Re: AW: DataArea vs. Tables

[Vern Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sequence objects are fine, if you are not compiling to v5r1 :-)

But they can't handle yes/no (ja/nein) kinds of things or other textual 
options. And that is what we use data areas for - to allow customers to 
customize the behavior of our products. Examples include which PDF 
conversion program to use - we have different ones.

Another reason to use data areas is to avoid adding parameters to 
programs. This helps to maintain backward compatibility in our products 
- so that customer's code does not break.

Vern

On 5/13/2011 11:08 AM, Birgitta Hauser wrote:
> > > "store next available numbers(Faster)."
> Instead of using an data area, I use an SQL sequence object (which is
> nothing else than a data area).
>
> In an sequence object a couple (depending on the cache you defined) of next
> numbers are in the pipeline and you do not have to determine the next number
> by yourself.
> The next number is retrieved simply by requesting the next one:
>
> Exec SQL Set :MyNxtNo = Next Value for :MySequence;
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards
>
> Birgitta Hauser
>
> "Shoot for the moon, even if you miss, you'll land among the stars." (Les
> Brown)
> "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." (Derek Bok)
> "What is worse than training your staff and losing them? Not training them
> and keeping them!"
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Mike Wills
> Gesendet: Friday, 13. May 2011 17:56
> An: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> Betreff: Re: DataArea vs. Tables
>
> I like that idea.
>
> "store next available numbers(Faster)."
> --
> Mike Wills
> http://mikewills.me