Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs
This is a good thought but we've got multiple files with tons of records in them. Our users can be restricted from accessing records throughout the application that are associated with particular clients/departments. Thus, when they want to select A/P invoices to pay, the user would generate: :SSELECT APINVOICES WITH AUTHORIZED AND WITH CLIENTNO = "A long list of clients" This may be a short list but for really large customers of ours, this list may exceed 200-300 clients/departments for a particular user. In this example, the client number is in field# 2. What brought this to my attention is we upgraded a large customer of ours from D3 to UniData and they have 300 clients (several users have access to 275 of them). I've only used QSELECT to select the attributes of a record(s) and that's not what we want here; we want all A/P invoices for the selected clients so they can be paid. So I'm not selecting multiple items specifying explicit item its but selecting thousands of records where the client number is defined as the ones the user is authorized to access. What's really difficult is many of our reports are "SORT"s, not "SELECT"s. This gives me no way to split apart a single report. I'd have to process the report in multiple parts, taking into account the dependency the reports have with the spooler and the interaction with the user. Whew! It's tough to grow and run into 25 year old limitations applied to modern hardware. :-( Thanks again. Bill __ From: Ken Wallis Sent: 1/29/2009 9:04 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs The problem here isn't that you can only have a certain number of items active in a select list, but that specifying them as explicit item ids on the command line is ugly, bad and only supported up to a certain point. Isn't this a job for QSELECT? PS. As much as I think UniData is a great toolset to work with, anyone who told you that conversion was a save and restore needs shooting. Cheers, Ken -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Marc Harbeson Sent: Friday, 30 January 2009 12:24 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] UniData LIMITs What about something along the lines of splitting the client ID's into two (or more) lists, selecting, and then MERGE.LIST them together then list? Kind of difficult to guess around it without seeing the whole picture. -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:12 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs That's correct. Bill __ From: Kevin King Sent: 1/29/2009 2:37 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs And the client records don't share any specific attribute, like a company number or such that you could use in the selection? --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] UniData LIMITs
The problem here isn't that you can only have a certain number of items active in a select list, but that specifying them as explicit item ids on the command line is ugly, bad and only supported up to a certain point. Isn't this a job for QSELECT? PS. As much as I think UniData is a great toolset to work with, anyone who told you that conversion was a save and restore needs shooting. Cheers, Ken -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Marc Harbeson Sent: Friday, 30 January 2009 12:24 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] UniData LIMITs What about something along the lines of splitting the client ID's into two (or more) lists, selecting, and then MERGE.LIST them together then list? Kind of difficult to guess around it without seeing the whole picture. -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:12 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs That's correct. Bill __ From: Kevin King Sent: 1/29/2009 2:37 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs And the client records don't share any specific attribute, like a company number or such that you could use in the selection? --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs
Charlie: Thanks. The client number is at the core of our ERP package. A quick look shows over 150 reports using a core subroutine to enter clients while another 100 use the client number field. Does this constant re-engineering crap ever end? [sigh]Never believe someone who says a conversion is nothing more than a backup and a restore. :-) Bill __ From: Charlie Rubeor Sent: 1/29/2009 6:44 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs When I ran into this issue, that's the solution that I used. It's not pretty, but I would be happy to share the code. I was really hoping that someone else had a better solution. - Original Message - From: "Marc Harbeson" To: Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 8:24 PM Subject: RE: [U2] UniData LIMITs What about something along the lines of splitting the client ID's into two (or more) lists, selecting, and then MERGE.LIST them together then list? Kind of difficult to guess around it without seeing the whole picture. -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:12 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs That's correct. Bill __ From: Kevin King Sent: 1/29/2009 2:37 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs And the client records don't share any specific attribute, like a company number or such that you could use in the selection? --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of PGP.sig] --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs
