Re: SQL Result Paging

The time didn't change based on if it was the first time or any time after
that. We are only talking about at most 5000 records in the table. I really
don't think it is the IBM i that's the bottleneck. I think the problem in
how I am processing the data from the i in .NET. I suppose I could confirm
that is the case by rewriting how I am processing the data and seeing that
improves the speed.

I wish IBM would write a .NET 4+ compatible driver so I don't have to
resort to converting from .NET methods to .NET 4 methods of processing data.

--
Mike Wills
http://mikewills.me


On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

One other thing to remember here. On the green screen the first time that
you open the program, the access plan for the query is store in the program
and reused each time. From the ASP .Net every time you run this it has to
go through and redevelop the access plan. If you recompile the green screen
program and call it how long does it take for the results on the first
call? Long time?


On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The question is the connection. Do you open and close connection to the
AS/400 with every call? If you maintain the connection between calls,

then

you have state because it is running in a single job on the iSeries until
the connection is closed.

The other way to do this in a stored procedure is to use the fetch
multiple rows. That is extremely fast. On the first page you only fetch

the

first less say 25 records and return them. On the next page you fetch 50
records and return only the last 25. Each page you fetch more but because
you are using fetch multiple rows you would probably never even notice it
and they would already be cached.


On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Mike Wills <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

We don't maintain state and I am not sure how I could in .NET if
our architecture would allow it.

--
Mike Wills
http://mikewills.me


On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

A stored procedure maintains state ...

That works IF the client maintains a persistent connection. I once

worked

with a group Java developers who vowed that they would never use

persistent

connections. Later they caved in and implemented "stateful"

connections

to

QZDASOINIT jobs in order to implement paging and offer better

performance.

Frankly, I think IBM i handles stateful connections well, so this

sounds

like a good solution.

-Nathan

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing

list

To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.