Jon Asher wrote:
> Thanks for the reply... but which query will be faster and less expensive?
> I don't have a table now with 4 million rows, but I'm thinking of building
> such a table. Querying it would return 1 row. The alternative is to query
> an existing table of 200k rows, and return 800 rows.
Actually, as a side-issue to my last reply...
How does one row contain the same information as 800?
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd