Nueva entrada en Harbour Magazine, sobre como usar opciones de filtrado en Harbour.
https://medium.com/harbour-magazine/pon ... 6dbb92f275
New post at Harbour Magazine, about how th use filtering options with Harbour.
https://medium.com/harbour-magazine/put ... 240aea74e0
Regards,
José Luis
Hello Luis,
thank you for your post and work.
Maybe you can compare filters to temporary index too.
Best regards,
Otto
Hello Otto,
I think that filters are powerfull than temporary indexes. With filters you can change the index order and the filter remains, and this behavour is very hard to obtain with temporary indexes.
Regards,
José Luis
Hello Luis,
For me filters where always dangerous because you never new if you have set somewhere a filter and then you reused the workspace and got wrong results.
You write in your article that you have a warning build in – which is very good and important.
As creating a temporary dbf-file which the “filtered” result is very fast these days (SSD disks) I use this technique much.
Best regards,
Otto
For me filters where always dangerous because you never new if you have set somewhere a filter and then you reused the workspace and got wrong results.
I think that filters are powerfull than temporary indexes. With filters you can change the index order and the filter remains, and this behavour is very hard to obtain with temporary indexes.
they are just too slow
nageswaragunupudi wrote:
they are just too slow
This is a very very old story.
Yes, they were slow till Foxpro came up with Rushmore technology long time back. Later comix and six implemented same technology. Present DBFCDX too implements the same. They can be quite fast but we need to understand how the RDD optimizes filters.
