After a long battle with technology, geoff@variosoft.com (Geoff Caplan), an earthling, wrote:
> b) Use a sequence. Faster for the SELECTS and UPDATES, I guess, but
> how much will the sequence slow down the INSERTS on a medium sized
> record-set?
Why, in particular, would you expect the sequence to slow down
inserts? They don't lock the table.
Note that if you're really doing a lot of INSERTs in parallel, you
might find it worthwhile to configure the sequence to cache some
number of entries so that they are pre-allocated and stored in memory
for each session (e.g. - for each connection) for quicker access. See
the documentation for "create sequence" for more details...
--
output = reverse("gro.gultn" "@" "enworbbc")
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/x.html
Think of C++ as an object-oriented assembly language.