More efficient; querying queries or querying tables?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

rgrantz - 23 Mar 2005 23:31 GMT

Sorry I split this up into 2 posts, I forgot to add this to my previous
"efficiency" post.

Is there a general rule of the thumb regarding querying in terms of whether
to use other queries or a table for the data? I have a query that DOES
return more of the records than I need, and I can query THAT as a
recordsource for another form (adding additional criteria), or I can make a
new query to get just the fields I need from the tables.

This is a split db for multiple users, front end on all pc's and one backend
on shared drive on network.

Any advice is appreciated, and thanks

Reply to this Message

Rick Brandt - 24 Mar 2005 15:12 GMT

> Sorry I split this up into 2 posts, I forgot to add this to my
> previous "efficiency" post.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Any advice is appreciated, and thanks

It depends. I have had "all in one" queries that were made much faster by
replacing tables with other queries that "pre-processed" some of the
selecting that was going on and I have tried the same on other queries where
it made no difference. Query optimization is such a complex area that I
doubt there is any "rule" that generally applies.

Signature

I don't check the Email account attached
to this message. Send instead to...
RBrandt at Hunter dot com

Reply to this Message