setAccountData - accounts in table

[Cocodrilo]

How do i something like this .. ?

local consulta = dbQuery(myCallback,db,"SELECT * FROM acc_table")    
local resultado =  dbPoll( consulta, -1 )    
    for _, v in ipairs(resultado) do 
        local acc = v['account'] 
        local playerAccount = getPlayerAccount ( getAccountName(acc) ) 
            setAccountData(playerAccount,"Money", 1000) 
        end 

* I save 'getPlayerMoney' into the "Money" accountData. I want to set that money to accounts who are in the table in the column 'account'.

[Anubhav]

local consulta = dbQuery(myCallback,db,"SELECT * FROM acc_table")    
local resultado =  dbPoll( consulta, -1 )    
    for _, v in ipairs(resultado) do 
        local acc = v['account'] 
        local playerAccount = getAccount( acc ) 
            setAccountData(playerAccount,"Money", 1000) 
        end 

[Simple0x47]

local consulta = dbQuery(myCallback,db,"SELECT * FROM acc_table")    
local resultado =  dbPoll( consulta, -1 )    
    for _, v in ipairs(resultado) do 
        local acc = v['account'] 
        local playerAccount = getAccount( acc ) 
            setAccountData(playerAccount,"Money", 1000) 
        end 

Use

pairs 

it's better

[Simple0x47]

local consulta = dbQuery(myCallback,db,"SELECT * FROM acc_table")    
local resultado =  dbPoll( consulta, -1 )    
    for _, v in ipairs(resultado) do 
        local acc = v['account'] 
        local playerAccount = getAccount( acc ) 
            setAccountData(playerAccount,"Money", 1000) 
        end 

Use

pairs 

it's better

[Noki]

No, pairs is never faster than ipairs or a simple sequential loop (for i = 1, #table do).

If you're iterating over a list with perfect pairs (sequentially, where there are no nil pairs), use ipairs or the other sequential loop. The only time when you ever use pairs is when the indexes are not integers or you have imperfect pairs.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1258 ... s-in-table

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8955 ... a-for-loop

Since the OP is iterating over a polled SQL result, the resultant table will have perfect pairs. He can use ipairs or i = 1, #table for optimal speed.

[Noki]

No, pairs is never faster than ipairs or a simple sequential loop (for i = 1, #table do).

If you're iterating over a list with perfect pairs (sequentially, where there are no nil pairs), use ipairs or the other sequential loop. The only time when you ever use pairs is when the indexes are not integers or you have imperfect pairs.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1258 ... s-in-table

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8955 ... a-for-loop

Since the OP is iterating over a polled SQL result, the resultant table will have perfect pairs. He can use ipairs or i = 1, #table for optimal speed.