|
I think it is cleaner to use both the JOIN clause. Before the JOIN clause was added to SQL, you had to use the "theta" method, which placed everything in the WHERE clause. After the JOIN clause was added, it separates your SQL statement into logical parts. JOIN shows HOW the files work together. WHERE shows WHICH selection criteria to use. I look at the older theta-style statements and see a lot of "noise" areas (such as where a.column=b.column) that have nothing to do with running the selection criteria. I much prefer the JOIN syntax. Loyd -- Loyd Goodbar Programmer/analyst BorgWarner Incorporated ETS/Water Valley 662-473-5713 -----Original Message----- From: Dan [mailto:dbcemid@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 9:21 AM To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Subject: Re: next baby step in SQL: start using join Ok, guys, I'm seeing two schools of thought here. Dave & Gord say to let the WHERE do the "joining", whereas Rick suggests using JOIN and taking care of file placement in the join. Gord also mentions that using WHERE will cause the query optimizer to determine the best path. I suppose it gets into personal opinion, but, in this example anyway, I find using the JOIN makes it more apparent that you are joining files and how you are joining them. (vs. using WHERE to do the join.) Comments and advice are welcome & appreciated. - Dan
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.