Is it faster to get data from a reference table or an accumulation register?

Question

1C

There is a report that takes data from the tabular part of the directory elements. The report is generated for a very long time up to 5-10 minutes.
Tell me please, if the report takes data from the accumulation register, will it speed up the report? Much? And why?

Answer 1

If you mindlessly replace one table with another, then this will not help you. And indexes can be added in the tabular parts of the directory.
Rather, the problem is not in the data, but in the report itself. Perhaps it shovels the entire database in cycles without a request to output the results to the report line by line. Perhaps in queries there is a quiet horror with a lot of subqueries in conditions, without taking into account indexed fields, parameters for virtual tables, and simply without common sense. If this is a layout, then it is possible to calculate some of the indicators using slow calls of crooked functions from their own program modules. Perhaps some of the information is obtained using ODBC from external remote databases. Perhaps the database simply has problems with locks up to deadlocks ... There are many hypotheses. Need to analyze.
PS By the way, one of the reasons for using non-periodic information registers that are subordinate to directories (in the form of indicating the leading dimension), instead of the usual tabular parts, is precisely the fight against locks that occur during normal user work in the database with the forms of these directories. They were promoted in the era of configurations 8.0-8.2, but in the new typical configurations they returned back to the use of tabular parts. An example is contact information.