You need to stick a buffer or an elastic before DAM.
On 07/01/2014 09:37 PM, Michael Harding wrote:
> Duh! Need more sleep I reckon. Should have seen the first, misunderstood
> DAM's behavior (and a trailing hole stage took care of that).
> Thanks again
> --
> Mike Harding
> z/VM System Support
>
Duh! Need more sleep I reckon. Should have seen the first, misunderstood
DAM's behavior (and a trailing hole stage took care of that).
Thanks again
--
Mike Harding
z/VM System Support
/sp
CMSTSO Pipelines Discussion List wrote on
07/01/2014 10:48:09 AM:
> From: Glenn Knickerbocker
> To: CMS-P
On 7/1/2014 1:29 PM, Michael Harding wrote:
> First, the second pick, matching against the cutoff time works for the >
> case but doesn't seem to for the = case.
> '|Pick w2 >>= /'cutoff'/',
Looks like the value of CUTOFF in your test case has a trailing blank,
so it will never match a word
CMSTSO Pipelines Discussion List wrote on
07/01/2014 09:47:49 AM:
> From: Glenn Knickerbocker
> To: CMS-PIPELINES@vm.marist.edu
> Date: 07/01/2014 09:48 AM
> Subject: Re: saving the last section I skipped
> Sent by: CMSTSO Pipelines Discussion List
>
> On 6/30/2014 8:00 PM, I wrote:
> > I'm thi
On 6/30/2014 8:00 PM, I wrote:
> I'm thinking I could use |BUFFER 1| to delay the contents of the
> transaction until the timestamp arrives, but timing the insertion of my
> target timestamp gets awfully messy.
It actually turned out to be simpler to code than I thought, but I wound
up doing the b
On 1 July 2014 14:59, Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> No, that's the problem. Each transaction is a group of records, and the
> timestamp is in the *last* record of the group.
>
>freeform
>stuff
>here
> ===timestamp===
>another
>freeform
>transaction
> ===timestamp===
>
In that case I would pick from each group of records the needed data into one
record before I filter by timestamp.
Or if the run of records between timestamps is constant you could use TAKE LAST
n instead of TAKE LAST (what implies n = 1) as I suggested earlier.
If the run of records is variable
Assuming one record = one transaction I suggest to feed the secondary output of
your TOLABEL or PICK or similar to a DROP | TAKE LAST which then just delivers
the last record before the first match. The DROP would filter the record you
injected with the timestamp in question. (Well, I assume als
