× 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.




Thanks for your reply Elvis
I'll look into that, but we were thinking it was something to do with
IGNORE_DERIVED_INDEX being changed from the default of *NO to *YES.
According to the text in the file, it says....

Allows SQE to process the query even when a mapped key index or select omit
index exists over a table in the query. SQE will ignore the derived index
(s) and continue. QQVAL: *DEFAULT--The default value is set to *NO.
*YES--Allow the SQE optimizer to ignore the derived index and process the
query. The resulting query plan will be created without any regard to the
existence of the derived index(s). *NO--Do not ignore the derived index. If
a derived index exists CQE will process the query.

Once this was changed back to the default, the results for BOTH of us was
what was expected.



Alan Shore
Programmer/Analyst, Distribution
E:AShore@xxxxxxxxxxx
P:(631) 200-5019
C:(631) 880-8640
"If you're going through Hell, keep going" - Winston Churchill
midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 02/10/2009 11:31:24 AM:

Check the following user profile settings for any differences between
yours
and his profile:

Sort sequence . . . . . . . . .
Library . . . . . . . . . . .
Language ID . . . . . . . . . .
Country or region ID . . . . . .
Coded character set ID . . . . .
Character identifier control . .
Locale job attributes . . . . .
Locale . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hth, Elvis

Celebrating 11-Years of SQL Performance Excellence on IBM i, i5/OS and
OS/400
www.centerfieldtechnology.com


-----Original Message-----
Subject: Re: Is this an SQL problem or quirk

Thanks for your reply Charles
It may seem that either, we both need new glasses, or its some mass
hallucination between us, but the LONG story was
1/. we thought that he had a weird version of the custadrp file (not
true)
2/. he was signed onto a different box (not true - the file APTSCAN ONLY
exists in my library on the development box)
3/. we changed the SQL to ONLY look at the files in the named libraries
the result was still the same.
Run the SQL signed on as me - no problems, the results were as expected.
Run the SQL signed on as him (at the same terminal in fact, different
sessions) the weird results are displayed
In all circumstances we copied the SQL statement and pasted the same SQL
statement into each sessions STRSQL
So we can definitely say that the SQL statement is NOT the problem


Alan Shore



--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

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.