RE: Two interesting features of Sybase that Informix may want

1. Sounds a lot like a SUBset of IDS 7.30's "Optimizer Directives": -- you can specify to use index_1, index_2, ... or index_n << OR >> -- you can specify to do a full scan << OR >> -- you can specify to AVOID using index_1, index_2, ... or index_n << OR >> -- you can specify to AVOID doing a full scan << OR >> -- some combination of the above. 2. "SET ISOLATION TO DIRTY READ" ================================ Paul A. Mosser, Open Systems DBA Informix Certified DBSA Wells Fargo & Co. Tempe, Arizona mosserp@wellsfargo.com ================================ > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Segel > [mailto:mikey@segel.NOSPAM-.KING.OF.MYDOMAIN.-NOSPAM.com] > Sent: Saturday, August 22, 1998 9:46 AM > To: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Two interesting features of Sybase that Informix may want > > > to consider... > > Sybase allows the programmer to *suggest* an index in a query. > This is handy because of some quirky behavior in their optimizer. > > Whats nice, is that you can ask for a specific index to be used > so that you don't have to do a table scan due to *other* issues. > > The other nice issue is that you can specify a "noholdlock" keyword > within the query. This would set the query to act at an > isolation level > of 0, > which in informix lingo, allows for dirty reads. It really comes in > handy. > > The only drawback is that if you are using Rogue Wave C++, > you may have > some > bizarre side effects unless you are writing dynamic SQL. > > -Mikey > > -- > #include <std_disclaimer.h> /* Mike Segel (MS385) */ > #include <No_Spam.h> > #ifdef OFFENDED_BY_CONTENT > The author takes no responsibility for this post. > Any resembalence to a coherent rational thought is purely > coincidence. > -The Management. > #endif > ***************************** > * Attention * > -*- Due to AGIS's Refusal to Act Responsibly > > We are blocking all of their domains at the packet level. > This block will exist until they modify their policies to > conform to existing RFCs and net community standards. > > We encourage all ISPs and domain holders to do the same. > ***************************** >