Re: Database Re-eng

[ghutchinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Gord Hutchinson)]

On Thu, 2 Apr 1998 18:19:43 -0500, you wrote:

>Neil (H-W),
>
>In a message dated 98-04-02 11:10:37 EST, you write:
>
>>      We're thinking of re engineering (to some extent) one of our 
>>       applications as we convert to y2k.
>>       
>>       We are divided on some of our ideas;
>>       
>>       1. Whether to get rid of access path definition on PF's.
>
>Not quite sure what you mean here.  If you mean getting rid of keyed PF's, we
>had a discussion here a year or so ago about it.  I believe that it was proven
>that my own archaic (S/38 days) opinions of _NEVER_ having a keyed physical
>were no longer valid in the /400 era.  Don't quite remember, though...
>
>Dean Asmussen

I was not part of that previous discussion so I am probably going to
restate something brought up then.  If so, I apologize.  I never
create a keyed physical file for the simple reason that if the key
field requirements ever change in the future, the keyed physical file
needs to be re-org'ed instead of simply rebuilding the logical file
index.

Gord

-- 
Gord Hutchinson
TST Overland Express
ghutchinson@tstoverland.com
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---