|
I strongly suggest that the original
>>poster try the dynamic SQL before
throwing it out as a poor performer.
>>It may run pitifully slow too,
Nah. CHAIN/UPDATE performs better
> than single-record dynamic SQL
UPDATE. Period.
A quick test on my machine shows that I can use prepare...execute and update 50k records in about 20 seconds, which may be _good_enough_ for this database design and this problem.
It took me under an hour to assemble the test environment and code from scratch and that included the database definitions and populating the files. I'm no SQL guru - I use RPG for virtually everything.
I stand by my statement that trying the SQL solution is better than summarily throwing it out without trying it at all.
--buck
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.
midrange.com
