Search results

Sure. And depending on why and how you are doing this one or the other is more useful. I get it, you don't like "wasting" bunches of updates and the associated latches etc that are never going to actually be read. I don't like that either. However - many people do NOT have thousands of...

"Client networking" is only needed if your connections from PASOE to a database are going to be using the -S connection parameter. If they are shared memory connections you do not need client networking.

George said: That depends entirely on your circumstances. Sure, if you have hundreds (or thousands) of remote connections enabling "cachingType = 1" for all of them could be rather painful. ("2" would be even worse...) But if they are all shared memory connections the penalty is pretty...

Lest anyone think that I am on vacation... OpenEdge 11.1 is ancient, obsolete, and unsupported. You should upgrade. All of OE11 is now ancient & obsolete but 11.7 is a much, much better place to be than 11.1. Since you speak of run time arguments you apparently have source code and a compiler...

It can seem like it is almost all that they talk about these days... not that that is different from anyone else! Can I summarize it? No, I'm much too grouchy. But they sure do talk about it a lot. Come to a PUG and learn more!

Granted there isn't much of an argument to be had. Personally, I like to try to get it close to a useful value primarily because I have a utility that does random sampling of tables by randomly generating RECIDs and I can avoid a lot of wasted effort by having a RPB that is a better fit. But...

A table called "wrkfile" strikes me as something that might be worth discussing. Is this a table that contains temporary data? Do you write a bunch of things there, do something, and then eventually delete all of that data? If you do, then that would be something that could benefit quite a lot...

I wouldn't go so far as to say that mean size is "meaningless". Sure, it is not perfect and there are certainly cases where it doesn't work as well as something else. It is, however, readily available and it works reasonably well in many cases. That's worth quite a lot.

I haven’t tried this but… you could try restoring and then running proutil truncate area on the audit area. That’s not quite what you are asking for but it might get you the same result. As Rob says though - you should not be keeping large amounts of audit data in your production instance in...

At a very high level... You cannot migrate to PASOE *after* migrating the database. Classic appserver is NOT available on oe12, thus you must migrate your appservers before or during the migration. You DO NOT want to be doing that for the first time the same weekend that you migrate the...

The database upgrade procedure itself is simple and straightforward. All that you need to do is to run "proutil dbname -C conv1112". Of course, as you note, you need test everything and have backups and and a rollback plan. And a whole lot of that is very specific to your particular...

I'm thinking that there must be some error messages. Perhaps you could consider sharing them?

Thanks for updating the thread and closing the loop!

"Enjoys suffering" = "use PDSOE"? ;)

You are not obligated to use PDSOE to compile. That’s nonsense. Someone has misunderstood something. Progress sells compiler licenses for Linux. So, clearly, it is possible. There are certain things that you sort of, maybe, might, need PDSOE for in development, like generating PAAR files, but...

Did you translate that .lg file somehow or other? There are a LOT of messages whose text is strangely worded.

There is no "if you are using PASOE, change parameters X, Y, and Z like so" guidance. From a database perspective PASOE is just another client. You would make tuning changes to the db based on the planned client configuration and your expected workload - whatever that might be. If the PASOE...

Actually, I think it is good to keep it visible. You asked a question in good faith, showed code and data relevant to the problem, got an answer quickly, and confirmed that the reason was as Peter suggested. That is a very nice example of “doing it right”! We can all learn from that.

It is, of course, important to properly scope transactions but... dash ell, lower case, is not about LOCKS. That would be -L (upper case). Lower case -l is for the "local buffer". This is memory used by variables, workfiles (not temp-tables), and local copies of records...

To me it sounds like you have done “something” that you hope has resulted in replication being enabled. But whatever you did has not worked. Replication is obviously not functioning. Finding out why should be your focus. Start by explaining the steps that you took to enable it and please...