Re: Is a table with 100 fields too big? On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 16:46:18 -0000, "Paul Lautman"
<paul.lautman@btinternet.com> wrote:
>firewoodtim@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:18:16 +0100, "Rik Wasmus"
>> <luiheidsgoeroe@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> "snip"
>>>
>>>Eehm. Why does it deliver unnecessary data? You control the queries,
>>>how come the queries don't ask for just the data they need?
>>>
>>
>> Well, I read somewhere that 'SELECT *' was a lot faster than naming a
>> bunch of fields that are specific for the exact task for the moment.
>
>Wherever it was you read that, make sure you don't go there again!
>
Interesting. Is there some reference for how queries for MySQL are
best structured? |