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

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).

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by 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.