Re: Still More, Re: Questions about RPG service program as an SQL UDF -- RPG400-L

Subject: Re: Still More, Re: Questions about RPG service program as an SQL UDF
From: CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 18:20:21 -0800
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l>
List-help: <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: "RPG programming on the IBM i \(AS/400 and iSeries\)" <rpg400-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:rpg400-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On 28 Feb 2013 16:44, James H. H. Lampert wrote:

<<SNIP>> wouldn't the fact that the VIEW is full of fields processed
by UDFs tend to imply "FOR READ ONLY"? At any rate, I can certainly
experiment with them.

It could matter, if the VIEW is update-capable. Noting: the term /update/ includes /delete/ so even if every column is defined as the result of a UDF, a DELETE can still find a row to process.

The salient point is that the STRSQL environment runs all queries as FOR READ ONLY by default, whereas some client SQL have been known to default to FOR UPDATE to allow /edit/ of the data. As I see it, to be absolutely sure that the client is not running implicitly FOR UPDATE, irrespective of the capabilities of the queried data, just code the FOR READ ONLY.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

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 [javascript protected email address].

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