|
Yea....but that is the one to avoid. You will not get into this kind of issues with a correct database design. Or 'if nothing else' (but than you do not talk about regular processes (only to be done once in an while)) you have to call in lowerlevel record selection. Temporary accesspath's or even embedded SQL could make that run faster. Eduard. ----- Original Message ---- From: "npodetz@xxxxxxxxx" <npodetz@xxxxxxxxx> To: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2007 10:41:18 AM Subject: Re: CHAIN Versus SETLL and READ When Data Needed Thats a lot of discussion over SETLL vs CHAIN. I would be more concerned about locking records on the read when it comes to performance. If you are processing many records before you get the one you need, you will save more time by reading without a lock than you will by doing a SETLL vs CHAIN. Norris
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 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.