Re: SQL Question

[Jerry Adams <jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

True, but with compromise you can. 


I am working on a project to push transactions from one machine to 
another one in, more or less, real time.  The transaction file is 
defined in the F-specs, not a Select.  I CONNECT to the remote; READ 
through the transaction file and INSERT into the receiver. 


The added time to the processing cycle is not noticeable.  However, the 
original question, if I recall correctly, was the possibility of using 
SQL to update tables on a Development box with tables from a Production 
box.  My gut feeling is that this would be very time consuming, plus the 
table would have to exist (or be created) on the Dev box, as well as be 
cleared before the INSERT.


Something like remote journaling (which I've never used so take that 
with a grain of salt) or SAVF-FTP would seem to be more appropriate than 
SQL for this objective.


        * Jerry C. Adams
*IBM System i5/iSeries Programmer/Analyst
B&W Wholesale Distributors, Inc.* *
voice
        615.995.7024
fax
        615.995.1201
email
        jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

> As said earlier, you can connect to a different remote system; just not 
> two systems at the same time.  For instance, you can do something like
> CONNECT MyLocal
> Select * from myfile
> CONNECT MyRemote
> Select * from myfile
>
> But you cannot connect to both at the same time and do something like
> Insert into MyLocal.myfile
> (select * from MyRemote.myfile)
>
>
>
> Rob Berendt
>