Hi, Nigel and Peter

But, daddy, this is the only PFC-related thread going here on now! <g> 
Besides, this is important and fun stuff, not just tedium.  So please bear
with me just a tad more...  I'd like to add some notes about "Sharing
PBLs/PBDs" at http://www.pfcguide.com/faq/faq_exe.asp and
http://www.pfcguide.com/faq/faq_gpf.asp .
==
Nigel, I am curious about how you are using your extra single corporate PFD
layer and your single PFE layer [1-PFC/1-PFD/1-PFE].  Please do pray tell
because that is a new one on me, and here we have at least two separate
people doing that.  So I am interested in understanding this better.  I'm
always open for new enlightenment <s>  Is yours the same as Peter's?
==
Peter, if I understand you correctly, you are using your 1-PFD for a
corporate framework, and you are using your 1-PFE for PFC bug fixes.  And
then when a new version of PFC comes along, you simply replace your PFC and
PFE layers with the new PBLs from Sybase.  And all of your
application-level-specific logic lies beneath the PFE cutoff (and you never
dip below the PFE level in your PFC/PFD so that direct PBL/PBD sharing is
cool).  Correct?

If so, do you realize that you may end up "scotching" some of your PFE
changes that did not perhaps get fixed in the new release?  Here's a tip
that a guy named Felipe inspired eons ago...  Add another layer between PFC
and PFE, call it PFF for fixes, so now we have [PFC/PFD/PFF/PFE].  But in
this new layer of PFF PBLs, start with truly 'empty' PBLs (no objects). 
Then, each time you need to modify a PFE object, *MOVE* that object from
PFE to PFF, then add your changes.  Then, when it comes time to retrofit
your PFF changes with Sybase's PFE changes, your changed objects are easily
isolated out, and you can more easily pull out the PFF changes that you
choose to without losing some unknowingly.
==
Notes:

(Before) when I think of a PFD corporate layer, I have always thought of it
as [1-PFC/1-PFD(Corp)/PFEApp1,PFEApp2/App1,App2,etc], elsewise I would see
it as [1-PFC/1-PFE(Corp)/App1,App2,etc].

For [1-PFC/1-PFD(Corp)/PFEApp1,PFEApp2/App1,App2,etc], you have to worry
about two things.  You need to be aware of the "GPF-Tug-Of-War" involving
PFC/PFD between PFEApp1 and PFEApp2 - when trying to share PBDs and regened
PBLs between PFEApp1 and PFEApp2 as explained at
http://www.pfcguide.com/faq/faq_exe.asp#why_regenerate_PFC .  Plus, you
still need to beware not to "dip below the PFE-level" in any references
within the PFC, PFD and PFE levels - because App1 could have differences
from App2, not to mention that the spiraling hierarchy could also
exasperate this.

For [1-PFC/1-PFE(Corp)/App1,App2,etc], you only need to worry about not
"dipping below the PFE-level".  So PBL/PBD sharing is a cinch.

But of course, if you only have [1-PFC/1-PFD(Corp)/1-PFE/App1,App2,etc],
it's *basically* like a stretched out [1-PFC/1-PFE(Corp)/App1,App2,etc].
==
Gee, I wonder what Mr. (Robert) Crawford's original kme/pfe strategy is <g>

Have fun,
~Sharon
--
Sharon Weinstrom Buntz      | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cheat Sheet for PFC/PB Help | http://www.pfccheatsheet.com/


"BRIGHT,NIGEL" wrote:
> 
> Sharon,
> 
> >Okay, so are you really saying that you only have one copy of
> >PFC/Corp/PFE?  If so, then there is no problem "sharing" the PBLs nor PBDs
> >(among applications), for there is only one copy of each!
> 
> Yes, this is what a number of us have been saying.  Certainly, at this site
> we have several applications sharing a single set of PBLs/PBDs without any
> problems.
> 
> >So, Peter, is your roundabout point that I ASSumed that because Mr.
> >Crawford had a "corporate" layer then he could not "share [his] PFC/kme/PFE
> >PBDs between the two applications"?
> 
> I believe that is what you said.  Allow me to quote from your original
> email...
> 
> >>.  Seems like you are sharing your PFC/kme objects with another
> application
> >>(since you have a corporate level).  If so, do you realize that cannot
> >>share the PFC/kme/PFE PBDs between the two applications?
> 
> >Hm, since we are coming full-circle now...  I wonder what Mr. Crawford's
> >REAL problem actually was...  I don't buy that "true color" malarkey <bg>
> 
> The original "Unresolveable external" problem probably indicates an
> incorrect library list or a regeneration sync problem (i.e. do a full
> rebuild).  If the problem relates to an application which works in
> development mode but fails when deployed, then it probably relates to a non
> deployed PBD.
> In any case it won`t be very difficult to resolve.
> 
> Could we all now please move on to a new topic/problem.  This one has really
> become much too tedious...
> 
> Regards,
> Nigel
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] HOSTED BY IIGG, INC. FOR HELP WITH LIST SERVE COMMANDS, ADDRESS
> A MESSAGE TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] WITH THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE:   help pfcsig
> SEND ALL OTHER INQUIRES TO [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to