Jeff: The concern that comes to mind is that *something* is intervening between the APPEND and the SCATTER commands, and the record pointer of the underlying table is getting moved, so the SCATTER is overwriting another record. That could be all sorts of bad.
Something like a grid or a browse or a lookup query getting refreshed on the table in the question could be wiggling the record pointer at the critical moment, even if "no code is running" while the method is processing. This is yet another reason why INSERT and a single pass at the table is much better than APPEND and SCATTER commands. You'll want to audit the data against other records the client may have to determine if all of the records they should have are actually present in the file. Do you have the code in source control? It's worth poking around to see if some change was put into place around the period the new data problems started appearing. It's also a good idea to check to make sure the client has some good backups, as you'll likely want to do some day-to-day compares. On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Jeff Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > Frank: Thanks. I do not see any way of reverting an added record if the > user wants to cancel. A new record is always created and the there > doesn't seem to be any form or fashion of cancel. I will investigate it > though. > > Thanks, > > > Jeff > > --------------- > > Jeff Johnson > [email protected] > (623) 582-0323 > > www.san-dc.com > www.arelationshipmanager.com > > On 02/22/2013 04:28 PM, Frank Cazabon wrote: > >> Jeff, the only way I can think this is happening is if some combination >> of factors is causing the APPEND command to run (unless you've got INSERT >> commands around too) without the user realising this. >> >> Does this application use a DBC? Maybe you could create a database event >> that logs the data to a text file whenever a new record is added and track >> any other data that might help you track it down. Maybe user or machine >> name, date and time and if possible what program and line of code it was >> called on. >> >> Frank. >> >> Frank Cazabon >> >> On 22/02/2013 05:23 PM, Jeff Johnson wrote: >> >>> I also found out that 40 percent of their orders are phantom orders! >>> Over the last nine months the phantom orders are 50% of the orders on the >>> highest volume day and 18% on the lowest volume day. Sure points to volume >>> but why 40% overall! And most of them are in large blocks of 20 to 60 >>> orders in a row. >>> >>> When appending records there is a stored procedure called newid('order') >>> that is set to the default value for the invoice number. Most of their >>> records are copied from a previous invoice. scatter invoice to copy, >>> append blank (which generates the new invoice number using the stored >>> procedure) gather some fields. After editing the save does an sql >>> update/set. >>> >>> It was working fine until June of last year. They think they were >>> hacked but what could someone hack to cause this problem? >>> >>> Thanks again for all your help. >>> >>> Jeff >>> >>> --------------- >>> >>> Jeff Johnson >>> [email protected] >>> (623) 582-0323 >>> >>> www.san-dc.com >>> www.arelationshipmanager.com >>> >>> On 02/22/2013 02:03 PM, Kurt wrote: >>> >>>> Well - I guess you slashed One Phantom off your List! :-) >>>> >>>> As for a Corrupt EXE - I doubt it. How could it be corrupt - such that >>>> the >>>> system Works - but, adds strange records. I suspect a truly corrupt EXE >>>> would just Crash or Not work at all! I think the culprit is elsewhere... >>>> >>>> -K- >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: ProfoxTech >>>> [mailto:profoxtech-bounces@**leafe.com<[email protected]>] >>>> On Behalf Of Jeff >>>> Johnson >>>> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 2:31 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Weird Problem Adding Records to a Table >>>> >>>> Is there any chance at all that the executable could be corrupt? I >>>> don't know if I mentioned it but on some days there could be 60 or 70 >>>> phantom records right in a row. >>>> >>>> Update. The slash is merely a coincidence based on my test. The slash >>>> has nothing to do with phantom records. >>>> >>>> Jeff >>>> >>>> --------------- >>>> >>>> Jeff Johnson >>>> [email protected] >>>> (623) 582-0323 >>>> >>>> www.san-dc.com >>>> www.arelationshipmanager.com >>>> >>>> On 02/22/2013 12:23 PM, MB Software Solutions, LLC wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 02/22/2013 07:33 AM, Kurt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> My suggestion - KILL that Append/Gather - and replace that code with >>>>>>> an SQL >>>>>>> Insert! Its what I have done in the past in some problem areas of >>>>>>> systems - >>>>>>> and its done Wonders!!! >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> INSERT INTO MyTable FROM NAME if you've got objects to insert; >>>>> otherwise direct INSERT INTO MyTable (fields) VALUES (values) like he >>>>> said should fix it. I recall that from VFP5 days in late 90s. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/cacw6n4ssukzcdg-n9qjj33+gdmga1vj2d_pqpws+cgdxs54...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
