Speciality in mysql_fetch_arr ay

[pradeep]

Dear all,

I want to know the difference between mysql_fetch_arr ay() and
mysql_fetch_row ().

I know that mysql_fetch_row () return data in numeric array while
mysql_fetch_arr ay() return data in numeric as well as in associative
array.

But my question is, why it returns in both format. Is it wastage of
memory ?
Why this wastage is necesarry ?

Thanks in advance.

BYe.

[Erwin Moller]

pradeep wrote:

Dear all,

I want to know the difference between mysql_fetch_arr ay() and
mysql_fetch_row ().

I know that mysql_fetch_row () return data in numeric array while
mysql_fetch_arr ay() return data in numeric as well as in associative
array.

But my question is, why it returns in both format. Is it wastage of
memory ?
Why this wastage is necesarry ?

Hi,

The answer is simple, if you want an assoc array, you can use
mysql_fetch_arr ay().

I always prefer constructs like this in my code:
echo $row["firstname"];

above

echo $row[3];

Since the former leaves you without doubt which column you are using.
And also: If you expand your query to get more columns, an index of an
array might easily get you confused.

But if you like the array-indexes more, just use them.
I expect there must be less overhead involved when no assoc arrays are
created and returned.

So as far as I can tell: it is not a waste of memory, but it offers you
the choice what you want:
1) faster code/less IO (use only indexes)
2) better readable/more robust code. (use assoc arrays)

just my 2 cent.

Regards,
Erwin Moller

>
Thanks in advance.

BYe.

[Captain Paralytic]

On 26 Nov, 09:29, pradeep <pwprad...@gmai l.comwrote:

Dear all,

I want to know the difference between mysql_fetch_arr ay() and
mysql_fetch_row ().

I know that mysql_fetch_row () return data in numeric array while
mysql_fetch_arr ay() return data in numeric as well as in associative
array.

So you know the difference then

>
But my question is, why it returns in both format. Is it wastage of
memory ?

It returns in both formats because that is what it was built to do.

>Is it wastage of memory ?

It is only a waste if you don't need both array types. If you only
want numeric use mysql_fetch_row (), or you can use msql_fetch_arra y()
with the MSQL_NUM constant. If you only want associative then use
MSQL_ASSOC.

Why this wastage is necesarry ?

Thanks in advance.

BYe.

[Jerry Stuckle]

Erwin Moller wrote:

pradeep wrote:

>Dear all,

I want to know the difference between mysql_fetch_arr ay() and
mysql_fetch_ro w().

I know that mysql_fetch_row () return data in numeric array while
mysql_fetch_ar ray() return data in numeric as well as in associative
array.

But my question is, why it returns in both format. Is it wastage of
memory ?
Why this wastage is necesarry ?

Hi,

The answer is simple, if you want an assoc array, you can use
mysql_fetch_arr ay().

I always prefer constructs like this in my code:
echo $row["firstname"];

above

echo $row[3];

Since the former leaves you without doubt which column you are using.
And also: If you expand your query to get more columns, an index of an
array might easily get you confused.

But if you like the array-indexes more, just use them.
I expect there must be less overhead involved when no assoc arrays are
created and returned.

So as far as I can tell: it is not a waste of memory, but it offers you
the choice what you want:
1) faster code/less IO (use only indexes)
2) better readable/more robust code. (use assoc arrays)

just my 2 cent.

Regards,
Erwin Moller

>>
Thanks in advance.

BYe.

Erwin,

The overhead in creating an associative array is negligible.

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attgl obal.net
=============== ===

[Erwin Moller]

Jerry Stuckle wrote:

Erwin Moller wrote:

>pradeep wrote:

>>Dear all,

I want to know the difference between mysql_fetch_arr ay() and
mysql_fetch_r ow().

I know that mysql_fetch_row () return data in numeric array while
mysql_fetch_a rray() return data in numeric as well as in associative
array.

But my question is, why it returns in both format. Is it wastage of
memory ?
Why this wastage is necesarry ?

Hi,

The answer is simple, if you want an assoc array, you can use
mysql_fetch_ar ray().

I always prefer constructs like this in my code:
echo $row["firstname"];

above

echo $row[3];

Since the former leaves you without doubt which column you are using.
And also: If you expand your query to get more columns, an index of an
array might easily get you confused.

But if you like the array-indexes more, just use them.
I expect there must be less overhead involved when no assoc arrays are
created and returned.

So as far as I can tell: it is not a waste of memory, but it offers
you the choice what you want:
1) faster code/less IO (use only indexes)
2) better readable/more robust code. (use assoc arrays)

just my 2 cent.

Regards,
Erwin Moller

>>>
Thanks in advance.

BYe.

Erwin,

The overhead in creating an associative array is negligible.

Hi Jerry,

I expected so much, but never actually measured it, since I always use
assoc retrieval of columns for clearity of code.
A task must be very daunting to optimize in this kind of way.

But thanks for the info. Now I know I'll never use indexed row
retrieval. ;-)

Regards,
Erwin