×

Good News Everybody!

The new search engine is LIVE!

Please report any problems to david (at) midrange.com.




No. On both SQL statements, try using an Order By which corresponds to an
existing key (e.g. Order by fields1) and see if it makes any difference.

HTH

Paul Tuohy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Goovaerts" <pgoovaerts@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <java400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 8:07 PM
Subject: [WEB400] SQL problem.


> For our webapps we use sql statements to retrieve data from our iSeries.
I
> used to use the * to retrieve all fields for a record.  Thinking this
over,
> I realized that I regularly need only half of the fields in the database.
> Because our records has mostly between 20 and 50 fields, this could be a
> huge datatraffic overhead.
> Therefore I tested retrieval of data using SQL as follows:
> SQL1= 'select * from dbfile where field1=string'
> SQL2= 'select field1, field10, field 17 from dbfile where field1=string'
>
> surprisingly SQL2 is running slower than SQL1!  I think this has something
> to do with the creation of a new temporary table with only 3 fields by the
> SQL-engine, no?



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2026 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.