Re: %TIMESTAMP renders only milliseconds?

[Bruce Vining <bruce.vining@xxxxxxxxx>]

> ..."Please provide your comments"...

Just for fun I threw together a test case of SQL current timestamp vs
QWCCVTDT (*YYMD, 20-byte receiver).  Both were accessing microseconds and
the loop for each was 1,000,000 iterations.  The API "won" every time
though not by a whole lot.  The percentage longer using the SQL route  was
13%, 7%, and 7% over the API approach.

Note all the typical disclaimers of the system not being dedicated, etc.
I'll also add that the *very first time* I ran the SQL part of the program
it took substantially longer and so I did not include that very first run
in the above timings.  The percentages are based on subsequent runs of the
program.

On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 8:28 AM Birgitta Hauser <Hauser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> %Timestamp() will only return the first 3 numbers of the microsecond part,
> the remaining positions are padded with *Zeros (even if you define your
> timestamp field as Timestamp(12).
> If you need a more exact timestamp you need to use the SQL specific
> register
> (as you already did)
>
> Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards
>
> Birgitta Hauser
>
> "Shoot for the moon, even if you miss, you'll land among the stars." (Les
> Brown)
> "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." (Derek Bok)
> "What is worse than training your staff and losing them? Not training them
> and keeping them!"
> „Train people well enough so they can leave, treat them well enough so they
> don't want to.“ (Richard Branson)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RPG400-L <rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Javier
> Sánchez
> Sent: Samstag, 7. Dezember 2019 02:15
> To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: %TIMESTAMP renders only milliseconds?
>
> Hi there!
>
> Sorry for asking if there is already something around on this.  Is the
> %TIMESTAMP built-in function already able to render microseconds
> granularity?
>
> Of course most of you know, %TIMESTAMP returns three trailing zeros after
> the timestamp's last period.
>
> I had solved this inconvenient with instructions calling DB2 like:
>
> EXEC SQL SET :myTimeStamp = CURRENT_TIMESTAMP;
>
> For what I have seen, it looks like calling DB2 could be more expensive to
> call the QWCCVTDT API to get an expression of the system's clock timestamp
> which includes microsecond granularity instead of milliseconds.
>
> Please provide your comments.
>
> Thank you.
>
> JS.
> --
> This is the RPG programming on IBM i (RPG400-L) mailing list To post a
> message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or
> change list options,
> visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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:
> https://amazon.midrange.com
>
> --
> This is the RPG programming on IBM i (RPG400-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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: https://amazon.midrange.com