Re: Index compression vs. table compression

Howard J. Rogers wrote:
> Tom: I didn't refer to a lookup table. I referred to a single key
> lookup. Lookup as a verb, not a noun. And by it, I meant "looking up
> some data in a table, searching for a single key value". Which is
what
> one does whilst searching through EMP looking for the row with
> ename='KING', or empno=7934... where uniqueness might or might not be
an
> attribute of the data being searched.

Sorry, but this is what you actually said in your post that started this whole argument back in Dec 30 2004, 3:40 pm:

"But there is then a further problem: how is the optimiser likely to read small, useful, lookup tables?.. er, via a FTS, probably, if they are genuinely small."

YOU said "lookup tables".

I'll add myself to the list of "voters" who associate the term "lookup table" with a table that is accessed by primary key to return a single row, and add that your other term "single key lookup", even if perhaps you coined it yourself with your own intended meaning, certainly brings to my mind a "lookup from a lookup table via a single key value, which will return at most one row". Received on Sun Jan 23 2005 - 06:22:34 CST