Re: More fun with native RLA on an SQL view -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: More fun with native RLA on an SQL view
From: "James H. H. Lampert" <jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:53:24 -0700
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>

Nathan Andelin wrote:

It's just so common to hear of cases where applications that use RLA
differ from alternatives that use SQL, that "of course" was the first
thing that came to mind.

That doesn't make a lot of sense. Other than (1) decimal data error checking happening on read in one, and on write in the other, (2) SQL being able to handle larger index page sizes, and (3) SQL not having any construct that imposes both a key and a record format on the PF, I don't see a lot of differences, and besides, we're talking about two different routes into the same database system.

--
JHHL

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: More fun with native RLA on an SQL view , rob

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 copyright@midrange.com.

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.