Re: *LANGIDSHR and SQE

I suggest that you do the shared weight indexes - CQE is not a bad thing - SQE
was intended to speed up complex queries and it won't matter which engine is
used for many kinds of queries - your mileage WILL vary.

The presence of a supporting index ALWAYS helps, whether SQE or CQE. Without
the index, a table scan will take place, AND the translation will be done. You
can, of course, always use the UPPER function - but the results are the same -
use of a function slows things down. Better if that work is done in the index.

And read the docs on that QAQQINI setting to see what it relates to.

Eventually I believe IBM will bring everything under the new engine - it all
takes time and resources. This is not an official statement, perhaps a wish,
but it makes sense to this civilian.

HTH
Vern

-------------- Original message --------------
From: "eftimios pantzopoulos" <eftimios@xxxxxxxxxxx>

I came across an excellent tip in a Centerfield Technology Newsletter(Vol 2
Issue 2) concerning the use of *LANGIDSHR. I actually got it working and was
able to retrieve records via SQL with the same column value regardless of
case. This involved creating an index while the STRSQL task was set to
*LANGIDSHR.

I was researching this in order to try and overcome the problem of v5r4
sending the SQL to the CQE and I optimistically thought that this might
overcome that problem and thus despatch it to the SQE. Alas and alack! When
I looked at the Visual Explain, the 'Reason SQE was not used' was -
'Translation Required'.

I presume this is something to do with the upper/lower case process in using
the index?

Is it worth pursuing this path? Or is there no way of overcoming the UPPER
barrier to the SQE? Something like the IGNORE_DERIVED_INDEX setting in
QAQQINI?

This is a continuation of a post I made a few weeks ago so I'm not hopeful
as *LANGIDSHR came up in that topic as well.

I tried telling my superiors that we could change every program which
populates the table to force an upper, however this is not really feasible
as it involves names which are used in communications.

Looks like we're stuck with the CQE which means there's no point in creating
indexes to assist the SQL as they'll be ignored. Does this mean that CQE
will always do a full table scan? Or should we retain the logical file in
the SQL as it's being despatched to the CQE anyway?

My head is spinning!

Thanks.........

_________________________________________________________________
Advertisement: Silverchair: Young Modern ? listen to full tracks plus win
gig tickets!
http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=772&referral=c

ompetitionpage&URL=http://music.ninemsn.com.au/silverchair