TEG
Jun 17th, 1999, 07:16 AM
Question that has been on my mind for quite a while:
In almost every program example I see in magazines, books and the help cd's; a recordset object is created and then put through a routine to copy the results to a data grid one field at a time... my question is this: What advantages does this offer or why is this done; rather than just using a data control?
Now, for list boxes and small almost fixed resultsets; i do copy them and destroy the recordset object, but when I'm unsure of the size of the resultset; I use data controls.
One advantage I can think of is the overhead that would be saved; but, when the resultset is large say 200 - 300 records with 25 fields in each; How could i justify the time it takes to copy all of these fields to a grid? Maybe I did something wrong when I tried this method, but it seemed to me that it took quite a while to scroll through the whole grid to populate it???
In almost every program example I see in magazines, books and the help cd's; a recordset object is created and then put through a routine to copy the results to a data grid one field at a time... my question is this: What advantages does this offer or why is this done; rather than just using a data control?
Now, for list boxes and small almost fixed resultsets; i do copy them and destroy the recordset object, but when I'm unsure of the size of the resultset; I use data controls.
One advantage I can think of is the overhead that would be saved; but, when the resultset is large say 200 - 300 records with 25 fields in each; How could i justify the time it takes to copy all of these fields to a grid? Maybe I did something wrong when I tried this method, but it seemed to me that it took quite a while to scroll through the whole grid to populate it???