Re: Defining dynamic sets of business rules

On 25 Nov 1997 08:52:29 GMT, "Grant Perry" <mperry@xtra.co.nz> wrote: >Use your imagination to group things. Anything that requires a sequential >search as a normal operation I view as WRONG. True widsom shining out in the darkness! I am busy with a problem that requires a sequential read of a table 800,000 records strong, which results in a 22,000 row result. Each of these rows requires a sequential read of another table, several million strong. I am not in a position to create indexes, and have resorted to creating my own flat files as auxilliary indexes. Without these, the first search takes a few minutes, and then each of the subsequent reads takes about twenty odd minutes each. Using my indexes, one sequential read is still necessary, to create the index, but all the subsequent searches are reduced to one simultaneous sequential read of both tables. >I believe in a dynamic set of rules for a database system. So I wrote a >database to define the database system. It speeds up and simplifies the >system maintenence. You need a couple of procedures -Make/Rebuild File, >retrieve File Definition. and your file maintence problems are greatly >reduced. With a little more effort you could include the facility for standard field definitions, e.g., you create a standard 'name' field type or basic field with attributes such as type=text(25), lookup table=xxxx,column heading='yyyy' etc. It is my experience that this is almost invaluable when developing and maintaining even small applications. Brady Kelly bkelly@icon.co.za