Gustav Brock
gustav at cactus.dk
Fri Mar 26 03:53:32 CST 2004
Hi John
It has been said that using DCount("*", ...) is slightly faster than
counting a specific field. I haven't run any tests on this to confirm
it but with 83 lookups it could be worth testing.
/gustav
> I wrote a program, about a year ago, and it contains two unbound
> reports. Each of these reports has 83 calculated (i.e. statistical)
> fields on them--they are actually pretty identical with exception that
> one is a quarterly and the other is a cumulative calculation.
> The calculations are mostly similar, for example:
> =DCount("[xAge]","qryOver60-Cumulative","[XAge] >= 60")
> =DCount("[xAge]","qryOver60-SC-Cumulative","[XAge] >= 60 And
> [fndCSE] = True And [logLowInc] = True")
> =DCount("[Legal]","qryPartIII-SC","[Legal] = True")
> The database (the main table anyhow) has just shy of 7000 records in
> it. And it seems like all of the sudden, it is taking quite a bit longer
> for the reports to come up and longer to print once they do. I went in
> to look at something else today and noticed this. I asked them, if it
> seemed slower--I thought maybe it was me--and they agreed.
> Did I do something wrong in setting this up? Should I have made 83
> queries instead? Is it the DCount function (I remember hearing something
> on aggregate functions be slow once--maybe)?
> This is an A2K program--my first one (I only have about 10 or so A97s
> out there).
> There not complaining yet, but I might be, if I were them, so I would
> like to head it off, if I can. The state came in their office and they,
> "were very impressed with [the] program," which is another reason I'd
> like to keep on it--maybe they'd be interested further.
> Thanks for any advise you can give me!
> Gotta go to a meeting--see y'all!
> John W Clark