On 10/6/2023 9:51 AM, John Yeung wrote:
That's probably still not what Dave was looking for, but I agree that
is the most relevant piece of documentation.
I hope that IBM doesn't start including another legalese disclaimer on
every PTF that documents the possibility that 'a change may have
happened that affects the order of unordered result sets.'
It's interesting to read the help text for OPNQRYF KEYFLD:
Single values
*NONE
No key fields are used to arrange the query records; therefore,
any arrangement is acceptable. It is even possible for the
system to give query records in a different arrangement if the
same query is run twice, based on such factors as the current
number of records in the file members queried.
I myself don't find a practical distinction between this and that on the
order-by-clause web page, but for those who do, I'd encourage you to use
the feedback on the web page to let IBM know. In my experience, they are
remarkable willing to make the documentation more usable for us;
constrained by the reality of having to translate to multiple languages.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.
midrange.com
