The U2UG will be building a committee to forward requests to IBM for
features, enhancements, bug fixes, and other - strictly technical -
feedback. I've been asked by the U2UG board to chair the committee and
my first duty is to establish a user-based committee. If you are
interested in
For anyone who is interested , I was informed by the client yesterday that they
have been informed by their var that the problem they are encountering is an
IBM confirmed issue with the version of universe that they are running. The
latest version of universe is set to be installed and is
Did you try a sequence like :
cd `cat .uvhome` ; uvsh SUSPEND.FILES ON
sync
cp . .
cd `cat .uvhome` ; uvsh SUSPEND.FILES OFF
Why not ?
Manu Fernandes Infodata S.`r.l. Tel : (352) 33 16 48 Fax : (.352) 33 75 55
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-Users
Thanks chuck, that sounds like a good plan. Maybe I will look at using fuser
to see if anyone is attached to the file at copy time too.
-- Original message --
I don't necessarily log people off when I do this, but I check the
modification time before I start the
What version of UniVerse is having the problem? Is it only when using
dynamic files?
Mike Dallaire
Mortgage Builder Software Inc.
(248) 208-3223 ext. 103
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.mortgagebuilder.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Beware of the big problem
Alternate key index subfiles are located via a pathname stored in the file
header. If you copy a file and then update it, you may be updating the
indices of the original file. See the SET.INDEX command for a solution to
this.
Martin Phillips
Ladybridge Systems
17b
Good point. My routine takes care of that as well as distributed files.
Thanks for the heads up.
I did make that mistake when I first started at this company some years ago. I
had never worked with secondary indices prior to coming here. After copying
all of our production files into a test
I'm modifying some programs that were written about 15-20 years ago,
there must be 30 or 40 that
interact with each other.
Here is the problem.
All the programs use dimensioned arrays, and they were dimensioned to
exactly what was needed
at the time, now I need to add 4 fields to one program.
Gerry,
Sorry if I missed the info in a previous message.
What version of UV are they on, what OS, and what version of UV are
they upgrading to?
Thanks.
--
Regards,
Clif
On May 12, 2005, at 6:32 AM, gerry-u2ug wrote:
For anyone who is interested , I was informed by the client yesterday
that
WOW. I just found an interesting feature of UV.
You can MATREAD a record that has more fields than are dimensioned,
and you can MATWRITE that record back out INTACT without getting an error,
It only bombs with an out of bounds error when you try to reference a
subscript
past the dimension.
This is a good point! It's also true if you restore a previous backup
say from tape, to an alternate location then put a VOC pointer to it so
you can see what the file looked like back when... If you do anything
with the old copy of the file, it can mess up your current file's
indexes. It's one of
Excellent answer Manu. I will give it a look.
-- Original message --
Did you try a sequence like :
cd `cat .uvhome` ; uvsh SUSPEND.FILES ON
sync
cp . .
cd `cat .uvhome` ; uvsh SUSPEND.FILES OFF
Why not ?
Manu Fernandes Infodata S.`r.l. Tel : (352) 33
While you're at it, move the DIM to a file to be included in all the
programs that use it. Then when you need to change it again in the
future, it's in 1 place. Also create a compile list program that
includes all of the programs that use it as well. After you change the
include file to resize the
I found that problem in the RESULTS or older application where most data
records were dim'd to (100). The original file sizes were around 50-70
attributes and it appeared to have some room for growth. Since it was
written in 1980-82, there has been some opportunity for growth.
Some of my
George,
It really matters what flavor you're running.
If you run a flavor that puts the overspill in element zero, you may be ok.
If you run a flavor that puts the overspill into the last element, that
might mess up any accesses to that element in the existing code.
Brian
-Original
Watch Out!!!
If your program changes the last dimensioned field, you will lose the
extra data!!! IIRC, the extra fields are being appended to the last
dimensioned element. If you change that element, the extra fields can
disappear.
You'd have to do something like:
MYARRAY(5)1 = newvalue
And not
Shouldn't be a problem as long as you aren't passing the arrays back and
forth between the programs, then they would all need to be dimensioned
the same.
-Dianne
George Gallen wrote:
WOW. I just found an interesting feature of UV.
You can MATREAD a record that has more fields than are
When I tested it, the last dimensioned element was not multivalued,
and writing to it did not cause loss of data. That may be a flavor
issue.
Thanks for the warning.
George
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:44 AM
To:
Any attributes outside the range of the dim are added to the last dim(?).
So what you want to do is ok as long as you are aware of how the data is being
held.
