Yep, gave me an excuse to try to "select" from every view they had defined to see what worked and what didn't! I didn't design the database, and found a whopping 13 views that had invalid definitions! Kept the definitions aside in a file, then deleted them all.
The reason I consider it "strange" is that I wouldn't have thought a gateway import command would check database-wide table integrity, just the integrity of the table you're importing into . And 6.5 (what we're converting from) either didn't check the database tables, or it did check but just didn't give us an error message. So this is a heads up as something to watch in a conversion from 6.5 to 7.6. Karen > It is not strange as mentioned in the subject line. It is the relational > integrity that R:BASE is known for over 25 years and makes it what it is > today. > > > It is the responsibility of end-user or developer to also fix/correct View > definition when underlying table structure is altered. If ignored, R:BASE > will generate -ERROR- messages. > > > Very Best R:egards, > > > Razzak. >
