× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Vern,

On 10 Feb 2003 at 8:48, Vern Hamberg wrote:
> The other points, esp. about copying the records you want to keep and
> clearing the file, are right on, IMO, esp. when the number of deleted
> records will be most of the file. You can CPYF on a range, and an
> existing logical will help this, too. You deleted c.72% of the
> records. Copying the other 28% would mean, at worst, about 40% of the
> I/O, and could be better, if blocking can be used - deletes are not
> blocked.
> 
> In my experience, SQL is the worst tool for deleting records, esp. a
> lot of them, relatively speaking. It's awfully easy to program but
> often performs very badly. The usual trade-off is: Convenient for the
> programmer, bad for the user (or performance).

we only run this SQL every other year or so.. And luckily, weekends are free 
for this kind 
of stuff.

I was just a little surprised about the long runtime.

How long will the RGZPFM take?

Regards,

Oliver

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.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 on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.