James Bott wrote:Rimantas,
Why ? The second browse is on the second folder tab . So with SQL I'll open recordset only for needful heading line , not all DBF as with ordscoping .
I'm not sure what you are saying above, but if you think ordscope is reading the entire database just to display those records within the scope, this is not true as Adolfo's test has shown. In fact, unless the browse is longer than all the records in the workorder, the browse will load less records than a recordset. The browse will only read as many records as needed to fill the browse.
I'm not trying to say you shouldn't use SQL but you should know the differences between SQL and DBFs so you can make an informed decision.
Regards,
James
I'm talking about this situation that at first I must OPEN the 2 dbfs with indexs - and that tooks amount of time . After that all is working OK . In mdichild is folder with 2 tabs - in first browse with heading dbf , in the 2-nd browse making . Changing tabs I'm setting on/of ordscope for dbfs - that is working fine and with good speed . Image - with SQL that will be one big recordset as for 1-st dbf and nothing for 2-nd browse . Second browse will get data only on that time , then you will push 2-nd tab of folder and will transfer recordset of 60-80 records form SQL . You are avoiding a big amount data transfer at a FIRST TIME ( openning ) , because you aren't openning a big ~ 7 mln record dbf with a big CDX file with 5 index tags inside ...
I'm not comparing - better or not with DBFs or SQLs ... That is a waste of time . Both techiques have owns + and - . And you can get a good result with both - simply you will find needful solution in any situation ...
That is my point of view . After some test I can say that increment searching is working fine as I wroted for Enrico - ado db techique is powerfull and easy maintaining thing . After reviewing ADORDD I can say that ussual ADO recordset techique is better - you can use that in more flexible way .
Regards !
Rimantas U.