Bobby Heid
bheid at sc.rr.com
Fri Oct 24 16:33:29 CDT 2008
Gustav, Well, I have been at it for a while. I did know that for many records, it can be faster to use edit/add, but I have come across times where it was faster to use the execute SQL method. I do not know if had to do with indexes or what. Also, based upon the OP's original post, I could not tell for sure how many records were being inserted/updated at once time. Bobby -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Gustav Brock Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 3:05 AM To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com Subject: Re: [AccessD] Updating a specific record using VBA. Hi Bobby For a single update that may be true but for many records like in a loop it is indeed not. That's one of the ways you can pinpoint an ASP or old-school VB programmer - they write code using endless series of sql execute methods. I once cleaned up an application made in Access but converted from a previous VB application by someone else. It was well done - no sloppy code - but the client complained about the slowness of an update routine. It ran several interrelated loops retrieving, verifying, and uploading data and pictures from/to an FTP server where all datatable manipulation was done calling SQL code. I transferred this to a system of recordsets and the speed increase was so high that I hardly believed it myself - and I gained eternal guru status at the client! Thus, as you write: > .. the .edit/.add methods do have their place. /gustav >>> bheid at sc.rr.com 24-10-2008 03:57 >>> I believe in many cases that the sql methods are faster. -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com