RE: Stored Procedure Result sets

["Neill Harper" <neill.harper@xxxxxxxx>]

UDTF is a good idea but I don't really want to go down that route if there
is a quicker answer, to be honest large parts of this routine are synon
generated, i.e .the array declaration filling the array etc. 

The result set return is done using a little be of user source.

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Scott Klement
Sent: 08 April 2009 22:54
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: Stored Procedure Result sets

What was wrong with the UDTF suggestion?

Why can't you set your DS field names to the names the PC guys are 
expecting?  (Is this RPG/400 or something?)


Neill Harper wrote:
> I didn't think there would be a way to do it. 
>
> I guess I'm just going to store my data in a work file and SQL it out into
a
> cursor where I can control the column names....
>
> Either that or get the pc guys to change their code to reference the field
> names of the data structure.
>
> Thanks for the reply.
>
> Neill
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Scott Klement
> Sent: 08 April 2009 20:58
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> Subject: Re: Stored Procedure Result sets
>
> Not with a stored procedure.  The system doesn't keep track of which 
> columns are returned by a stored procedure -- indeed, your program logic 
> could potentially change those columns each time you run it.
>
> However, if you used a UDTF, you could control the column names...
>
> Otherwise, I suggest that you simply name your DS subfields the name 
> that you want SQL to see.
>
> Neill Harper wrote:
> > Anybody know of a way to override the Result set column name generated by
> > the following:
> >
> > SET RESULT SETS ARRAY :X FOR :Y ROWS
> >
> > Where is X is a multi occurrence data structure.
> > Thanks
> > Neill