When I ran into this issue, that's the solution that I used. It's not pretty, but I would be happy to share the code. I was really hoping that someone else had a better solution. - Original Message - From: "Marc Harbeson" To: Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 8:24 PM Subject: RE: [U2] UniData LIMITs > What about something along the lines of splitting the client ID's into > two (or more) lists, selecting, and then MERGE.LIST them together then > list? > > Kind of difficult to guess around it without seeing the whole picture. > > -Original Message- > From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett > Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:12 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs > > That's correct. > Bill > > __ > > From: Kevin King > Sent: 1/29/2009 2:37 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs > > And the client records don't share any specific attribute, like a > company > number or such that you could use in the selection? > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of PGP.sig] --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] UniData LIMITs
What about something along the lines of splitting the client ID's into two (or more) lists, selecting, and then MERGE.LIST them together then list? Kind of difficult to guess around it without seeing the whole picture. -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:12 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs That's correct. Bill __ From: Kevin King Sent: 1/29/2009 2:37 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs And the client records don't share any specific attribute, like a company number or such that you could use in the selection? --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs
That's correct. Bill __ From: Kevin King Sent: 1/29/2009 2:37 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs And the client records don't share any specific attribute, like a company number or such that you could use in the selection? --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
[U2] [Announcement] International Spectrum Denver 2009
International Spectrum Conference and Exhibition Attend the Premier MultiValue User Event March 23rd- 27th Benefits International Spectrum makes a special effort to bring together the tools you need to make sure you and your MultiValue Enterprise stay on the competitive edge. Whether you are an end user, a vendor, or an independent consultant, you get to talk to MultiValue experts and see the latest products, tools, software releases, and general corporate updates from the vendors and database providers. Work Smarter, Not Harder! Join us for session topics that will help you maximize your existing business system with as little effort as possible, and still say on-time and in-budget. We include session on Reporting and Business Intelligence, Web development, as well as many other detail technical sessions you need to manage and maintain your MultiValue Enterprise. Highlights - Learn from Premier MultiValue Consultants at your choice of in-depth educational sessions. - Expand your knowledge at vendor-sponsored training and demonstrations. - Learn about the new products, tools, and features available to the MultiValue community. - See more session details on the Conference Session List Register Now - Save $200.00 before February 11th http://www.intl-spectrum.com/conference/2009/ Full Conference Package: $795.00 1 Day Conference Package: $595.00 Exhibition Only: FREE After February 11th Full Conference Package: $995.00 1 Day Conference Package: $695.00 Exhibition Only: FREE More Information: http://www.intl-spectrum.com/conference/2009/ Hotel Information: The Westin Westminster 303-410-5000 Room Rate: Single/Double $169.00 Special Rate Cut-off: February 17th --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs
And the client records don't share any specific attribute, like a company number or such that you could use in the selection? --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs
Marc: I don't think so because the reports may be: SELECT CUSTOMERS WITH CLIENTNO = "1""2""5""7""11"... -or- SELECT APINVOICES WITH CLIENTNO = "1""3""4""6""8""9"... -or- SELECT EMPLOYEES WITH CLIENTNO = "1""2""3""4""5"... ...etc, etc, etc. These aren't just individual records but large numbers of records, in many files, for a specific department style client; where the client number is often one of the fields in the record. Every report in our system uses a client number search, since all accounting records are client-centric. Bill __ From: Marc Harbeson Sent: 1/29/2009 1:54 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs Can't you just FORMLIST them, then list? Aka: CLIENTIDS = "1":@AM:"2" FORMLIST CLIENTIDS TO 0 -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 2:44 PM To: U2 Mail List Subject: [U2] UniData LIMITs We have a report writer that allows users to select the client they want to print any report for. This subroutine builds a list of clients available to any particular user and uses this list to either compare against the clients entered or of all clients are selected then the entire list is used. When this list is placed in an ECL query and executed, e.g SELECT CUSTOMERS WITH CLIENTNO = "1""2""3""4". ...all has been fine for years. We picked up a new customer who has over 300 clients. When a user tries to run a report for all clients accessible by them the query aborts with... WITH condition stack overflow A quick look at "LIMIT" shows: :LIMIT U_MAXFNAME: File name limit = 198. U_NAMESZ:Record id(key) size = 126. U_SELEMAX: Number of select list = 10. U_MAXDATA: Number of DATA statement = 500. U_HEADSZ:HEADER/FOOTER length = 2120. U_MAXHASHTYPES: Number of hash functions = 3. U_MAXSORT: Number of sort fields(BY...) in LIST = 20. U_MAXWITH: WITH stack size = 256. U_MAXWHEN: WHEN stack size = 60. U_MAXCAL:Number of SUM+AVG+PCT+CAL in LIST = 54. U_MAXBREAK: Number of BREAK.ON+BREAK.SUP in LIST = 15. U_MAXLIST: Number of attribute names in LIST = 999. U_LINESZ:Page width in printing =272. U_PARASIZE: Paragraph name and its parameter size = 256. U_LPCMD: System spooler name = NT Spooler. U_MAXPROMPT: Number of prompts allowed in paragraph = 60. U_FSIZE: Dictionary field name size =31. U_MAXVALUE: Number of values WHEN can handle = 10240. U_MAXBYEXPVAL: Number of values BY.EXP can handle = 10240. U_SENTLEN: Maximum sentence length = 9247. U_PROCBUFSZ: Proc buffer size = 8191. U_NIDES: Maximum number of virtual fields in query= 256 ...which indicates there's a limit of data allowed in the "WITH" clause(s) of 256. The UniData documentation says these parameters are __NOT__ configurable. How in the world are other people overcoming this limitation? Doesn't anyone want data for more than 256 somethings? Is it possible for me to overcome this limitation without going into 1,000 programs to split large numbers of ECL queries? Or am I forced to count the "somethings" available to submit to any query and abort if its more than 250? Am I forced to split up A/P check runs (and many other processes) into two or more runs to accommodate this limitation? Any experience, or thoughts, on this will be appreciated. Bill --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] UniData LIMITs
Can't you just FORMLIST them, then list? Aka: CLIENTIDS = "1":@AM:"2" FORMLIST CLIENTIDS TO 0 -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 2:44 PM To: U2 Mail List Subject: [U2] UniData LIMITs We have a report writer that allows users to select the client they want to print any report for. This subroutine builds a list of clients available to any particular user and uses this list to either compare against the clients entered or of all clients are selected then the entire list is used. When this list is placed in an ECL query and executed, e.g SELECT CUSTOMERS WITH CLIENTNO = "1""2""3""4". ...all has been fine for years. We picked up a new customer who has over 300 clients. When a user tries to run a report for all clients accessible by them the query aborts with... WITH condition stack overflow A quick look at "LIMIT" shows: :LIMIT U_MAXFNAME: File name limit = 198. U_NAMESZ:Record id(key) size = 126. U_SELEMAX: Number of select list = 10. U_MAXDATA: Number of DATA statement = 500. U_HEADSZ:HEADER/FOOTER length = 2120. U_MAXHASHTYPES: Number of hash functions = 3. U_MAXSORT: Number of sort fields(BY...) in LIST = 20. U_MAXWITH: WITH stack size = 256. U_MAXWHEN: WHEN stack size = 60. U_MAXCAL:Number of SUM+AVG+PCT+CAL in LIST = 54. U_MAXBREAK: Number of BREAK.ON+BREAK.SUP in LIST = 15. U_MAXLIST: Number of attribute names in LIST = 999. U_LINESZ:Page width in printing =272. U_PARASIZE: Paragraph name and its parameter size = 256. U_LPCMD: System spooler name = NT Spooler. U_MAXPROMPT: Number of prompts allowed in paragraph = 60. U_FSIZE: Dictionary field name size =31. U_MAXVALUE: Number of values WHEN can handle = 10240. U_MAXBYEXPVAL: Number of values BY.EXP can handle = 10240. U_SENTLEN: Maximum sentence length = 9247. U_PROCBUFSZ: Proc buffer size = 8191. U_NIDES: Maximum number of virtual fields in query= 256 ...which indicates there's a limit of data allowed in the "WITH" clause(s) of 256. The UniData documentation says these parameters are __NOT__ configurable. How in the world are other people overcoming this limitation? Doesn't anyone want data for more than 256 somethings? Is it possible for me to overcome this limitation without going into 1,000 programs to split large numbers of ECL queries? Or am I forced to count the "somethings" available to submit to any query and abort if its more than 250? Am I forced to split up A/P check runs (and many other processes) into two or more runs to accommodate this limitation? Any experience, or thoughts, on this will be appreciated. Bill --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2][UD] Index for @ID (IBM documentation)
IMO, if the index has been created with NO.NULLS, then the <= would require the file to be scanned as there is a possibility of a "" in the data that would not be index'ed. -Original Message- From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Kevin King Sent: Friday, 30 January 2009 7:18 AM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2][UD] Index for @ID (IBM documentation) Martin, are you sure? I would expect the query optimizer to see the <= and cancel the use of the index. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2][UD] Index for @ID (IBM documentation)
Martin, are you sure? I would expect the query optimizer to see the <= and cancel the use of the index. --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] UniData LIMITs
There have always been limits on how big or complex a selection statement can be. And as best I know, these things are not configurable. So... you have to be creative on how you select the items. For example, if you know the keys to the records of the customers to select - or can build the keys based on the client number - you should be able to take that list and use a FORMLIST to select those records directly. On the other hand, if the CLIENTNO field is a data field in the record and a SELECT is absolutely necessary, you may need to create some preprocessing code that selects all of the records in the file and if a record matches your critieria, write it to a work file or a list in memory that can then be selected or FORMLISTed. With SUBR(..) type dictonaries, the possibilities are actually pretty remarkable. For example, create a routine that takes the list of CLIENTNOs that you know and have those values put into a named common variable. Create a SUBR(..) type dictionary using the same named common that returns a Y/N as to whether that record is a candidate based on the list in common. Then change your select to select any records where that field is "Y". The select command is well within limits, and you can put as many millions of data elements in that list that you want, performance notwithstanding. -K --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
[U2] UniData LIMITs
We have a report writer that allows users to select the client they want to print any report for. This subroutine builds a list of clients available to any particular user and uses this list to either compare against the clients entered or of all clients are selected then the entire list is used. When this list is placed in an ECL query and executed, e.g SELECT CUSTOMERS WITH CLIENTNO = "1""2""3""4". ...all has been fine for years. We picked up a new customer who has over 300 clients. When a user tries to run a report for all clients accessible by them the query aborts with... WITH condition stack overflow A quick look at "LIMIT" shows: :LIMIT U_MAXFNAME: File name limit = 198. U_NAMESZ:Record id(key) size = 126. U_SELEMAX: Number of select list = 10. U_MAXDATA: Number of DATA statement = 500. U_HEADSZ:HEADER/FOOTER length = 2120. U_MAXHASHTYPES: Number of hash functions = 3. U_MAXSORT: Number of sort fields(BY...) in LIST = 20. U_MAXWITH: WITH stack size = 256. U_MAXWHEN: WHEN stack size = 60. U_MAXCAL:Number of SUM+AVG+PCT+CAL in LIST = 54. U_MAXBREAK: Number of BREAK.ON+BREAK.SUP in LIST = 15. U_MAXLIST: Number of attribute names in LIST = 999. U_LINESZ:Page width in printing =272. U_PARASIZE: Paragraph name and its parameter size = 256. U_LPCMD: System spooler name = NT Spooler. U_MAXPROMPT: Number of prompts allowed in paragraph = 60. U_FSIZE: Dictionary field name size =31. U_MAXVALUE: Number of values WHEN can handle = 10240. U_MAXBYEXPVAL: Number of values BY.EXP can handle = 10240. U_SENTLEN: Maximum sentence length = 9247. U_PROCBUFSZ: Proc buffer size = 8191. U_NIDES: Maximum number of virtual fields in query= 256 ...which indicates there's a limit of data allowed in the "WITH" clause(s) of 256. The UniData documentation says these parameters are __NOT__ configurable. How in the world are other people overcoming this limitation? Doesn't anyone want data for more than 256 somethings? Is it possible for me to overcome this limitation without going into 1,000 programs to split large numbers of ECL queries? Or am I forced to count the "somethings" available to submit to any query and abort if its more than 250? Am I forced to split up A/P check runs (and many other processes) into two or more runs to accommodate this limitation? Any experience, or thoughts, on this will be appreciated. Bill --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] Last accessed date stamp for UniVerse files
John, It gets worse. For dynamically hashed files (type 30) the datetime-modified stamp gets set even if one does no updates. This is because UV brings the current mod & load parameters into memory when you open the file in case it dynamically changes. When you close the file, those params indiscriminately get written back to the header of DATA30, even if they have not changed. Unix dutifully records the data-time modified. (Exception: if user has read-only rights, the update to the header is not written, no harm, no foul. Which, incidentally, proves the update is superfluous. Seems like there might be an enhancement request buried here.) So you can't really trust the mod-stamp on DATA30 to tell you when the file was really last updated. For most files the stamp on OVER30 might be fairly accurate. One does not necessarily update OVER30 whenever there is a write, but for very active files it's pretty accurate. If OVER30 mod-stamp is 2 years old, it might mean that the dynamic file has not been updated for 2 years. Chuck Stevenson On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 3:30 PM, John Rodgers wrote: > UniVerse 9.6.1.6 on HP/UX > > We are analyzing our "mature and extensive" application to find obsolete > files. > I was