RE: Real Time Data Warehouse

2004-02-10 Thread Brian Leach
Tom, I guess I am echoing various other responses, but here's my 2c anyway: 1. There are a whole host of tools that will populate a SQL database from UniVerse. (I recommend mvQuery: it's my product so I would anyway). You will need to consider how far each solution can be automated and what it

Re: Secondary Indices on Distributed Files

2004-02-10 Thread gcanedy
For some strange reason, the DICT of each Part File needed to contain copies of the I-Types from the Distributed File's DICT in order for CREATE.INDEX to work correctly. Next question... To avoid having to copy DICT items to all the Part Files each time a change is made, I updated the VOC

Re: Secondary Indices on Distributed Files

2004-02-10 Thread gcanedy
Sorry, forgot to mention: UniVerse 9.5 on AIX 4.3.2 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Secondary Indices on Distributed Files

2004-02-10 Thread Anthony Youngman
Except it's not a strange reason. The whole point of a distributed file is that any part of the file can be treated as a file in its own right, so it needs its own dictionary. And given that MV makes no distinction between data and dict portions at the structural level (and all that jazz),

Formatting a Negative

2004-02-10 Thread Baruch Salamander
What's the exact command that places parenthesis around a negative number? -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

RE: Formatting a Negative

2004-02-10 Thread Anthony Youngman
But if you're doing it for accounting reasons, that's the convention. You use parentheses INSTEAD OF as negative sign. It makes it stick out because on the rhs the parens stands out in a column of its own. Cheers, Wol -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Formatting a Negative

2004-02-10 Thread Brian Leach
OCONV(value, MDn) where n is your descale factor, e.g. Crt OConv(123.45,MD2) gives 1.23 Crt OConv(-123.45,MD2) gives 1.23 For more detail, HELP CONV MD (UniVerse). Brian Leach -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Baruch Salamander Sent: 10

2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Dave Raven
Gentlemen, I was having a walk-around this Unidata system. I noticed that some of the files are approaching 2 gb and a couple of files are over 2 gb. Is there a future problem looming. What is the 2 gig limits mentioned in some of the email's? Dave Raven Mobile(949) 228 2224 e Fax

TNET Client/Site licensing inquiry failed

2004-02-10 Thread Yimi Lopez
I HAVE UNIDATA 5,2 IN WINDOWS 2000, And The FOLLOWING ERROR : Tipo de suceso: Error Origen del suceso: UDTnet Categoría del suceso: Ninguno Id. del suceso: 1002 Fecha: 09/02/2004 Hora: 07:14:52 p.m. Usuario: No disponible Descripción: TNET Client/Site licensing inquiry failed REINSTALL The

Re: TNET Client/Site licensing inquiry failed

2004-02-10 Thread Results
In English (According to iTools.com): Type of event: Error Origin of the event: UDTnet Category of the event: Unknown Id. of the event: 1002 Date: 09/02/2004 Hour: 07:14:52 p.m. User: not available Description: TNET Client/Site licensing inquiry failed It sounds like a

Re: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread KAbraha454
I did not originally notice the OP stated they were a Unidata platform. My distributed file comments were related to UniVerse. However, when designing a UniVerse distributed file, it is wise to pick the number of part files that will keep each part file size *well below* the 2GB limit. Based on

Re: U2 System Guru

2004-02-10 Thread Karl L Pearson
If the file is corrupt, you need the file repaired, then distributed. Fixing the file can be a real bear at the 2GB limit because of group truncation and other issues. After you get that part solved (I could do it for you if you don't have local help and don't mind telecommuting administration),

Re: U2 System Guru

2004-02-10 Thread KAbraha454
The system was an IBM RS6000 with about 100-130 active users. The 80GB file actually had about 40GB of data in it (to allow for growth, as previously mentioned). These were usually large historical sales analysis files, where the worst file contained every invoice line item for the last 5-7

RE: Login question for Universe/SB+

2004-02-10 Thread Jason Theis
All, We use UniVerse/NT and SB+. It seems redundant to have to login to UniVerse with a valid user and password, then choose an account, and then login to SB+ with a user and password. What options do we have to avoid this redundant entry. Is there a way to pass the user's authentication

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Jason Theis
The 2GB file size limit is a traditional Unix-based operating system limit. The 2GB file limit appies to *all* files, UniVerse or not. Then maybe I missed something in an earlier post. What is a general suggestion if we expect any sort of file to be larger than 2 gigs? Thanks, JT -- u2-users

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Logan, David (SST - Adelaide)
It would have to be a 64bit file, there are no exceptions as this is a limitation brought on by the size of a number. (I think a couple of earlier posters had the numbers involved) therefore you literally cannot create a file larger than 2Gb with 32 bit addressing. We have a substantial number of

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Dan Fitzgerald
You can make larger files, but U2 cannot address them, unless you enable 64-bit addressing. The limit is in the unix file /etc/limits (at least on AIX), as fsize. Fsize is usually expressed in 512b chunks, so a) check, and b) figure out your upper size requirement in local block size. Our

Re: Login question for Universe/SB+

2004-02-10 Thread Dianne Ackerman
Jason Theis wrote: All, We use UniVerse/NT and SB+. It seems redundant to have to login to UniVerse with a valid user and password, then choose an account, and then login to SB+ with a user and password. What options do we have to avoid this redundant entry. Is there a way to pass the user's

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Dan Fitzgerald
The limit is an old one from Unix having 32-bit addressing. On a system with 32-bit addressing, the limit applied to all files, including backup images (at least to disk - I'm not certain about on tape drives, although I'd assume so). Now, we have 64-bit addressing, so the upper limit is in the

RE: Real Time Data Warehouse

2004-02-10 Thread Tom Firl
I would question how real time the OLAP BI tools are never mind the database. Yes, the real-time requirement is ambiguous. It will be addressed as we flesh out the tactical analysis requirements for the BI tools. I would suspect they are looking for a dashboard solution rather than an

Re: wIntegrate script- dialog box?

