|
Another option would be to catch the error on the read for update, then perform a READ(N) for the same record, then move forward in your loop to try to retrieve the next record for update. However - the CHAIN will not be all that slow, since the record will already be in memory. You won't be waiting on disk! mp > > One solution would be to read it with no lock first, then CHAIN out to the > > file for update. If that chain > fails, read the next record. > > Thanks Michael, I dont want to go that way because this program deletes > millions of records and I need to keep it as fast as possible, that is why I > am reading sequential and blocking records. The overhead of a chain on each > record might slow it down considerably. > > But I will test it out to see if does return control on the > CHAIN and post the results. > > > > Regards > Mauricio
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.