This is actually the reverse of my understanding. I thought embedded SQL would perform better than OPNQRYF because there was less system overhead involved. Your test makes me wonder about that. I also wonder, though, if the number of records in the file makes a difference. Or if retrieving and sorting the records cannot use an existing access path. How about the number of joins and/or sub-queries or the use of calculated fields? Somehow I think this comparison may be far more complicated than it looks. Donald R. Fisher, III Project Manager The Roomstore Furniture Company (804) 784-7600 ext. 2124 DFisher@roomstoreeast.com <clip> I did a test of SQL and RPG vs OPNQRYF and RPG. It took exactly 6 CPU seconds for either solution to run 500 iterations over a 72 record file (QAUOOPT). <clip>
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.