Hello, All!

Why Abstract query plans are so hard to deal with ?
No good and distinguishable diagnostics with not so easy
and transparent syntax and semantics.

Is Sybase going to do anything to make APs more
reliable and understandable ? I don't mean
syntax and semantics which are fixed and should not
change. I mean good diagnostics and MORE documentation
explaining semantics. And documentation which is
more clear.

F.e. some problems :

1) APs are obviously sensitive to client console
you use to put into the server. I suspect
they have some problems with CR/LF or single CR or LF.
When I create procedures with APs with one or another
ISQL-like tool, I have or have no errors in APs.

2) Docs say an AP can be introduced in PLAN clause
either with PLAN or HINTS AP keywords. And little is said
about what is the difference. I found that some partial plans
introduced with HINTS claim on errors and some partial plans
can still work begining with PLAN clause.

3) Sometimes same plan which have been working for
some time, stops working if I re-create the procedure
without changing the plan and its query.

4) Why APs doesn't work in VIEWS ?
ASE allows to attach the plan to a view, but
dosn't use it and AFAIR doesn't say a word.
Why ? If APs can't be used in views, isn't it
better to disallow them in veiws ?

5) You can't force ASE using APs process some
tables AFTER all other tables in the query.
Sometimes this could be usefull.

So, isn't it time to discuss APs ?

Ilya Zvyagin
E-mail: ziv[AT]fct[dot]ru
ICQ# 29427861