odd results with scan search

[Bruce Easton]

On 11/19/15 3:27 PM, Scott Walker via Filepro-list wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Filepro-list
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+scottwalker=ramsystemscorp.com at lists.celestial.
> com] On Behalf Of Nancy Palmquist via Filepro-list
> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 3:08 PM
> To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Cc: Nancy Palmquist <nlp at vss3.com>
> Subject: Re: odd results with scan search
>
> Bruce,
>
> On 11/19/2015 11:28 AM, Bruce Easton via Filepro-list wrote:
>> In a file where a field contains "Lyon" and I scan for records using
>> extended selection and ask for records containing (co) "yon", some
>> results are returned that include the records with name "Lyon".
>> However, if I search the same file on another field for "DPM" and some
>> records exist where that field contains "xxx/DPM", no results are
>> returned.  This is with filepro 5.0.13.
>>
> The important part of the answer is if you have index scan on or off, paired
> with that is if the field you are scanning is indexed and the field length
> is total in the index.
>
> If the field is indexed, and you have scan/select ON (default behavior) then
> the search is done on the index not the real data. Try turning the index
> scan off by using -jn on the command line. Try it then.
>
> I can not remember if there is an environment variable to turn off index
> scan in the environment.
>
> If the index is built on less than the entire field or it is corrupt, that
> could explain your scanning issue.
>
> Using Index scan can be much much faster but the index has to be reliable.
> I am not sure if the CONTAINS method might affect your index scan results
> somehow.
>
> Nancy
>
>
>
>
> NANCY:
>
> I believe PFIXS=OFF would turn off index scan.
>
> Regards,
> Scott Walker
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>
Thanks Nancy and Scott,

I did check that earlier and I don't have PFIXS set.  Also there is no 
index built on the field in question.  (I too was wondering if PFIXS 
would make a difference for "contains" - I seem to remember that co was 
not an operator that index scan would work with, which would make 
sense.)  I just noticed that this is an right-justified field.  That 
must be the problem - that filepro respects the leading spaces in the 
extended selection prompt field when comparing to existing values.

Bruce


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus