Re: IBM i "Open I/O" Architecture

[Luis Rodriguez <luisro58@xxxxxxxxx>]

<SNIP>
 I have the same question.  I think the partial answer is that the read
 prior instructions don't have an SQL equivalent.
</SNIP>

Steve,

There is always the FETCH PRIOR clause in the SELECT statement.

Regards,

Luis Rodriguez
IBM Certified Systems Expert — eServer i5 iSeries



On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 6:07 AM, Steve Richter <stephenrichter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 9:31 PM, Vern Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I don't understand what you mean when you say that RPG's I/O model
> > doesn't map to RDBMS's. Seems to me there is little difference
> > functionally between cursor-based processing - a FETCH into a host
> > structure - and a CHAIN into a data structure (recent versions).
>
> I have the same question.  I think the partial answer is that the read
> prior instructions don't have an SQL equivalent. Also, holding a
> record lock. On the record lock front I would create a 2nd file that
> held the keys of every row of a corresponding table that currently has
> a read lock. Any SQL UPDATE instruction used on a table that could
> currently have a record lock on it would have to include a WHERE NOT
> EXISTS clause that selected records for update only if the keys to the
> row were not found in the "currently locked row" table.
> --
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.