"Anton Buijs" <remove_aammbuijs_at_xs4all.nl> wrote in message news:<3f37a964$0$49108$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>...
> Mark D Powell <Mark.Powell_at_eds.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
> 2687bb95.0308110625.495d8bb9_at_posting.google.com...
>
> | If changing the using processes from using a permanent table to using
> | a global temporary table like Niall suggests is not possible then I
> | would suggest you follow Anton's advice and truncate the table on a
> | regular basis. That is exactly what we do for a half-dozen tables
> | that hold phanton rows as conversion to global temporay tables is not
> | cost justified. (That is, the existing code written on version 7.0
> | works fine and we have too many other changes/new requests to work on
> | to get permission to perform the change)
> |
> | HTH -- Mark D Powell --
>
> I've not investigated the temporary tables in depth but as far as I know: you
> just recreate the table as a global temporary table and that's it. Nothing has
> to change to the code? The only thing is: rows are only visible for the session
> that inserted them and they are there until commit or until end of session (on
> commit delete/preserve rows). You must verify your application can deal with
> that. That's all? Or am I missing something?
Anton, that is pretty much it. But in our case code changes require
permission of the owner (customer department) and work is chared to
their budget, hence if what exists works you are probably not going to
be able to change it just to use a better feature.
Received on Tue Aug 12 2003 - 08:24:39 CDT
