Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-08-04 Thread Craig Bennett
Having talked to IBM (who were as usual amazingly helpful, thankyou Jonathan and Leroy), their conclusion was that when a blink error occurs in a file, the action taken will depend on the type of file corruption that has occured: When a READ is performed and a group is dicovered to have a

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-26 Thread Leroy Dreyfuss
But Leroy, the program neither aborts nor takes the ON ERROR branch, it takes the ELSE branch and continues. That might be a problem. I guess you see something in the errlog file, but does anything display on the screen? If so, then perhaps that is a problem. The code is a bit tricky and blink

RE: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-26 Thread Glenn Herbert
: Monday, 26 July 2004 11:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken When (if?) we find a solution I'll post the results. IBM have suggested that the initial corruption problem which sent us this way is patched in UV 10.0.17 or later (including

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-26 Thread Clifton Oliver
How does the application program determine it is in the ELSE clause due to an error rather than due to record not found? -- Regards, Clif On Jul 25, 2004, at 23:13, Leroy Dreyfuss wrote: Since the ELSE clause is taken anyway (whether or not is moot for your purposes), you can still do your

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-26 Thread Craig Bennett
Leroy, But Leroy, the program neither aborts nor takes the ON ERROR branch, it takes the ELSE branch and continues. That might be a problem. I guess you see something in the errlog file, but does anything display on the screen? If so, then perhaps that is a problem. The code is a bit tricky and

RE: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-26 Thread Leroy Dreyfuss
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leroy Dreyfuss Sent: Monday, 26 July 2004 4:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken Sorry, but I have to disagree

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-26 Thread Leroy Dreyfuss
Perhaps it is a problem, perhaps not. Have you corrected the blink error? If you are finding you have blink issues on a somewhat frequent basis, perhaps the focus is not in the right place? I might be trying to ascertain why my files are becoming damaged and worry about how BASIC deals with it

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-26 Thread Craig Bennett
I couldn't find where this anything has changed in this area of our code, nor could I reproduce the condition of it taking the ELSE clause. Leroy, I have a corrupted file which reports the following on a READ from the corrupted group: File '/path/FILE': Computed blink of 0x74617C20 does not

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-25 Thread Leroy Dreyfuss
When (if?) we find a solution I'll post the results. IBM have suggested that the initial corruption problem which sent us this way is patched in UV 10.0.17 or later (including 10.1), but they believe that not taking the ON ERROR clause when a blink error is encountered may be a bug. I am not sure

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-25 Thread Craig Bennett
I am not sure I would agree that blink errors not taking ON ERROR clauses is a defect. While inconvenient to the user to have a program stop abruptly, the error needs to be dealt with as quickly as possible or the problem will perpetuate. The abort in this case is a deliberate one, i.e. it is

RE: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-25 Thread David Jordan
critical applications like 24x7 banking. Regards David Jordan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leroy Dreyfuss Sent: Monday, 26 July 2004 11:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch

Memo: Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-20 Thread asvin . dattani
] on 20 Jul 2004 03:16 Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: bcc: Subject:Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken Hi All, we have a site which is experiencing file corruption problems (in one particular file

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-19 Thread Craig Bennett
Hi All, we have a site which is experiencing file corruption problems (in one particular file). The clients are trying to find problems in their SAN etc, and have created the errlog item in the UV account so we are logging the Internal Data Error messages when the corruption occurs (UV 10.0.7,

RE: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-19 Thread David Jordan
statement. Regards David Jordan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Craig Bennett Sent: Tuesday, 20 July 2004 12:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken Hi All, we have a site which

Re: [U2] [UV] File corruption error, but ON ERROR branch not taken

2004-07-19 Thread Craig Bennett
Try the On Error with the file open command, the error may be occuring at the file open. Have you played aroubnd with the FILEINFO Command, that may pick up the issue. I have noticed in the path if there is an error with the File Variable that the on error clause does not work in the read