Re: SQL vs. traditional I/O?

[Pat Barber <mboceanside@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

SQL is the "modern" version of Opnqryf, which is the same
SQL engine operated by CLP statements. IBM has "pushed"
this form for many years with some success, but the
performance issues continue to nag the whole thing.

Any time somebody tells you SQL is god's gift to
programming has been to too many IBM seminars.

"Clunky" is an excellent description ....

Creating a magical view of a data file is hardly
rocket science.... it was called "logical views"
back in the early days.

I recall several stories by Jim Sloan where he compared
opnqryf(building views) to the lowly fmtdta, which in some
cases would beat the pants off opnqryf(sql).
That's plain old "Sort & List".

In fairness to SQL, it can do record selection and certain
other functions quite well, but in the wrong hands, SQL is
a system killer.




Bob Cagle wrote:
> Maybe I'm opening a bucket of worms here, but for straight RPG
> programming on an AS400/iSeries/i5 machine, why should we use SQL
> instead of traditional RPG I/O (read, chain, etc.)?  I have seen
> multiple postings on these lists and several articles all saying we need
> to switch to SQL now!  But, traditional I/O works great on the platform
> it was intended for - the SQL implementations I have seen are 'clunky'
> at best.
>
> Note: I understand SQL has its place; web programming, etc.  I just
> don't see the need to switch over 100% to SQL.  What am I missing?  Why
> should I use an SQL select statement versus a simple chain to a logical
> file?
>
> Bob Cagle