Re: SQL Views worth it?

HI Nathan

you say that Nested views as not able to be restored; do you have an IBM
reference to support that or explain why that might be ?

Do you have a simple example of how I might re-create the restore issue so
I test the scenario ?

I'd really like to understand this restore issue so being able to re-create
the problem would be a great start.


On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 5:00 AM Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 3:33 PM, Evan Harris <auctionitis@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Hi Nathan
What release did you encounter this issue in and was there a problem

report

to IBM ? What was IBM's response if it was reported ?

I guess if this is really the case then I would like to understand the
issue more deeply in order to take preventative measures.

Hi Evan,

We're on 7.3 and our PTFs are pretty-much up to date.

The issue is that Restore commands are not able to resolve SQL view
dependencies when they are nested, even if they are defined within the same
library. Nested (or cascading) views are very elegant and really slick from
a design and functional perspective. They're a lot more readable and
understandable than creating a single SQL view from long and protracted
query logic that you might code into a program or put into a single view.

We finally settled on our maintaining a script to rebuild nested views
after physical files have been restored.
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (RPG400-L)
mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate
link: http://amzn.to/2dEadiD