Re: [U2] LaunchAppAndWait Failed
Well for whatever it's worth I still had the Unidata 6.1 PE package so I replaced setup.inx in 7.1.5 PE with the 6.1 setup.inx file and installed it with a couple of errors "COMP_LICENSE_PE not found in string table", after that everything is working fine. I'm quite sure this is not the recommended/optimum method but it's just for testing. What ever I could find googling Launchappandwait seemed to lead to that. Dan Dave S wrote: > > Fantastic. > > Steve Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No problem installing UD 7.1PE on > Win XP Pro. But I also saw the same > LaunchAppAndWait Failed message when I tried to install 7.1.5PE. > -- > Regards, > Steve Johnson > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > > > > - > Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out. > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/LaunchAppAndWait-Failed-tf2221576.html#a6297022 Sent from the U2 - Users forum at Nabble.com. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
[U2] [UV] TEXT box subroutine
Hi Folks, I'm hoping someone has some nifty little subroutine already written and is willing to share. I have a need to be able to enter a possibly lengthy description value. Something to call as a subroutine would be my ideal that would allow entry then editing later on without having to retype the whole things. Estimated size could be something as high as 1,000 characters. I'd love bells and whistles, too, but something straight forward would be greatly appreciated. This is a Universe 10.1.18 on Win2K3 environment using Dynamic Connect. Thanks, Bob Woodward Senior Programmer/Analyst Harbor Wholesale Grocery --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
[U2] [AD] MITS Report Webinars
Webinar: Announcing MITS Report, the Revolutionary New Operational Reporting Environment from MITS. Based on freedback from partners and customers for our MITS Discover analytical reporting product, we've taken a unique approach to operational reporting against MultiValue databases. Join us for a free architectural overview and demonstration. This one-hour webinar will be held twice: September 19th at 11:00 AM Pacific September 20th at 8:00 AM Pacific. Details and registration at: http://www.mits.com/events.htm?u2 Ross Morrissey, CBIP Channel Solutions Architect MITS voice: 206-789-8313 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Debugging a program using distributed files causes core dump
No, we don't use triggers. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Woodward Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 11:26 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] Debugging a program using distributed files causes core dump Is it possible that you have a trigger on the file? Triggers don't do well with the debugger. BobW -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brenda Price Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 8:17 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Debugging a program using distributed files causes core dump This is our first experience with distributed files. While debugging programs that have selected the whole file I get core dumps sometimes when I tell it to continue. As long as I am stepping through the program I am ok, as soon as I hit continue it blows up. I can take the debug statement out and run the programs without them blowing up. I've tracked back and found it is never on the same record when it blows. These files do have indices on them. We are stumped as to what is causing this behavior. This is not a critical error at this time because this is a conversion project. However, if this behavior continues after we are converted to this new method of business, it will be a big a problem the first time we have to get into the debugger to fix something during our critical processing and it blows up. Any idea's? On Universe 10.1.12, Reality flavor, Linux Advanced Server 3. Brenda Price Affiliated Acceptance Corporation --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Debugging a program using distributed files causes core dump
I trust some mates more familiar with distributed files will also respond... but you might try this just to get you going: UniVerse handles things differently if you do OPEN '','CUST' TO FILENAME ELSE GOSUB DEALWITHIT SELECT FILENAME LOOP WHILE READNEXT more.stuff REPEAT or EXECUTE 'SSELECT CUST BY FIELD29 BY WHATEVER' CAPTURING SCREEN.IO CRT @SELECTED:" Custs to Service" LOOP I won't attempt to answer the internals of how these are handled by the kernal but the latter example lends itself more to debugging activity. In the first example you don't always have the entire selection 'at the ready', even in a non-distributed file system. -Baker -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brenda Price Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:17 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Debugging a program using distributed files causes core dump This is our first experience with distributed files. While debugging programs that have selected the whole file I get core dumps sometimes when I tell it to continue. As long as I am stepping through the program I am ok, as soon as I hit continue it blows up. I can take the debug statement out and run the programs without them blowing up. I've tracked back and found it is never on the same record when it blows. These files do have indices on them. We are stumped as to what is causing this behavior. This is not a critical error at this time because this is a conversion project. However, if this behavior continues after we are converted to this new method of business, it will be a big a problem the first time we have to get into the debugger to fix something during our critical processing and it blows up. Any idea's? On Universe 10.1.12, Reality flavor, Linux Advanced Server 3. Brenda Price Affiliated Acceptance Corporation --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Debugging a program using distributed files causes core dump