2004-02-10 Thread Ian Renfrew
Yes. Execute the script 'example/script/wc.wis'. The STYLE for this script reads: Style WS_CAPTION|WS_POPUP|WS_VISIBLE|WS_SYSMENU|WS_MINIMIZEBOX|WS_GROUP Regards, Ian Renfrew - Original Message - From: Barry Brevik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: U2 list (E-mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:

RE: Real Time Data Warehouse

2004-02-10 Thread Tom Firl
Just for some more background here is the real reason you are having to go through the ETL is so that the users can play with your data using 'standard' BI tools like Cognos against the SQL database ? Yes. Also, what USE is the information going to be put to ?! To be

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Jason Theis
We only use AIX and possibly (at a later date) Linux. JT -Original Message- From: Geoffrey Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 2:41 PM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: RE: 2 gig limits Under HP/UX there are some known bugs with 64-bit files in older

RE: Login question for Universe/SB+

2004-02-10 Thread alfkec
In UD we don't have the VOC/user option so our LOGIN VOC item calls a program. This program takes the user (@logname) and determines the SB user, it then data's the user and password to SB.LOGIN. You could easily apply encryption to the passwords (they are encrypted in DMSECURITY as well). Note,

RE: Real Time Data Warehouse

2004-02-10 Thread Tom Firl
Another possible name for a real-time data warehouse is Operational Data Store (ODS). I'm somewhat familiar with the concept ODS, I don't think it will play a role in this project, but it is on my radar. Any approach to actually porting data to SQL Server, for example, sounds so small

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Stevenson, Charles
... On Behalf Of Dan Fitzgerald You can make larger files, but U2 cannot address them, unless you enable 64-bit addressing UV *mostly* handled 2GB files, but I had trouble enabling them for UV's transaction logging. If I remember, UV used a unix utility - maybe fsync? - that was only

RE: wIntegrate script- dialog box?

2004-02-10 Thread Barry Brevik
Yes. Execute the script 'example/script/wc.wis'. Thank you! I find scripting to very different than universe basic, heh heh. Barry -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users

[OT] Damian Conway on Perl 6 -- February 17 - Melbourne

2004-02-10 Thread Stuart Boydell
Any Melbournian Perl jockies who might be interested in this? Apologies for the off-topic post. - Subject: Fwd: Damian Conway on Perl 6 -- February 17 Tuesday 17 February, 11am WEHI Lecture Theater (http://www.wehi.edu.au/about/locations.html) Parkville Prof Damian Conway School of Computer

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Logan, David (SST - Adelaide)
Hi Dan, We can use filepeek quite happily on our 64bit files. Do you mean uvfixfile? I know that has restrictions and cannot be used on 64bit files. The parameter in the uvconfig file is 64BIT. If this is set to 1, all files are created by default as 64bit files. Regards David Logan Database

RE: Secondary Indices on Distributed Files

2004-02-10 Thread Hona, David S
There's a few postings on this very topic in the archives, such as this from Glenn Herbert... http://www.indexinfocus.com/dl/u2list/200106/15105.html -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 7:37 AM

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Dan Fitzgerald
Yes; I remembered one of those didn't work, and I chose the wrong one. Shoulda fired up my UV server checked first... Our greatest duty in this life is to help others. And please, if you can't help them, could you at least not hurt them? - H.H. the Dalai Lama When buying selling are

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Horn, John
From: Dan Fitzgerald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You can make larger files, but U2 cannot address them, unless you enable 64-bit addressing. The limit is in the unix file /etc/limits (at least on AIX), as fsize. Fsize is usually expressed in 512b chunks, so a) check, and b) figure

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Horn, John
From: Dan Fitzgerald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] will then make the limit a historical curiosity. Or you can use dynamic files (although at the most - with a lot of luck - this gives you 4Gb), What makes you say this? We have some dynamic files that are well over 10-15 gig. They have

Re: Login question for Universe/SB+

2004-02-10 Thread Bruce Lunt
What caught my attention was MYPASSWORD. I assumed (maybe wrongly?) that that was an ASCII string in the VOC. If that can be found by others then my password is not very secure. Or did I misunderstand? R. Bruce Lunt 408.832.1900 cell From: Bruce Lunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: U2 Users

RE: 2 gig limits

2004-02-10 Thread Ken Wallis
From: Horn, John From: Dan Fitzgerald Or you can use dynamic files (although at the most - with a lot of luck - this gives you 4Gb), What makes you say this? We have some dynamic files that are well over 10-15 gig. They have multiple dat files that are all well under the 2 gig limit.

RE: Login question for Universe/SB+

2004-02-10 Thread Stuart Boydell
We use UniVerse/NT and SB+. It seems redundant to have to login to UniVerse with a valid user and password, then choose an account, and then login to SB+ with a user and password. Sure does. SB won't change this I'm guessing because their licencing relies on it. What options do we have to

RE: Login question for Universe/SB+

2004-02-10 Thread Andrew Gissing
One of the prior concerns that R. Bruce Lunt raised was about security - if you set all the SB+ passwords to be the same, you lose that. However, i'd like to add that if you've got users who do not have access to TCL; do not have access to a unix shell; and in effect, once they login can only do