Re: Sequences in transaction

Greetings! I've just found .. nothing! This works pretty well to my
surprise. Thanks so much for the suggestion. I did a little rewrite
which builds a doubly-linked list table of dates, with prior date and
next date columns maintained by triggers. I then retrieve adjacent
pairs of data table rows via a merge with this table. This appears to
be faster than issuing a subselect .... order by ... limit 1 for
each data row, but your key idea (to me, at least) is that I can avoid
sequential sequence numbers by making explicit reference to the order
of the date values themselves.

Thanks again!

Mike Castle <dalgoda(at)ix(dot)netcom(dot)com> writes:

> On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 12:03:40PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > need to be able to *quickly* select a pair of *adjacent* rows in a
> > table. t2.seq = t1.seq + 1 seems to work pretty well. Of course, I
>
> What's wrong with a select ... order by .. limit 2 ?
>
> mrc
> --
> Mike Castle Life is like a clock: You can work constantly
> dalgoda(at)ix(dot)netcom(dot)com and be right all the time, or not work at all
> www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/ and be right at least twice a day. -- mrc
> We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
>
>

--
Camm Maguire camm(at)enhanced(dot)com
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah