RE: SQL vs. traditional I/O?

["Carel Teijgeler" <coteijgeler@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jim,

It depends on what Os release you are. With V5R2 SQL has been enhanced to refer 
to columns (fields) in other tables when creating tables (files). I still think 
that that enhancement is more cludgy and cumbersome than the traditional field 
reference file.

I wish there was a repository of fields (columns) somewhere to use for 
reference, both in SQL and DDS (file SYSCOLUMNS (an LF IIRC) perhaps?). Was 
IDDU not developped for that purpose?

Regards,
Carel Teijgeler.

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 23-7-04 at 10:48 Jim Essinger wrote:

>At 10:16 AM 7/23/2004, Rob wrote:
>
>>     The ONLY advantage DDS has over SQL is the ability to combine an index 
>> with
>>     a view.  Or, in DDS terms, the ability to create a logical file with 
>> field
>>    and/or record selection and a key.  However this is only an advantage in
>>   traditional I/O.  In SQL I/O you would read the 'view' or the file with
>>    the field and/or record selection.  And the optimizer would use the
>>    appropriate 'index' to find the best key.
>
>   The other thing that DDS _can_ bring to the table is using field reference
>   files, if you design your files that way.  Not do-able in SQL if I remember 
> right.