Microsoft KB Archive/248608
Article ID: 248608
Article Last Modified on 2/12/2007
- Microsoft Visual FoxPro 9.0 Professional Edition
- Microsoft Visual FoxPro 8.0 Professional Edition
- Microsoft Visual FoxPro 7.0 Professional Edition
- Microsoft Visual FoxPro 6.0 Professional Edition
This article was previously published under Q248608
To fully optimize your queries in Microsoft Visual FoxPro 6.0 and later versions, it is necessary to add index tags matching the WHERE and JOIN clauses. In addition, if you have SET DELETED ON, you must have an index on DELETED() to fully optimize your query. However, creating the indexes required for a SELECT to be fully optimized might not improve query performance, and might actually hinder it in some cases.
For a query to be optimized, the SELECT statement must have a WHERE clause. The expression on the left of the equal sign must match an index expression exactly. For example, if the clause is WHERE UPPER(cName) = <some value>, you must have an index with an expression of UPPER(cName) for Rushmore to optimize the query.
In Visual FoxPro 5.0, Microsoft introduced the SYS(3054) function to report the Rushmore optimization level of SELECT statements. If the SELECT statement's WHERE clause is performing a join (... WHERE tableA.keyValue = tableB.keyValue), or the SELECT uses the JOIN syntax, this displays differently than a filtering WHERE clause. If the join is optimized, it says, "Joining tableA and tableB using index tag <tag>." Otherwise, it says, "...using temp index."
NOTE: Optimization does not always mean faster performance than non-optimization. You must test on a query-by-query basis.
The following sample code demonstrates this. It uses the testdata database in the Samples directory.
SET DELETED OFF CLEAR CD HOME(2) + 'data' && Tools:Options:File Locations:Samples directory must && be set for HOME(2) to work. = SYS(3054, 11) && Display optimization information for joins ? "Query 1:" lnStart = SECONDS() SELECT * ; FROM orders JOIN customer ; ON orders.cust_id = customer.cust_id ; INTO CURSOR crsrTemp ? SECONDS() - lnStart, _TALLY ? ? "Query 2:" lnStart = SECONDS() SELECT orders.* ; FROM orders JOIN customer ; ON orders.cust_id = customer.cust_id ; AND customer.cust_id = "BONAP" ; INTO CURSOR crsrTemp ? SECONDS() - lnStart, _TALLY ? ? "Query 3:" lnStart = SECONDS() SELECT orders.* ; FROM orders JOIN customer ; ON orders.cust_id = customer.cust_id ; AND customer.cust_id = "BONAP" ; AND orders.order_id > ' 10000' ; INTO CURSOR crsrTemp ? SECONDS() - lnStart, _TALLY
The first query returns all of the records from orders. Execution time is ~.017 seconds on a particular test computer. Neither table reports as optimized, since the WHERE clause does not filter either table. The join is optimized.
The second query returns 19 records from orders. Execution time is ~.005 seconds on the same computer. The customer table reports as optimized, because the WHERE clause has a filter that matches an index expression in the table. The order table is not optimized, but the join is, as in the first query.
The third query returns 19 records from orders. Execution time is also ~.005 seconds on the same computer. Both the orders and customer tables report as optimized, as well as the join. Note that although this query is fully optimized, the execution time is the same as in the second query.
If you run the above code example with SET DELETED ON, each query that was fully optimized is now partially optimized. However, the execution times are the same.
It is usually better for performance not to create a DELETED() tag, even though it causes the query to be only partially optimized if SET DELETED is ON. The reason for this behavior is that if you are operating over a network and few records are deleted, bringing the DELETED() tag over the wire can take a non-negligible amount of time for very little gain when compared to just testing the deleted status of the fewer records in the result set.
When writing queries, you should:
- Avoid unnecessary joins.
- Make sure your joins are optimized.
- Add index tags for frequently-used non-join WHERE condition expressions. You won't usually get any performance gain from indexes on 1-byte or logical fields, or DELETED(), even though this may change the optimization level from partial to full.
- Test, test, and test to make sure you have what you need for indexes. If you get equal performance with and without an index tag, and you don't need the tag for SEEKs or ordering, don't create it.
A technique you can use in Visual FoxPro 5.0 or later to isolate performance bottlenecks is to create a coverage log with SET COVERAGE. Visual FoxPro 6.0 adds the Coverage Profiler, which assists in analyzing the coverage results. You should focus on all slow code sections, not just SELECTs, to improve their performance.
For more information about how to optimize queries, click the following article number to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base:
155788 How to optimize SQL using the FORCE clause and SYS(3054)
(c) Microsoft Corporation 2000, All Rights Reserved. Contributions by Jim Saunders, Microsoft Corporation.
Keywords: kbperformance kbdatabase kbinfo kbsqlprog KB248608