Are we the only people having problems with the SQL92 optimizer choosing poor table join order and index usage on queries involving more than five tables with volume data and compound indexes, or are Progress not quite telling us the truth.
We are running queries against a Progress 9.1B04...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.