On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Alex wrote:
>
> The searches are within the database yes, the problem is that "not much of a
> performance hit" isn't ideal when carrying out a large number of searches.
I've just had a look around online. Various test results may surprise you.
http://dbscience.b
for standards it doesnt matter which country you come from - praise the
lord.
on a db level this usually only is the one: YY-MM- (for the reasons
mentioned above)
you are worried about a theoretical - slightly - slower performance with
the current way of doing things?
write a test case to p
>
> Where are you doing these searches? If in the database I don't think
> there would be much of a performance hit.
>
The searches are within the database yes, the problem is that "not much of
a performance hit" isn't ideal when carrying out a large number of searches.
>
> You could do a c
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Alex wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I currently make use of the created and modified fields throughout my
> application but being datetime fields, performing searches/comparisons isn't
> as fast as they could be if unix timestamps were used.
Where are you doing these searches?
Hi,
I currently make use of the created and modified fields throughout my
application but being datetime fields, performing searches/comparisons
isn't as fast as they could be if unix timestamps were used.
I realise there may be the excuse that formatting would be required as unix
timestamps a
