Re: Optimized Search method for DB files. ?

[Greg van Paassen <gregvp@xxxxxxxxxx>]

At 12:29 22/10/98 -0500, Ravi wrote:
>Instead of combining data from multiple companies into the same file,
>have you considered using multiple members? (ie) A member for each
>company. Depending on the company you want to work with, a CL can set up
>appropriate overrides. 

Don't, don't, don't even think about it.
It's not just one CL, it's lots of them -- or a generalised one and a
database file of multimember files in your system (which has to be kept up
to date!), and an extra program call in every batch and interactive job.
It won't work with SQL or query tools.
It complicates every aspect of maintenance.

As you can guess, I have experience of a couple of systems that used the
multi-member approach for core database files. Multi-members got in the way
all the time.

Unless your file size is _large_, say 100,000,000 records or more, use the
naive approach - put a company field in the record format.

BTW if the data for each company is always separate (there is no, or
little, cross-company reporting), put copies of the database in different
libraries for each company (still use a company field, if there is any
cross-company stuff).  It is much easier to manage library lists than
multi-member files.

Cheers -- Greg
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@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
+---