Re: Faster HTML Output.

[Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>]

Michael,

I agree that the problem is NOT with the TEMP file.  Whether you create one explicitly or under the cover of SQL, it will not make much difference (I did wonder whether you were running your SQL asynchronously though, where the INSERT might be taking longer than your log shows).

However the problem is also NOT with the READ.  It appears to me that your time-stamp logging is covering the READ and the FORMATTING and OUTPUTTING of the HTML, where the vast majority of time would be spent on FORMATTING and OUTPUTTING HTML.

You might consider posting your HTML template to the list where someone might offer suggestions for streamlining it.

I have a service program that formats HTML at about double the speed of CGIDEV2 but I'd have to charge for a license.

Why would you be interested in SELECT ... for XML, if the users need report breaks with summary totals?

Nathan M. Andelin




----- Original Message ----
From: "Michael_Schutte@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <Michael_Schutte@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 6:25:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WEB400] Faster HTML Output.

It helps with getting it off the server faster and puts the burden on
 the
client's computer.  Has I have said and some of you guys keep
 forgetting...
the problem is not getting the data with the SQL statement.  The
 problem is
reading the large amount of data.  So to use the suggestion of "not"
 using
the temp table doesn't help.  Cursor read or regular I/O doesn't make a
difference.

For some reason, I thought that in V5R4, or another version, you were
 given
the ability to do a SELECT ... FOR XML (or something similar to that).
  But
I haven't found any documentation on it.


Michael Schutte
Admin Professional
Bob Evans Farms, Inc.
"The Secret's the Sauce! Enjoy our new Bob-B-Q Pulled Pork Knife & Fork
Sandwich!"