You could, but that would mean that a query using the date as the
selection criteria would require a full table scan as an index would
not be used to select rows.

If you only needed a couple of fields, you could do an index over the
date component fields plus the couple of extra. At least that way
(maybe) only a full index scan would be required. That would be
faster than scanning the whole table if the records are large.

Charles

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Brian Johnson
<brian.johnson.mn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Bradley V. Stone <bvstone@xxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

See, what I was thinking I could do was

date >= ((yyyy * 10000) + (mm * 100) + dd)

Probably not, though.



Yes, why not? SQL doesn't <have> to be that difficult.

--
Brian Johnson
brian.johnson.mn@xxxxxxxxx
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.