I had such an occurrence where someone was creating an additional data-level file on an existing dict/data file set. So he typed:
CREATE-FILE DATA EXISTINGFILE NEWDATALEVEL 1,1 10000,1 assuming that the 1,1 pertained to the dict and the 10000,1 applied to the new datalevel that they were creating. The 10000,1 was ignored While D3 and native systems reply with the base and mod frame numbers of the new file, it wasn't read by the programmer. But when the new datalevel file was put into production, the client called in a few weeks as it got hammered. There was some egg on the face of that programmer, especially reviewing the TCL-STACK file (big brother) for the typed command. FYI Mark Johnson ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 11:51 AM Subject: RE: Re: [U2] VOCLIB and keeping VOC entries Short and Small, IM & RM > Mark > > >Today's numbers are downright staggering in the MV world. > > A couple of weeks ago I had to repair a failed RedBack implementation. > > The garbage collection wasn't running, and so their state file had grown to being a mere 15,000 times undersized. > > Strangely enough, this eventually led to corruption and decay. But it must have been running a long while before it did. > > and, yes, I left the tuning manual and garbage collection instructions on the guy's desk. > > <grin> > > Brian > ------- > 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/
