LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous (more recent) messageNext (less recent) messagePrevious (more recent) in topicNext (less recent) in topicPrevious (more recent) by same authorNext (less recent) by same authorPrevious page (December 2008, week 2)Back to main SAS-L pageJoin or leave SAS-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Wed, 10 Dec 2008 23:03:41 -0500
Reply-To:     "Howard Schreier <hs AT dc-sug DOT org>"
              <schreier.junk.mail@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         "Howard Schreier <hs AT dc-sug DOT org>"
              <schreier.junk.mail@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Forcing Indexes and Preventing Index options
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 06:17:33 -0800, Irin later <irinfigvam@YAHOO.COM> wrote:

>Being new in SAS SQL Indexes, I got confused with understanding of� the following options: >� >� When IDXWHERE = option is: >Yes-SAS uses the best available index to process the WHERE >������������� Expression, even if SAS estimates that sequential access is >������������� Faster >NO- SAS process the data sequentially even if SAS estimates that >����������� Processing with an index is better�� >� >I just wonder �.what might be hypothetical cases when both cases are applicable? >Could you please give me any example why it might be in need? >� >Thank you in advance, >� >Irin >�

The critical word is "estimates". SAS may not always make the right decision, so it's useful to be able to override.

I would look at Mike Raithel's book (http://tinyurl.com/5uxsuz).


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SAS-L page