> On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 01:59:22PM -0700,
> operationsengineer1@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > is it a good practice to leave this included in
> the
> > queries, as is, or should i factor it out somehow?
> if
> > i should factor it, how do i do so?
>
> If what you're saying is that these additional
> criteria are
> redundant, then it's up to you: what do you want to
> optimise for? If
> you're protecting against future errors, then the
> additional
> criteria might help. If you're protecting against
> having to write
> your code to produce a more efficient query, you
> should weigh the
> cost and benefit (which benefit includes "easier to
> debug queries").
> There is a probably non-zero cost to the extra
> joins.
Andrew and Rod,
my apologies for not being more clear in my question.
all the code is required to get from t_inspect_result
data back to t_product information.
however, many of the joins are used over and over and
over - making for a complex query to view and try and
to debug - not to mention forcing a long trail of
chasing linked data to get from t_inspect_result_id
back to the linked t_product data.
Thanks for taking the time to address the question -
and i will try and be more clear going forward.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