Is it possible that you have a trigger on the file? Triggers don't do well with the debugger. BobW -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brenda Price Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 8:17 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: [U2] Debugging a program using distributed files causes core dump This is our first experience with distributed files. While debugging programs that have selected the whole file I get core dumps sometimes when I tell it to continue. As long as I am stepping through the program I am ok, as soon as I hit continue it blows up. I can take the debug statement out and run the programs without them blowing up. I've tracked back and found it is never on the same record when it blows. These files do have indices on them. We are stumped as to what is causing this behavior. This is not a critical error at this time because this is a conversion project. However, if this behavior continues after we are converted to this new method of business, it will be a big a problem the first time we have to get into the debugger to fix something during our critical processing and it blows up. Any idea's? On Universe 10.1.12, Reality flavor, Linux Advanced Server 3. Brenda Price Affiliated Acceptance Corporation --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Time/Date as a single number
In that case I think I'd go with the concatenation option: DATE()"R%5" : TIME()"R%5" At least that'll get you up to October 14, 2241. Hopefully by then barcodes will have been replaced by telepathy. -Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PrecisOnline.com ** Check out scheduled Connect! training courses at http://www.PrecisOnline.com/train.html. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Gallen Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 8:19 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] Time/Date as a single number yes. It needs to be to the second. My final solution at present, is to use 01/01/2006 as my base for the date, use the date*86400+time encoding, with my other manipulations, this will give me a span of about 12 years, and if this system is still in place in 12 years without being upgraded...well. My other option, is to shrink the barcode size to allow for more room, but right now, it's pretty small to begin with, and I'd rather not make it unscanable. For those asking, it's a code128 barcode subset C. The barcode doesn't need the checksum, but rather the other side does, which I have no control over, except for the definition of the number, but the checksum is still required. George > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Steve Johnson > Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 6:12 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] Time/Date as a single number > > > George, > > Do you need to be accurate to one second? If you can live with > 10-second precision you can save one digit. > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
[U2] Debugging a program using distributed files causes core dump
This is our first experience with distributed files. While debugging programs that have selected the whole file I get core dumps sometimes when I tell it to continue. As long as I am stepping through the program I am ok, as soon as I hit continue it blows up. I can take the debug statement out and run the programs without them blowing up. I've tracked back and found it is never on the same record when it blows. These files do have indices on them. We are stumped as to what is causing this behavior. This is not a critical error at this time because this is a conversion project. However, if this behavior continues after we are converted to this new method of business, it will be a big a problem the first time we have to get into the debugger to fix something during our critical processing and it blows up. Any idea's? On Universe 10.1.12, Reality flavor, Linux Advanced Server 3. Brenda Price Affiliated Acceptance Corporation --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Time/Date as a single number
yes. It needs to be to the second. My final solution at present, is to use 01/01/2006 as my base for the date, use the date*86400+time encoding, with my other manipulations, this will give me a span of about 12 years, and if this system is still in place in 12 years without being upgraded...well. My other option, is to shrink the barcode size to allow for more room, but right now, it's pretty small to begin with, and I'd rather not make it unscanable. For those asking, it's a code128 barcode subset C. The barcode doesn't need the checksum, but rather the other side does, which I have no control over, except for the definition of the number, but the checksum is still required. George > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Steve Johnson > Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 6:12 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] Time/Date as a single number > > > George, > > Do you need to be accurate to one second? If you can live with > 10-second precision you can save one digit. > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] LaunchAppAndWait Failed
Fantastic. Steve Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: No problem installing UD 7.1PE on Win XP Pro. But I also saw the same LaunchAppAndWait Failed message when I tried to install 7.1.5PE. -- Regards, Steve Johnson --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ - Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] LaunchAppAndWait Failed
No problem installing UD 7.1PE on Win XP Pro. But I also saw the same LaunchAppAndWait Failed message when I tried to install 7.1.5PE. -- Regards, Steve Johnson --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] IDC White Paper on U2
