unindexed and non-sequential columns, such as a text > field, is where QoQs would offer performance increases? > > >I'm not too surprised in this case. The original query just pulls > >everything from the table. The QoQ has to go through that whole > >recordset and find the matching record(s), with no index to follow as > >would be the case if the DB were doing it. -- CFAJAX docs and other useful articles: http://jr-holmes.coldfusionjournal.com/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:225306 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
