<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cache</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kirtandesai.com/write/index.php/2007/09/08/cache/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kirtandesai.com/write/2007/09/08/cache/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:40:20 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Administrator</title>
		<link>http://kirtandesai.com/write/2007/09/08/cache/comment-page-1/#comment-13986</link>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 03:35:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kirtandesai.com/write/2007/09/10/cache/#comment-13986</guid>
		<description>can you tell me why it would not help? Would you rather have random data coming in through the source .. and scan a sorted lookup cache file? (in some cases this might actually work faster) but but with large data , and lookup , i would rather let first few (million?) rows pass by faster and then let it scan ... using the index cache lookup transformation would know where to go , no?

tell me why it would not help (or help).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>can you tell me why it would not help? Would you rather have random data coming in through the source .. and scan a sorted lookup cache file? (in some cases this might actually work faster) but but with large data , and lookup , i would rather let first few (million?) rows pass by faster and then let it scan &#8230; using the index cache lookup transformation would know where to go , no?</p>
<p>tell me why it would not help (or help).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dev1</title>
		<link>http://kirtandesai.com/write/2007/09/08/cache/comment-page-1/#comment-13979</link>
		<dc:creator>dev1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 02:49:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kirtandesai.com/write/2007/09/10/cache/#comment-13979</guid>
		<description>Hi, Thanks for sharing the information with all of us. I was trying to understand why the sorted input would be faster for a lookup transformation. I do not recollect any option in lookup transformation where we can tell the lookup that input data is sorted. If that&#039;s true then how would sorted input  help the lookup operation. I assume for every incoming row it would start the search from the top.

i appreciate if you could reply. Thanks in advance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Thanks for sharing the information with all of us. I was trying to understand why the sorted input would be faster for a lookup transformation. I do not recollect any option in lookup transformation where we can tell the lookup that input data is sorted. If that&#8217;s true then how would sorted input  help the lookup operation. I assume for every incoming row it would start the search from the top.</p>
<p>i appreciate if you could reply. Thanks in advance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

