RE: SQL vs. traditional I/O? -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: RE: SQL vs. traditional I/O?
From: "Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 20:28:06 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

> From: Joe Pluta
> 
> Results:
> 
>             Start  End    Count
> Native I/O: 193459 193509 100000
> SQLRPGLE:   194230 194241 10000

On advice, I added OPTIMIZE FOR 1 ROW to the SELECT.

Result?  No discernable change.  Still ten seconds fully optimized.

Joe

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.