Ron White wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 16:09 -0400, W B Hacker wrote:
>> Ron White wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2010-04-28 at 13:44 -0400, W B Hacker wrote:
>>>> Ron White wrote:
*snip*
>
> There is probably a short cut to assign everything in one hit, but at
Yes, there is BUT....
You then have to 'extract' or slice out the parts you need at each later stage
when you need to utilize them.
I personally do not know if that method is more CPU/RAM - call it 'machine'
efficient than the multiple / complex SQL calls that put each 'chunk' into a
bespoke 'bucket' directly.
It well may be.
But I DO know that for an 'SQL head' the method you (and I) use is far easier to
understand and debug than counting-off byte positions or remembering it was the
fifth item in a collection that holds what is now needed.
So debug is easier for ME.
And, as I said - the machine doesn't get a vote.
CAVEAT: IF/AS/WHEN brute performance under heavy load becomes an issue, the
machine that had no vote may get figuratively driven to its knees...
...from which position it is strategically placed to emulate biting great
bleeding chunks out of the softer parts of your anatomy...
One size does not fit all..
;-)
Bill
