RE: SQL question

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Walden H. Leverich
> 
> >I am curious about this because the large i5
> >where I am at is being brought to its knees by
> >sql coded by people who dont have an as400 background.
> 
> My guess is that it's not that they don't have an as/400 background,
but
> rather that they don't have a large-table background. You can get away
> w/just about anything on a table w/50,000 rows. <G>

Bing bing bing!  Some people just don't get the idea that 10,000,000
records takes a LOT longer than 10,000.


> Also, has your DBA
> looked at the issues. And don't say "the as/400 doesn't need a dba."
> Those queries might run perfectly fine if there was a good index for
> them to use.

Or, you could use one of the many tools on the iSeries such as STRDBG or
OpsNav that will typically tell you exactly which indices to create.

This is another pet peeve of mine, though.  If you have any sort of
basic understanding of how databases work, you ought to be able to
figure out which indices are needed for a given SQL query.  In essence,
remove the SQL engine from the picture and figure out which logical
views you would create in order to best process the business logic.

Of course, with SQL many people don't know what a logical view is, or
how you might program using one, but they get their SQL queries just
humming on their Microsoft Access database.  But then they run the same
non-optimized query on an iSeries table with 150,000,000 records and
then they blame the machine when it takes 4 hours.

>>sigh<<

At the end of the day, if you don't know how to program, you really
shouldn't be touching production data even in read mode.

Joe