Re: Default user ID in SQL table - trigger

Alan Campin wrote:

CRPence wrote:

Alan Campin wrote:

<<SNIP>> As far as how it works, IBM did all locks
_for performance reasons_. Trick was how to get the
almost the same performance using the mediator as
without it and I think I solved that problem.

<<SNIP>>
Noting that the implementation is /for performance reasons/, correlates with the fact that a dynamic call is inherently
slower than a call by stored address; i.e. the dynamic call
requires a name to object address resolution for each
invocation at each I/O, whereas the static call requires only
one object address resolution which is performed at each
open.

If implication here is that the mediator uses a program call, it
does not. <<SNIP>>

FWiW no such implication. I have no knowledge of the specifics for any of various /mediator/ implementations. My comments quoted above were with respect to the claim that the /IBM/ implementation of locking was /for performance reasons/, which I was affirming; i.e. the locking ensures both that the stored address to the trigger program would remain valid since obtained & cached at open time, and that each call of the trigger program was by that address versus use of a dynamic call [which is inherently slower than call by address] for each triggered I/O event.

Regards, Chuck