WooHOO! That did it! Thanks Mike. The KEY was the including the key field. You do good work at 1:59am!!
Bill -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Flint, Mike Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 1:59 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SUPERC Insights Bill, Here's my take on what you are after. I have two files: Old one ******* 10 FRED AAAA 20 JON AAAA 30 SHEILA AAAA 40 JUNE AAAA 50 ALICE AAAA New one ******* (changes) 10 FRED AAAA 20 JIM AAAA <<<<<<<<< changes in cols 4-9 (a relevant change) 30 SHEILA BBBB <<<<<<<<< changes in cols 12-20 (an irrelevant change) 35 SHEILA AAAA <<<<<<<<< a new record 40 JUNE AAAA <<<<<<<<< record '50 ALICE' deleted. ---- To follow your requirements, I want a report on any added or deleted records, or any changed records in columns 4 to 9. I don't want any report of lines changed in columns 12 to 20. So, in this example, I want report of lines 20, 35, and 50. I use 'Compare Type' = Line, and 'Listing Type' = Delta My process statements are: CMPCOLM 1:2 4:8 And this produces: I - 20 JIM AAAA D - 20 JON AAAA I - 35 SHEILA AAAA D - 50 ALICE AAAA ... is this what you are after? You need to include (what you see as) your key columns in the comparison as well. SuperC doesn't know that changes in this column are relevant unless you tell it to. Specifying only cols 999:1005 means it will ignore changes in any other columns - including your 'record key'. Adding this should fix your problem, hopefully. hth, Mike Flint, Systems Consultant, Experian. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
