RE: CHAIN Versus SETLL and READ When Data Needed

Well, that's the thing, Joe. You nailed it.  It's an issue of
performance because there are millions of records that get processed
this way.

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joe Pluta
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:26 PM
To: 'RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries'
Subject: RE: CHAIN Versus SETLL and READ When Data Needed

From: Booth Martin

A secretary once told me that we don;t care about efficiency, we care
about effectiveness.  This, to my mind, is an example of that.  If
performance is a concern then the differences between SETLL and CHAIN
are not going to solve his problem.  He needs to look in other areas.
If performance isn't the issue then wouldn't it make sense to opt for
the clearest, most easily maintained code?

Sure, but the difference between CHAIN and SETLL will not make the code
any
more or less maintainable.  That being the case, and especially since
there
was initially discussion about making a corporate standard out of this,
then
it makes sense to identify the best performing route.

While this single change may not affect the performance of this program
noticeably, as the number of users increases it may affect the overall
load
on the system, and the lower that is, the better.

Joe