Hi Symeon, The DIR key length in UDT is 124. Sure you do not have an @VM
in the key? That would give you this error. Thanks, Martin
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Symeon Breen
Sent: 21 July 2011
MORE -It is U_MAXFNAME that is stopping it.
:LIMIT
U_MAXFNAME: Unix file name limit = 46.
U_NAMESZ:Record id(key) size = 126.
U_SELEMAX: Number of select list = 10.
U_MAXDATA: Number of DATA statement = 500.
U_HEADSZ:
Hi Symeon, LIMIT is giving you the configured operating system limits.
Linux is 255 bytes normally. Looks like you have an override. Martin
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Symeon Breen
Sent: 22 July
Which is odd, as linux has the files in the directory no problem and i can
work with those files using shell commands, awk, python and php.
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Martin Braid
Sent: 22 July
I did a little experimenting with UV under HP-UX as I was curious...
I first tried a Type 19 file, and it worked fine.
Then tried a Type 1, and it truncated the IDs.
# ll
total 0
-rw-rw-rw- 1 root sys 0 Jul 22 09:49 .Type1
-rw-rw-rw- 1 root sys 0 Jul
Does it make any sense to use a U2 database to save scanned pdf's? That is...
Does it make any sense to save small blobs in a U2 data base?
Would a Type 1 file be best?
Are there any advantages to using MS-SQL, MySQL, or some other database
technology?
--Bill
I would say its more dependent on the OS than the database.
There are a lot of good free tools out there for PDF's, images, etc. on
Linux.
Most of the windows server stuff I've seen, you need a license for.
There is also two ways to look a the whole scene of document management too.
1) Do you
Had a user get a message I've not seen before. Message was: Index: 0 to one
dimension is out of range. The system kicked the user to TCL after this
message. We are running UniData 7.2.4 on HP UX.
I went into the system but was unable to duplicate the error. Has anyone seen
this message
You could have a record out there larger than other records that that
program normally reads in.
Just a shot in the dark...
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:56 AM, John Thompson jthompson...@gmail.comwrote:
Never seen that one...
My initial thought is:
Is there a program that has a dimensioned
Try ls -b at a linux prompt to see if there are any unprintable characters
in any of the names
Larry Hiscock
Western Computer Services
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Symeon Breen
Sent: Friday, July
Maybe you should go windows :)
Even 6.0.12
:LIMIT
U_MAXFNAME: File name limit = 198
Hth
Colin Alfke
Calgary, Canada
-Original Message-
From: Symeon Breen
Thanks - ud just has DIR type files no type 1 or 19.
I just (this week) took a couple C# projects and created an executable callable
by AccuTerm that interacts with a scanner and converts to JPG,BMP,TIF or PDF.
It places the files in a network directory on the UV server which the calling
program (UV side) picks up stores in a more secure
I would say SQL, etc. is no different than U2 when it comes to document
management. Its all the tools around the database that is going to help
get the job done for you. Use the database you know best :)
**
The filestream option in sql server is designed specifically for this
task.
I would not store blobs directly in a U2 file. All it would take is one use of
ED and an inadvertent “file” to corrupt it. Using a plain WRITE statement to
put a blob into a type 1 or 19 file may well corrupt it.
An alternative using U2 is to use the sequential file statements of WRITEBLK
On 22/07/11 16:56, John Thompson wrote:
Never seen that one...
My initial thought is:
Is there a program that has a dimensioned array, where the data that the
program is trying to read in is larger than the array that was declared in
the BASIC program?
The which situation is explicitly
On 22/07/11 17:46, Holt, Jake wrote:
I would say SQL, etc. is no different than U2 when it comes to document
management. Its all the tools around the database that is going to help
get the job done for you. Use the database you know best :)
**
The filestream option in sql server is
Actually, Wol's right: the filestream option in SQL Server is just an entry
point into the regular Windows file system, so in effect it's no different
from using a type 19 directory.
Brian
**
The filestream option in sql server is designed specifically for this
task.
But how does it manage
In UD ($basictype 'p') - you get this message when you try to access the
zero element in an array. Eg:
DIM X(1)
X(0) = 'Hello world'
Usually, a variable isn't getting set...
With $basictype 'u' it puts the excess in (0) and this syntax works. In
$basictype 'p' it puts the data in the last
On 22/07/11 18:11, Brian Leach wrote:
Actually, Wol's right: the filestream option in SQL Server is just an entry
point into the regular Windows file system, so in effect it's no different
from using a type 19 directory.
I didn't know that :-)
So if you're using a filesystem that's naff at
Really! My machine looks like:
5 Dev (0)- LIMIT
U_MAXFNAME: File name limit = 118.
Windows 2008 R2 and UD v7.2.7
If this isn't configurable, as Wally says, I wonder what accounts for
the difference between our two environments?
Bill
Earlier code branch (Windows vs UNIX) differences were made consistent at 7.2.
This is an internal UniData limit.
It is not configurable.
What the OS supports is different (though must support at least the UniData
limit).
Wally Terhune
U2 Support Architect
Rocket Software
4600 South Ulster
I'm connected to a win 2000 UD 6.0.6 and a win 2003 UD 7.1.6 system and both
are 198. I guess they had to lower it to make it consistent among the
various OS's.
Colin
-Original Message-
From: Bill Haskett
Really! My machine looks like:
5 Dev (0)- LIMIT
U_MAXFNAME: File name limit =
Rob,
First, twain dot net does not appear to be correct.
Please send me your source. I have worked in the area of scanning and PDF
production, and might pick up some tips.
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011, Robert Porter wrote:
I just (this week) took a couple C# projects and created an executable
Its something like
Static void installUdt(){
U_MAXFILENAME = random(254);
}
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Bill Haskett
Sent: 22 July 2011 18:52
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] udt dir
As Wally pointed out, this was standardized in U2 across OS releases as per 7.2
Earlier wasn't standardized across Windows and UNIX.
Bill Haskett's was on UD 7.2.7 (post-standardization)
Colin Alfke's was on UD 6.0.1 (pre-standardization)
Regards,
Dan McGrath
U2 Product Manager
Rocket Software
Bob, I'm also replying directly with more details. Let me begin by saying this
was a quick and dirty proof of concept so I could get approval to pick some
equipment to begin the project. In that sense it was a success... We've
ordered Keyscan keyboards http://www.keyscan.com/ to begin the
It looks like your responses, including mine here, are unanimous
- it's preferred to store blobs outside the DB and metadata
inside. I see no benefits to storing blobs in the DB and lots of
reasons not to do so. I wrote a blog a while back on signature
capture, which I implemented much like Rob
27 matches
Mail list logo
