More intelligent filtering.

Meeting place for R&R customers and clients to share tips and ideas. Post your questions, messages or problems here.
Post Reply
Chris_Ransom_(Guest)
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:44 pm

More intelligent filtering.

Post by Chris_Ransom_(Guest) » Fri Apr 20, 2001 8:39 am

Does the new version of R&R include more intelligent filtering? By this I mean if you include Calculated fields in a filter condition, does it only create these fields after it has cut down the amount of data that is excluded by the other pre-existing filter conditions? This would make it so much faster and more efficient to run.

kfleming
Posts: 5795
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:44 pm

=> RE: More intelligent filtering.

Post by kfleming » Fri Apr 20, 2001 9:44 am

No changes were made in the filtering logic for Version 9.____Kathleen__R&R Support

Chris_Ransom_(Guest)
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:44 pm

==> RE: More intelligent filtering.

Post by Chris_Ransom_(Guest) » Mon Apr 23, 2001 2:55 am

Would it be possible to improve filtering in the way described? I would have thought that applying the non-calculated filter items first, then the calculated filters on the reduced record set, would be far more efficient.

kfleming
Posts: 5795
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:44 pm

===> RE: More intelligent filtering.

Post by kfleming » Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:40 am

There is some built in optimization but I will add an ehancement request to have another look at possibly improving the logic.____Kathleen__R&R Support

DLevin
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:44 pm

====> RE: More intelligent filtering.

Post by DLevin » Tue Apr 24, 2001 10:40 am

I believe that the R&R algorithm for assessing the filter, while not the most ideal one possible performance-wise, provides the most flexibility for the wide variety of potential record selections. While it may take some extra processor cycles to calculate fields for record selection, this is minor compared to the application of the filter prior to attempting record links, scans etc.____Besides, the faster the computer the faster the records are selected, and computers are getting faster geometrically. Therefore, less than 100% efficiency in this area is not a priority. It can also be a significant problem since making some filters more efficient would probably make other less so. Consider Crystal^s approach to pre-processed totals. So that all total can be immediately applied in a filter, pre-processing is the default. However, this is only necessary maybe 5% of the time but Crystal runs slower because it must ALWAYS perform the pre-processing step.____R&R filter always work and R&R runs through records exceptionally fast under all circumstances.____Dan Levin__President

Howard_Hammerman_(Guest)
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:44 pm

=====> RE: More intelligent filtering.

Post by Howard_Hammerman_(Guest) » Tue Apr 24, 2001 6:34 pm

Here is how I handle the problems with R&R filtering in FoxPro:____1) I create a menu that allows the user to pick the report he wants.__2) I create a screen that provides the parameters for the report. For example, strart date, end-date, division, etc. I capture the user^s choices as memory variables.__3) I use FoxPro^s Query utiltiy to __ a) join the tables __ b) select the records__ c) return the required columns__ d) create a *.dbf with the result set. For example if the screen was for Report 6 I would create report06.dbf____4) I then call R&R (or Crystal) from within FoxPro and create the report based on the result set. There is the need for very few relations. I do all the calculations within R&R. I do some minor additional selections in R&R.____Use a report writer for Report Writing. Use a database for database-ing.____Howard Hammerman__Hammerman Associates, Inc.__R&R and Crystal training, consulting, development, books, __outsourcing.__800-783-2269__www.hammerman.com__

Post Reply