Hi,
Well, this particular code might very well work across databases.
The other main concern with Direct SQL is that it is untraceable by the AR
System. The AR System does not understand what you are doing, and you can
not use AR tools to trace and analyze it in the same way as other
workflow.
Then we have the issue of going straight at the T-tables, and other things
related to datatype-conversion for timestamps, enum-values
You will also be bypassing permissions.
I am convinced that using the ARAPI and the provided AR-workflow-actions
is worth some effort in lieu of direct SQL. Even if it would mean some
small performance hit.
In this specific case, it much depends on the nomber of records in the table.
Best Regards - Misi, RRR AB, http://www.rrr.se (ARSList MVP 2011)
Products from RRR Scandinavia (Best R.O.I. Award at WWRUG10/11):
* RRR|License - Not enough Remedy licenses? Save money by optimizing.
* RRR|Log - Performance issues or elusive bugs? Analyze your Remedy logs.
Find these products, and many free tools and utilities, at http://rrr.se.
>> It might be faster, but it is direct SQL and may not work on any
>> database...
>
>> > select count(*) from HPD_Help_Desk
>
> Does Remedy support a database where the above ANSI SQL won't work?
>
> I suppose if ARS implements view names for their tables differently in
> another database, it would not be "HPD_Help_Desk", but does anyone know of
> which database that would be? Just curious because the above works on
> Oracle and SQL Server.
>
> Dale Hurtt
>
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
> attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
>
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