Ok if you and only you are ever going to work on the system!
We use an include to hold the dim statement along with an equate
I seem to remember that the matread will take the extra attributes and
multi-value them into the last element of the dimensioned array. When it
writes them back out, the attribute marks go into the item so you don't lose
anything.
So you're ok, as long as nothing ever uses that last dimensioned
The extra fields get put into element (0) of the array as a dynamic
array, should you want to access them.
--
Regards,
Clif
~~~
W. Clifton Oliver, CCP
CLIFTON OLIVER ASSOCIATES
Tel: +1 619 460 5678Web: www.oliver.com
hpux B.11.11
uv 10.0.0 to ( I believe ) 10.1.10
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Clifton Oliver
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 10:46 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] Dynamic File Performance
Gerry,
Sorry if I missed the
I guess it's time for my usual plug for this course.
Many of the questions raised on this list are addressed in detail in this
course. The next scheduled presentation in the UK is w/s 13 June but when I
last asked there were no bookings.
Martin Phillips
Ladybridge Systems
17b Coldstream Lane,
Sounds like you have less semaphores configured than what you really
need for item locking.
Mike Cannady
Computing Services
Campbell University
PO Box 164
Buies Creek, NC 27506
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(910) 893-1204
There is no place like 127.0.0.1
I don't think MV participates with the OPTION BASE 0 or 1 that allows the
use of REC(0) that VB etc does. MV tends to count things starting with 1 and
MS starts with 0. REC0 etc tends to be confusing as it's not the primary
key either.
I use OPTION BASE 1 to keep my head on straight when
Just to pick nits, if you use Transaction Logging, the txlg number is in
the file header, too. Subsequent updates of the cloned file can goof
up your logs.
Is there a similar concern with data replication?
Distributed files also have pathnames buried in them.
-Original Message-
From:
You may want to think about this again if you think you will ever move to
.NET as OPTION BASE 1 is gone. Everything starts at '0' now.
Regards,
Jim
[snip]
I use OPTION BASE 1 to keep my head on straight when progamming in VB.
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To
Thanks Gerry, we have a few customers who have complained about system
slowdowns. This sounds like something to look into. If you get more
details please let us know.
Mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of gerry-u2ug
Sent: Thursday, May
That's nice to know. I've inherited some VB code written with OPTION BASE 0
and it keeps me honest.
Thanks.
- Original Message -
From: James Canale, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 1:16 PM
Subject: RE: [U2] I'm in an Array quandry, any
Sounds like you have less semaphores configured than what you really
need for item locking.
Mike Cannady
Computing Services
Campbell University
PO Box 164
Buies Creek, NC 27506
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(910) 893-1204
There is no place
Charles,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stevenson,
Charles
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2005 04:49
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Unix copying Universe files
Just to pick nits, if you use Transaction Logging, the
Any place that says typical I change to maximum if I have the
resources (kernel) to handle it. I remember that the number is
something like 16+numberOfUsers since some semaphores are reserved from
the set allocated. I don't have any references with me currently and
I'm working strictly off of
instead of using a unix cp, perhaps you could use uvbackup piped through a
uvrestore? Slower than a cp, but there will be no corruped files or odd
index interactions. I don't know if uvbackup has provisions for re-creating
indexes though.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greetings,
Is there anyway to increase the user stack from 49 lines when a user exits
the system? I think I remember UniVerse was 99. I'd like to increase this
to whatever I can if possible since there are only a few users at the TCL
level.
thanks in advance,
Paul
Paul Hruby
Police Database
Don't know about increasing the number, but you can use 'SAVE.STACK' to
save the current 99.
And then you can 'record' the 99 to a logging file, if you're trying to
keep track of what they're doing.
Roger
Hruby, Paul wrote:
Greetings,
Is there anyway to increase the user stack from 49 lines
Could always roll your own by NOT letting the users get to 'real' TCL
- can avoid mishaps then by doing your own parsing to get confirmation
of critical verbs, like CLEAR-FILE
Just a thought
Ross Ferris
Stamina Software
Visage - an Evolution in Software Development
-Original
Set an environment variable CSTACKSZ
The command stack is actually pretty well documented in the Using UniData
manual
Wally Terhune
Manager - U2 Advanced Technical Services
IBM Information Management Solutions
Tel: 303.294.4866 Fax: 303.294.4832
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In universe its a tunable param. Maybe ud has a setting.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org' u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Thu May 12 17:04:28 2005
Subject: [U2] [UD] Increasing TCL Stack
Greetings,
Is there anyway to
38 matches
Mail list logo
