RE: DBCS issues revisited

["Dennis Lovelady" <iseries@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>    As a query interface, that the VIEW has no key should not matter;
> i.e. a query must specify the ORDER BY explicitly to ensure order of
> data.  Thus a VIEW can replace a keyed LF, and a keyed select\omit
> logical file need not become two files.  The INDEX would be

Excellent point, Chuck!  I couldn't see the building with all those bricks
in my way!  :)

> i.e. for LF named ORIGINAL.XXYYZZLF, CREATE VIEW ALTERNATE.XXYYZZLF
> and CREATE INDEX ALTERNATE.XXYYZZLF_IX   The query names the VIEW as
> from where data is retrieved, and the INDEX is something the SQL may
> or may not use to implement the query and\or access the data.

No need for this; the LF will already exist; anything I do here would be
redundant in this case.

Regards,

Dennis Lovelady
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady
--
"The most dangerous thing in the world is to leap a chasm in two jumps."
        -- David Lloyd George