Re: More fun with native RLA on an SQL view

James,

Right now I don't have access to an IBM i, so I can't check this but, Does
the use of RRNs have any sense when accessing a view?
As I see it, RRNs would apply more to a PF. For a view I would use either
SETTL *START/*END, as Chuck suggested, and some sequential reads or, in the
case of i6.1, I suppose I could do a chain against a SELECT/OMIT index
(see previous posts about new capabilities in the CREATE INDEX statement).

Regards,


Luis Rodriguez
IBM Certified Systems Expert — eServer i5 iSeries


On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:22 PM, James H. H. Lampert <
jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

CRPence wrote:

Do "going forward" and "going backward" mean to imply the use of
the expected /sequential access method/ [i.e. retrieve previous or
next] versus the unexpected /direct access method/ [i.e. retrieve by
rrn; for other than *START or *END] for row retrieval?

Hmmmmm......

Going to another ILE RPG test program, *START doesn't work for CHAIN,
but it works just fine for SETLL.

SETLL with *START gets me to a "good" record.
SETLL with 1 gets me to an "excluded" record.
SETLL with 0 gets me no record at all.
SETGT with 0 gets me to an "excluded" record.

Interesting, since I'm just about certain that MI is calling the same
thing an RPG SETLL calls, rather than what an RPG CHAIN calls.

--
JHHL
--
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.