RE: SQL under the covers

[Vern Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Reeve, I'm not sure this will help, I'm not even sure any of the CASE 
processing comes up for air, but here goes.

<http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/iseries/db2/permdebug.html> lists 
PTFs for V5R1 and V5R2 related to the *SOURCE debug view being made 
permanent. I've not tried the very intriguing kind of statement you've 
shown, so I don't know whether stepping through would show a different path 
for each branch of the CASE statement.

The other thing I'd look at is the STRDBMON command - this has a lot of 
information, including the statement used. It's no fun to work with - 
that's why we have a product that analyzes its output. But you can get a 
start with the info at 
<http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/iseries/db2/dbmonqrys.htm>. There's 
also a RedPaper called "Using AS/400 Database Monitor and Visual Explain To 
Identify and Tune SQL Queries" - try <www.redbooks.ibm.com> and dig around 
- I don't have the exact link.

HTH
Vern

At 06:33 PM 7/10/2004, you wrote:
> Somewhere the statement is interpreted; I'm thinking specifically of an
> evaluation of the CASE statements.
>
> I build SELECT's in other programs; they're easy to diagnose.  But with the
> ability to use CASE statements in ORDER BY in V5R2, I'm pushing my customer
> to get to previous-release current.  As I develop more complex SQL logic,
> I'll need a tool to show me how an SQL statement is formed (or malformed).
>
> -rf
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Vern Hamberg
> > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 4:18 PM
> > To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> > Subject: Re: SQL under the covers
> >
> > I'm confused - what do you expect to see, other than what you already
> > have?
> > The only statement you have is
> >
> > select fhpro, etc.
> >
> > I'm curious as to what you mean by "created" SQL statement.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Vern
> >
> > At 12:38 PM 7/10/2004, you wrote:
> > >Is there any way to see the "created" SQL statement for something like
> > this: