RE: [U2] UV SEARCH Bug?
My guess would be that when a search is performed on a type 1 file, without a select list, it reads the file names and some may have been split by the name truncation used with type 1 files. With an active select list the search routine probably uses the select list which has the full concatenated name. A type 19 file wouldn't have the same problem because it does not split the long names. Jerry Banker Senior Programmer Analyst IBM Certified Solutions Expert Affiliated Acceptance Corp Sunrise Beach, MO 1-800-233-8483 www.affiliated.org > -Original Message- > From: Kevin King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 5:42 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: [U2] UV SEARCH Bug? > > I am working on a UV 10.2 system and the BP file is a Type 1. SEARCH > BP and then entering a string that is known to be in the records > returns erroneous results. For example: > > > SEARCH BP > STRING: KK > STRING: > > 5 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. > > >CLEARSELECT > SELECT list number 0 cleared. > > SELECT BP > > 935 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. > >> SEARCH BP > STRING: KK > STRING: > > 48 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. > >> > > Why would the SEARCH with no active list return 5 but the SEARCH with > the active list returned 48 items? Copying the records to a type 19 > file, the SEARCH works fine on the type 19 file. It only seems to be > with the type 1. Any clues? > > -Kevin > http://www.PrecisOnline.com > --- > 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 SEARCH Bug?
Kevin - Did you move the file to this system from another one? If so, it may have been created with LONGNAMES on or off and your current setting for LONGNAMES is the other choice. I had this same problem on another system where I restored the account with uvrestore and had to remove the ".Type1" record from the directory to get things working again, ie. a directory without the ".Type 1" item is a Type 19 file. Also, if you did a restore, did you run "UPDATE.ACCOUNT" in the account; it fixes lots of problems that occur with moved accounts. Ken At 03:41 PM 1/16/2008, you wrote: I am working on a UV 10.2 system and the BP file is a Type 1. SEARCH BP and then entering a string that is known to be in the records returns erroneous results. For example: > SEARCH BP STRING: KK STRING: 5 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. >CLEARSELECT SELECT list number 0 cleared. SELECT BP 935 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. >> SEARCH BP STRING: KK STRING: 48 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. >> Why would the SEARCH with no active list return 5 but the SEARCH with the active list returned 48 items? Copying the records to a type 19 file, the SEARCH works fine on the type 19 file. It only seems to be with the type 1. Any clues? -Kevin http://www.PrecisOnline.com --- 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 SEARCH Bug?
I ran into this some time ago. I think it was a permissions issue. Once search runs into a record that you don't have permissions to, it just stops and returns what it has found up to that point. Hope that's it. -- Original message -- From: "Kevin King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I am working on a UV 10.2 system and the BP file is a Type 1. SEARCH > BP and then entering a string that is known to be in the records > returns erroneous results. For example: > > > SEARCH BP > STRING: KK > STRING: > > 5 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. > > >CLEARSELECT > SELECT list number 0 cleared. > > SELECT BP > > 935 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. > >> SEARCH BP > STRING: KK > STRING: > > 48 record(s) selected to SELECT list #0. > >> > > Why would the SEARCH with no active list return 5 but the SEARCH with > the active list returned 48 items? Copying the records to a type 19 > file, the SEARCH works fine on the type 19 file. It only seems to be > with the type 1. Any clues? > > -Kevin > http://www.PrecisOnline.com > --- > 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/