× 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.


  1.  Home
  2. RPG400-L
  3. May 2003

Re: Date arithmetic - performance dog?

Mlpolutta@xxxxxxx wrote:
I wanted to see if you folks have found that ADDDUR and SUBDUR (etc.), and MOVEing to/from date fields are REALLY poor performers - it sure seems that way to me. Is there a way to make such things perform well?

The performance of the date/time/timestamp operations is indeed a touch on the slow side. The reason is that each operation does a validity check on the values.

The only suggestion I have is that if you're converting from character or numeric to a D/T/Z value, don't check first using a TEST operation. Just convert directly using the appropriate built-in function (%DATE, %TIME, or %TIMESTAMP) wrapped in a MONITOR group. That will at least save one validity check.

For example:

MONITOR;
   DATE=%DATE(DSTR:*YMD);
ON-ERROR 112;
   DSPLY 'Egads! We have a bad date value!';
ENDMON;

Cheers! Hans



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
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.