Alastair, It sounds like both are reporting errors in some cases when there are none. I've seen the same thing when doing db maintenance. I haven't fretted about it too much, but it is a bit scary each time you see it.
Dennis McGrath [email protected] [email protected] On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Alastair Burr <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Dennis, > > OH whoops! I really should check what I’m doing and saying and make sure > they match! > > What I showed is what is happening with Autochk and yes, I can see the > maths of it clearly enough but Autochk exits with “Errors have been > encountered.” – presumably because actual and expected counts don’t match. > > As far as I recall, and we’re treading in deep water here, this didn’t use > to happen – at least, not the exit with errors shown. > > However, what is causing me the real problem is that RELOAD exits with > these errors and sets the ErrVar to the error number. > > R>reload xxx > -ERROR- Table SYS_COMMENTS has an incorrect number of rows. ( 450) > -ERROR- Table SYS_DEFAULTS has an incorrect number of rows. ( 450) > -ERROR- Table SYS_COMPUTED has an incorrect number of rows. ( 450) > -ERROR- Table SYS_CONSTRAINTS has an incorrect number of rows. ( 450) > Finished reloading with 4 error(s). > RELOAD operation is complete > > Any thoughts? > Regards, > Alastair. > > > *From:* Dennis McGrath <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, July 20, 2013 5:48 PM > *To:* RBASE-L Mailing List <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [RBASE-L] - Re: Autochk query (and an unrelated mysterious fix) > > Actually there is no error. The expected = active. The counted = active > + deleted. > > > Dennis McGrath > [email protected] > [email protected] > > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Alastair Burr > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I posted about this earlier in the year and the problem has arisen >> again. >> >> After amending a table, adding a column in this case, when I next run >> Autochk these errors appear: >> >> Examining data in file #2... >> Examining data in SYS_COMMENTS Rows: Active 194, Deleted 28 >> Actual rows counted: 222, expected count: 194 >> >> Examining data in SYS_DEFAULTS Rows: Active 27, Deleted 1 >> Actual rows counted: 28, expected count: 27 >> >> Examining data in SYS_RULES Rows: Active 19, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_VIEWS Rows: Active 7, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_COMPUTED Rows: Active 20, Deleted 2 >> Actual rows counted: 22, expected count: 20 >> >> Examining data in SYS_PASSWORDS Rows: Active 239, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_CONSTRAINTS Rows: Active 81, Deleted 2 >> Actual rows counted: 83, expected count: 81 >> >> Examining data in SYS_TABLES >> Examining data in SYS_COLUMNS >> Examining data in SYS_INDEXES >> Examining data in SYS_FORMS Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_REPORTS Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_LABELS Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_LAYOUTS Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_TYPES >> Examining data in SYS_FORMS2 Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_REPORTS2 Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_LABELS2 Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_SERVERS Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_PROCEDURES Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_PROC_MODS Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_PROC_COLS Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_TRIGGERS Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_FORMS3 Rows: Active 26, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_REPORTS3 Rows: Active 21, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_LABELS3 Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_MERGE Rows: Active 0, Deleted 0 >> Examining data in SYS_LAYOUTS3 Rows: Active 5, Deleted 0 >> All the non-system tables are fine – including the one that was changed. >> >> Is this meant to happen? This was C&P’d from the output using the latest >> build: R:BASE eXtreme 9.5 (32), U.S. Version, Build: 9.5.3.20718. >> >> Which, if anyone had the same problem as me, with the letter N being >> omitted when using KEYMAP has mysteriously begun to work again – many >> thanks to whoever. >> >> Regards, >> Alastair. >> >> >> >> >> > >
