Are DSUM and DLOOKUP functions slow ???

[David]

I modified a system and added a few DLOOKUP and DSUM statements and the system now runs much more slowly. Are these to blame? Are there any faster alternatives

Would it be faster to open and close a recordset and run an SQL. How would I do that.

 

[Pavel Romashkin]

Domain aggregate functions are known to be slow. I have not seen it in
reality but I almost never need them. I prefer recordset based functions
and SQL, which are faster. I use Seek and FindFirst in place of DLookup,
and SUM in SQL to get totals.
I resort to D-functions only when I am particularly lazy - they save
some typing. But I would never use them in a loop, calling them 500 times.
Pavel

 

[Bruce M. Thompson]

I modified a system and added a few DLOOKUP and DSUM statements and the system
now runs much more slowly. Are these to blame? Are there any faster
alternatives?

Would it be faster to open and close a recordset and run an SQL. How would I

do that.

Aggregate domain functions do not use indexes, so, as a general rule, using sql
and filtered recordsets would be faster. For a good example of a replacement
function for DLookup, see the following page at Allen Browne's web site:

http://members.iinet.net.au/~allenbrowne/ser-42.html

Note that this page also contains a good explanation of the shortcomings of the
DLookup function, some of which also apply to other aggregate domain functions.

See, also, the following page at The Access Web for a free download of
replacement functions written by Trevor Best.

http://www.mvps.org/access/modules/mdl0012.htm

 

[Duane Hookom]

I have seen lots of Access developers use DSum() etc in reports where Sum()
works much more efficiently.

--
Duane Hookom
MS Access MVP

I modified a system and added a few DLOOKUP and DSUM statements and the

system now runs much more slowly. Are these to blame? Are there any faster
alternatives?

Would it be faster to open and close a recordset and run an SQL. How would

I do that.