29 lines
1.1 KiB
Markdown
29 lines
1.1 KiB
Markdown
 
|
# Performance of Date-Only vs Date-Time Indexes (forum thread)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Metadata
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
| Field | Value |
|
||
|
|
|---|---|
|
||
|
|
| Institute | Molodetz Institute — Research & Retrieval Division |
|
||
|
|
| Subject | agent-memory-recency-tracking |
|
||
|
|
| Document type | Source Citation Card |
|
||
|
|
| Tier | 2 |
|
||
|
|
| Source title | Performance of Date-Only vs Date-Time Indexes |
|
||
|
|
| Source URL | https://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/goto/post?id=1120144 |
|
||
|
|
| Source type | forum thread |
|
||
|
|
| Date researched | 2026-10-09 |
|
||
|
|
| Researched by | tai (agent), model: Claude Sonnet 5, on behalf of retoor |
|
||
|
|
| Research method | Search aggregator result listing (not independently opened or quoted) |
|
||
|
|
| Confidence | Not independently verified |
|
||
|
|
| Status | Active |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Why it's here
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Surfaced by the search "SQLite last_accessed column unix timestamp vs datetime performance indexing"; an MS Access-focused forum discussion on date-index performance, tangential to SQLite specifically but conceptually adjacent. Not opened or quoted during this pass.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Changelog
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
| Date | Change |
|
||
|
|
|---|---|
|
||
|
|
| 2026-10-09 | Logged as consulted-but-not-analyzed. |
|