We had this problem with version 5.1 (supposedly fixed in 5.1.8). This is what Ardent (at that time) told us:
"Engineering has determined that the problem is with udtsort.exe for 5.1 (all versions). A bug was introduced when optimizing udtsort (making it faster). They have tested the 5.0 udtsort.exe and it runs fine - even with the rest of the 5.1 executables." Perhaps it was still around in 5.2 (even though this is Aix). You can try checking the release notes or with IBM. Either that or you rebuilt the index while users were updating the file. Colin Alfke Calgary, AB >-----Original Message----- >From: Kevin King > >Okay, it's definitely NOT DISABLE.INDEX. The problem has >occurred again, but with a slightly different manifestation. > >LIST.INDEX shows the indexes are enabled, built, and no >updates pending. However, when I select the file using that >indexed field, I get nothing. If I disable the index and >execute the exact same select statement, I get 28 records. > >Here's the selection statement, and yes, it's Prelude: > >SELECT BIN.QUEUE WITH BTREE_DEFAULT = "001!002!O]" > >Again, this is UD 5.2 on AIX, and DISABLE.INDEX isn't even >around as a verb from TCL. > >-Kevin ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