The complete URL is listed below. http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/u2/pubs/whitepapers.html Tom Dodds [EMAIL PROTECTED] 513-563-2800 Cincinnati Office 708-234-9608 Chicago Office 630-235-2975 Anywhere Cell -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Jordan Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:24 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] IDC White Paper on U2 Now we have a document that has U2 recognised by industry analysts. Something that can be given to the CEO, CFO, CIO justifying that U2 is the right choice. Make sure to read the IDC white paper, "Because Not All Data is Flat: IBM's U2 Extended Relational DBMSs". The IDC white paper compares the strengths of the extended relational approach with the more commonly used relational approach and highlights the advantages of the extended relational approach in terms of development, performance and maintenance of the data server. It includes an overview of IBM UniData and UniVerse, their suitability for use in embedding in vertical applications and how these data servers are meeting the needs of today's development challenges. You will find the paper posted under the Highlights section on the right-hand side of the U2 home page: http://www.ibm.com/software/data/u2 Regards David Jordan Managing Consultant www.dacono.com.au --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] Time/Date as a single number
I worked on a Security Monitoring system for years and the best date/time schema is (DATE()*86400)+TIME() It's incredibly useful when detecting time differences between 2 times that may or may not cross a day boundary. It was never meant to be an alternative to the DATE() and TIME() functions alone. The DATE()-1 concept would mean that you're trying to replace the DATE() method and you're correct. With the method mentioned above, it really doesn't matter as long as its consistent because the date expressions. During my time when using the method above, it never was a replacement for the actual date and time of an occurrence. It was simply used to derive the time 'difference' as many signals, alarms and incidents in the security monitoring business are time sensitive, ie received 2 signals within 15 minutes, which could obviously cross midnight. My 1 cent Mark Johnson - Original Message - From: "Kevin King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 4:45 PM Subject: RE: [U2] Time/Date as a single number > >My method is take date()*86400+time() > > Is the goal to track a chronology via a single field? If so, I'd say > your calulation is close. Wouldn't it be: > > ((DATE() - 1) * 86500) + TIME() > > (...as the number of days elapsed is today - 1, not today.) > > Regardless, you're right that the date could get humongous. For the > cycles you're going through to do this calculation it would be a small > step to convert it into and out of any other base to compress and > decompress the bytes. > > The foundational question, however, is one of context. Why do you > need this? That answer may limit or expand your options. > > -Kevin > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.PrecisOnline.com > > ** Check out scheduled Connect! training courses at > http://www.PrecisOnline.com/train.html. > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Time/Date as a single number
Or simply drop the first character - day 2 isn't until October 2022 - simple prefix a "1" to first 4 digits Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage > Better by Design! >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-u2- >[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Moll >Sent: Wednesday, 13 September 2006 8:53 AM >To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >Subject: RE: [U2] Time/Date as a single number > >If you want a smaller number and you don't have to really worry about >historical dates, you could shift the date and use 1/1/2000 as day 1 by >subtracting 11688 from the date before you do the multiplication. > >Brad Moll >JK Consulting Services, Inc. >Phone: (763)754-5354 >Fax: (763)463-1750 > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Johnson >Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 4:31 PM >To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >Subject: Re: [U2] Time/Date as a single number > >In my application, I add a constant (134408) to the date so that it is >always > 0. Then I right-justify and zero-fill to a constant length both >date (plus constant) and time and delimit them with a literal ":". This >gives me a non-numeric string with a constant length by which I can sort >if >need be. > >FWIW, the constant 134408 works with dates back to 1-Jan-1600. (Dates >earlier than year 1583 don't seem to work on UniData.) > >Steve Johnson > >On 9/12/06, George Gallen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> OK. what is the ?best? way to store the time/date (to the second) as a >> single number >>similar to unix's epoch, although I'm not looking to convert it to >> unix format. >> >> My method is take date()*86400+time() >> idate=int(combo/86400), itime=combo-(idate*86400) >> >> Is there anyway to do this giving less than 10 characters (and stay in >> base >> 10) ? >> >> George Gallen >> Senior Programmer/Analyst >> Accounting/Data Division >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> ph:856.848.1000 Ext 220 >> >> SLACK Incorporated - Delivering the best in health care information >> and education worldwide. >> http://www.slackinc.com >> --- >> u2-users mailing list >> u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >> To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ >--- >u2-users mailing list >u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ >--- >u2-users mailing list >u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org >To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
