> From: Walden H. Leverich
> >This is not a good reason, especially if you have encapsulated your
> >updates in a single place.
> Or have properly used SQL for your reads and writes. SQL doesn't care
> how many fields I add to the end of my table (or the middle, or the
> beginning) it's going after named fields.

This bit doesn't really matter if you have updates scattered throughout
your code, because now you have to find every one and fix it to use the
counter.  In fact, SQL makes it far more difficult because you can't use
normal XREF procedures to find which programs use which files and
fields.  Impact analysis, especially with dynamic SQL, is much more
difficult than with native I/O.

SQL is not a panacea.  It's great for queries and for mass updates, not
so great for transaction processing.


Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2015 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact