FWIW if you're using SQL to populate host variables and the data type, etc
changes you'll *still* have to do some maintenance
And as Forrest Gump stated "That's all I got ta say about that"
From: Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 09/02/2011 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: Storing Numeric Values in the Database
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
On 9/2/2011 10:46 AM, Morgan, Paul wrote:
Joe,
This is an implementation detail that used to be important (visible and
with a shared best way) but now it isn't. You might need packed or binary
for performance, zoned for readability of the raw data or floating-point
because it matches a related database. From the other answers here we are
moving away from working directly with the raw data. IMHO it's less about
using the 'best' format than having a flexible database that can change to
the most appropriate format without breaking code. That's why using
embedded SQL instead of directly accessing the data with RPG is a good
idea. SQL won't break (or it will break less) if you change the numeric
format but RPG will break (maybe or probably and it requires a recompile).
That's also why using a database retrieval tool (Query, DBU, SQL) instead
of viewing the raw data is also good. Hiding details that aren't
important makes it easy.
I'm enjoying the responses - it's really been a great representation of
the general community. But I really don't want the discussion be used
as an "RLA bashing" platform. If you want to get rid of RLA, that's
fine. But don't use the horrible pain and suffering of a recompile as
the excuse. SQL is still slower than RLA for lots and lots of things,
and it also requires jumping through hoops for some things that are very
simple in RLA.
I like to use whatever tools are available, and I trust my own skills to
know when each one is appropriate. And that includes DSPPFM :).
Joe
midrange.com
