RE: Should I replace all CHAIN, SETLL, and READs to SQL

Why would you consider re-engineering good working code just for the sake of the latest and greatest DB access technique.

My answer is absolutely leave your RLA in place. That's one of the benefits of using RPG.

Regards,
Richard Schoen
RJS Software Systems Inc.
Where Information Meets Innovation
Document Management, Workflow, Report Delivery, Forms and Business Intelligence
Email: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web Site: http://www.rjssoftware.com
Tel: (952) 736-5800
Fax: (952) 736-5801
Toll Free: (888) RJSSOFT

------------------------------

message: 2
date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:06:03 -0400
from: "John Allen" <jallen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
subject: Should I replace all CHAIN, SETLL, and READs to SQL



I have been thinking about changing all CHAINs SETLLs and READs in our software to SQL



Our programs use these operations for various reasons such
as:

Simple SETLL to check if a value is valid

Reading records for loading subfiles

Chaining by RRN (used in subfile processing, the input file does not have a unique key so RRN is stored in Subfile then used for accessing the original record)

Reading and chaining to several files for processing thousands of records and doing validations, calculations etc.



My main concern would be:

How this would affect performance

Does SQL allow for accessing records by RRN.



Does anyone have any thoughts on why this is a good or bad idea



Thanks



John