couple hundred loops, but mutiple tables.

right, sort of what I did.

I ended up collecting what I need in a bulk query, sorting, then scanning
tagging in order each value. If sorted properly, works well.

The tag is a short number then I delete < 6.
o I may scan for 5, loop scan, etc

thanks

"Steven Green" <greens@diamondsg.com> wrote:
>how many loops thru the process do you have to make? are others online when

>you do it?
>
>query
>sort D, grab top 5 and do whatever
>(or view/end grab bottom 5)
>rinse and repeat
>
>--
>
>Steven Green
>Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
>
>http://www.OasisTradingPost.com
>
>Collectibles and Memorabilia
>Vintage Lego Sets and Parts
>- and Paradox support, too
>"Kevin Zawicki"  wrote in message 
>news:5f111447$1@pnews.thedbcommunity.com...
>
>
>I have two tables A and B.
>each has a unique part # column
>
>There is item name table with the part # and then two tables with part #
>and sub part #
>
>M part# and info
>A active   part#, subpart#
>B retired  part#, subpart#
>
>A list of parts, and one table with active subparts of the part, one table
>with the retired subparts on the part.
>
>subparts are unique and a subpart cannot be in both tables
>
>
>each subpart "child table" has a date column
>each part may have zero to many subparts in either table
>
>I need to get the last x number (3-5) subparts by date from both tables.
>
>example
>If I have part 12345 and want the get the latest 5 entries by date and they
>may be in A or B or both.
>
>
>I can query and collect from both tables and then sort and grab top 5.
>
>But this may put 100s of rows in the collection table just to get the top
>5.
>
>Using QBE or local SQL is there a better way to get the latest 5?
>
>Even if I get the latest 5 from A and latest 5 from B (if they have 5) then
>latest 5 from collection it would be more efficient than getting the entire
>set of subparts.
>
>Is there a way to do TOP 5 in local SQL?
>
>