ay of the month and < the first day of the next month. That will
use an index.
- Original Message - From: "Anders Lundgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Dan Buettner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Thomas Bolioli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent:
That will use an index.
- Original Message -
From: "Anders Lundgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Dan Buettner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Thomas Bolioli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: Date v. DateTime
OK, thank you. How is the speed of this index compared with an indexed
date column if I do:
year_number='x' and month_number='y' and day_number='z';
They should have about the same cardinality, right?
Thanks,
Anders
Chris wrote:
Anders Lundgren wrote:
> One potential solution might be to
Anders Lundgren wrote:
> One potential solution might be to use an extra column that tracks
> month_number, and populate it with a trigger on insert or update.
> Index that field and then use it in your WHERE clause. One
> possibility anyway.
Resulting question, what if I have three colums
> One potential solution might be to use an extra column that tracks
> month_number, and populate it with a trigger on insert or update.
> Index that field and then use it in your WHERE clause. One
> possibility anyway.
Resulting question, what if I have three colums named year_number,
month_nu
Thomas, I do not think in this case that one is better than the other,
for the most part, because both require using a value computed from
the column. Computing month from a DATE field should be just as fast
as computing from a DATETIME column I would think.
Also splitting into DATE and TIME col
