I tend to use another break to do the report sorts within the last break. My 
memory is extremely
efficient, it empties itself in minutes, so I need to keep things simple. I 
don't use ORDER BY
clauses for reports, only WHERE clauses.

--- Javier Valencia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Also, make sure that the ORDER BY clause in your statement does not conflict
> with the breaks in the report; I found that if you want to use and ORDER BY
> clause in your statement, it must include first the exact order of the
> breaks and then the additional sort.
> Javier,
> 
> Javier Valencia, PE
> President
> Valencia Technology Group, L.L.C.
> 14315 S. Twilight Ln, Suite #14
> Olathe, Kansas 66062-4578
> Office (913)829-0888
> Fax (913)649-2904
> Cell (913)915-3137
> ================================================
> Attention:
> The information contained in this message and or attachments is intended
> only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> confidential and/or privileged material.  Any review, retransmission,
> dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon,
> this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient
> is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
> delete the material from all system and destroy all copies.
> ======================================================
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of David M.
> Blocker
> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 9:32 AM
> To: RBG7-L Mailing List
> Subject: [RBG7-L] - Re: Problem with reports (continued...)
> 
> Alastair
> 
> I bet Emmitt is right - he usually is - but just in case, what you're
> describing would also be consistent with damaged indexes.
> 
> Backup the database
> Do a PACK KEYS on the database
> 
> See if that makes a difference
> 
> David Blocker
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 781-784-1919
> Fax: 781-784-1860
> Cell: 339-206-0261
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alastair Burr <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: RBG7-L Mailing List <mailto:[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 6:59 AM
> Subject: [RBG7-L] - Problem with reports (continued...)
> 
> Last month I was having problems with a report that I could not get to print
> all the data although if I used a where clause to select approximately half
> the data I could run the report against each half with no problems.
> 
> I now have another report where the same thing happens. This time the
> report, from the same database, runs against a different selection of data
> from a different driving view.
> 
> In both cases:
> The report runs against a view;
> The data is written to a text file;
> I have removed all sort definitions from the view;
> The report variables do various lookups and concatenations but nothing very
> exciting;
> There are multiple break points to sort the data in the report;
> The failure seems to occur at around 30,000 records;
> Browsing all the data directly from the view and sorting that is no problem;
> There is plenty of free disk space;
> The results looks perfect with only half the data selected;
> I am getting no error messages.
> 
> In one case I use an additional sort clause to sort the detail section's
> data.
> The output files are quite large: one would be around 16mb but the other is
> nearer only 8mb. (The "halves" come in at 9.7mb & 5.9mb in one case and
> 4.5mb & 3.7mb in the other.) I have other reports that run to close to 7mb.
> 
> R:Base seems to "stop working" rather than "hang". I can see some disk
> activity as if data is still being accessed but the output file remains at a
> fixed size no matter how much longer I wait (hours, even). I can disconnect
> the database, close the R:>, open and/or close the Database Browser but not
> do much else and then I do have to kill R:Base. After that the output files
> are perfectly readable only missing the last part of the data.
> 
> I am using the latest beta (#80/W98SE) but I think this has been happening
> for some time although I have a feeling that earlier versions of the reports
> worked months, maybe as much as a year, ago - but I may not have noticed the
> problem then.
> 
> Does anybody have any ideas what I need to look for to correct this? Are
> there any limits imposed by the report on sort depth? Or row numbers? Or
> output file size?
> Is there any significance in the failure row count being close to 32,768?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any suggestions,
> Regards,
> Alastair.
> 
> ----------------------------------
> A D B Burr,
> St. Albans, UK.
> ----------------------------------
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ----------------------------------
> 


=====
Albert Berry 
Management Consultant
RR2 - 1252 Ponderosa Drive
Sparwood BC, V0B 2G2 
Canada
(250) 425-5806
(250) 425-7259
(708) 575-3952 (fax)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to