<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<title>Comments for Searching a ClientDataSet</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/plain" href="http://dn.codegear.com/article/29176" title="Searching a ClientDataSet" />
<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://dn.codegear.com/article/29176/feed" title="Comments for Searching a ClientDataSet" />
<id>http://dn.codegear.com/article/29176</id>
<updated>2008-11-21T16:12:54-08:00</updated>
<entry>
<title>Error</title>
<author>
<name>joan llosas</name>
<uri>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/userall?commentid=35107</uri>
</author>
<id>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=35107</id>
<updated>2003-08-11T22:12:17-07:00</updated>
<published>2003-08-11T22:12:17-07:00</published>
<summary>Error</summary>
<content>There is an error at the end of the articleWhere it saidThe following figure shows the main form of the CDSSearch project following a call to Locate. Notice that the current record is still the first record in the ClientDataSet, even though the data returned from the call to Locate was found much later in the current index order.Locate must be replace by LookUp.</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Problems with IndexFieldName with string fields !!!</title>
<author>
<name>Manny Ramirez</name>
<uri>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/userall?commentid=33360</uri>
</author>
<id>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=33360</id>
<updated>2002-10-22T08:53:06-07:00</updated>
<published>2002-10-22T08:53:06-07:00</published>
<summary>Problems with IndexFieldName with string fields !!!</summary>
<content>The order  of my query (without index) is:DESCRIPTION-----------------------ACCES P'ADORNACCES P'AJUSTACCES P'ASPIRACCES P'BATHACCES P'COURTACCES P'SOLDACCES PARA PUERTAACCES PLAST...When i do this, i lost the order of the records:  cdsQuery.IndexFieldNames:= DESCRIPTIONThe result is:DESCRIPTION-----------------ACCES P'ADORNACCES P'AJUSTACCES PARA PUERTAACCES P'ASPIRACCES P'BATHACCES P'COURTACCES PLASTACCES P'SOLDCan you help me to resolve this problem ?</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Using GetBookmark / GotoBookmark / FreeBookmark</title>
<author>
<name>Daniel Ardelian</name>
<uri>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/userall?commentid=33306</uri>
</author>
<id>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=33306</id>
<updated>2002-10-12T02:28:37-07:00</updated>
<published>2002-10-12T02:28:37-07:00</published>
<summary>Using GetBookmark / GotoBookmark / FreeBookmark</summary>
<content>  Usually, when searching a DataSet, the user prefers that the current record is changed only if a match is found. For that purpose, I found very useful to call the GetBookmark, GotoBookmark, FreeBookmark functions (implemented in TDataSet, an ancestor of TClientDataSet).</content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>Use of Filter</title>
<author>
<name>Roger Graham</name>
<uri>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/userall?commentid=33289</uri>
</author>
<id>http://threads.codegear.com/threads/threads.exe/view?commentid=33289</id>
<updated>2002-10-10T01:33:56-07:00</updated>
<published>2002-10-10T01:33:56-07:00</published>
<summary>Use of Filter</summary>
<content>Great overview.  I've never used Locate, every day you learn something.How does filter compare as an access mechanism?  It is particularly useful if the results are linked to data aware controls as all the other methods leave the data aware controls pointing to incorrect data if the locate/search etc fails.  What are the performance implications, particularly on large datasets?RegardsRoger Graham</content>
</entry>
</feed>