hoping to use the array loaded by STATUS() after a file OPEN to > return > the date/time stamps. > > From the manual for STATUS() after OPEN > ... > Last Access date = <14> - date of last access > Last Date Written = <16> - date of last mod > > It appears that opening the file immediately changes the last access > date/time <14> and <15>. > That seems to defeat the purpose because the answer is always today / now. > > Is there a way around this? > Is there another way of getting at that info without having to parse the > results of a unix shell command? > One hassle with that is the external date returned which is "sometimes" > month day & time or maybe month day & year - for older records. > > I can do that but it just seems simpler to stay within UniVerse to query > UniVerse entities. > We get spoiled by the U2 way of managing dates/times. > > I have searched the IBM knowledge base but got no relevant hits. > That surprises me. I am either misunderstanding something or I am totally > on > the wrong path. > > > Cheers > > > JR > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
RE: [U2] Last accessed date stamp for UniVerse files
Hello John You are right about the problem with STATUS(). I would look at the UNIX 'stat' command, that should give you what you want. You can combine that with a find command to run it for each of the files then parse the results. Not elegant but it should be functional. Sorry I don't have a UNIX system to hand right now, so I can't give the syntax with the stat options. Brian > -Original Message- > From: owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:owner-u2-us...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of John Rodgers > Sent: 28 January 2009 23:31 > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: [U2] Last accessed date stamp for UniVerse files > > UniVerse 9.6.1.6 on HP/UX > > We are analyzing our "mature and extensive" application to > find obsolete files. > I was hoping to use the array loaded by STATUS() after a file > OPEN to return the date/time stamps. > > From the manual for STATUS() after OPEN > ... > Last Access date = <14> - date of last access Last Date > Written = <16> - date of last mod > > It appears that opening the file immediately changes the last > access date/time <14> and <15>. > That seems to defeat the purpose because the answer is always > today / now. > > Is there a way around this? > Is there another way of getting at that info without having > to parse the results of a unix shell command? > One hassle with that is the external date returned which is > "sometimes" > month day & time or maybe month day & year - for older records. > > I can do that but it just seems simpler to stay within > UniVerse to query UniVerse entities. > We get spoiled by the U2 way of managing dates/times. > > I have searched the IBM knowledge base but got no relevant hits. > That surprises me. I am either misunderstanding something or > I am totally on the wrong path. > > > Cheers > > > JR > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] UV, Linux, and Active Directory
Thanks all, I have used Samba and Kerberous many a time before just never had UniVerse on a Linux box before. From the sound of it there are no issues with UV logons once you join to the domain. Thanks again, Norm On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Adrian Merrall wrote: >> > How are you authenticating against AD on Linux? >> >> >Oops, forgot about kerberos in my previous reply. > > > > We also used Kerberos at my last gig (RHEL4 & 5). Kerberos is the part that > actually talks to the AD controller and it does so in a secure fashion. > Windows supports it out of the box I believe - > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerberos_(protocol) > > Very robust solution for us. The only problem we had was we only pointed to > the primary AD controller in the kerberos config file and if that failed we > had to edit the config file to the backup AD (comment one line, uncomment > the other). The change was instant, no need to reboot/restart anything. > I'm sure there is a way to do this automatically though. > > Regards, > > Adrian, > Auckland, NZ > --- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2] Running Universe and Unidata on RHEL Without Virtualization
Hi Dave, Has anyone run Universe and Unidata on the same instance of RHEL (not on separate virtual machines), either one-at-a-time or simultaneously? There is no problem with this so long as you move one of them from port 23 to some other port. Martin Phillips Ladybridge Systems Ltd 17b Coldstream Lane, Hardingstone, Northampton, NN4 6DB +44-(0)1604-709200 --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Re: [U2][UD] Index for @ID (IBM documentation)
Hi, The most common use of an index on @ID is where the ids are a sparse set of values and you want to find those in a specific range. For example, if I have a file where the id is the date but not all dates are present, I might want to do LIST MYFILE WITH DATE >= "1 Jan 08" AND <= "31 Dec 08" With an index on @ID, this only reads the records that exist. With no index, it must read the entire file. Martin Phillips Ladybridge Systems Ltd 17b Coldstream Lane, Hardingstone, Northampton, NN4 6DB +44-(0)1604-709200 --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
