Re: 4gl -> spl

In article 1tjnm1INNaih@emory.mathcs.emory.edu, ckipp@vth1.vth.colostate.edu (Cathy Kipp) writes: > Would anyone care to discuss the pros and cons of stored procedures? An *excellent* idea. > While the concept is nice, I was given the impression that they added to > the size of the engine and should therefore be used sparingly. The engine is increased by the size of the SPL interpreter, but that's a done deal. The procedures are stored in the database, in various system catalog tables. <...thinks...> Uh, doesn't this mean you need a copy of a procedure in every database where you might use it? Yes, or perhaps no. Part of storing the procedure is to pre-optimize the SQL in it; and this is done in terms of the statistics of the database you store it in. So if it contains SQL referring to tables in the current (default) database, it is a good idea to store a copy with the tables it uses. On the other hand you can write sPl that contains no sQl, or that refers only to tables in other databases by name (dbname:tabname). Such procedures can be kept in a single database used anywhere in the same OnLine using "dbname:procname(...)" syntax. Dave Cortesi cortesi@informix.com