Search results

Do you specify the -H value on the sqlexp (the linux DB Server name)?

Hi , trying to connect to a linux DB from a Windows computer => Error establishing socket to host and port: localhost:#####. Reason: Connection refused: connect Do you specify the -H value on the sqlexp (the linux DB name)? Patrice

Hi, Have you set a particular word-rules for your DB ? There is the parameter -ttwrdrul which sepcify the word-rules for the temp-table in your session . Patrice

FILE-INFO:FILE-NAME = cipDir . IF FILE-INFO:FULL-PATHNAME <> ? AND INDEX(FILE-INFO:FILE-TYPE, "D") > 0 THEN //The input directory is valid Else // The input directory is NOT valid

It rings me a bell when you use a browse in the UIB you could have {&OPEN-QUERY-BROWSE-2} Which is related to the browse browse-2 define several lines above in your code /* Definitions for BROWSE BROWSE-2 */ &Scoped-define FIELDS-IN-QUERY-BROWSE-2...

You can also test if the new order find (order2 in the do while) is in the list of the previous order (cCombinedOrder). The Marco's N value is still interresting to avoid the error on 32K.

Rob is correct. It could be interresting for you to use the Temp-table to avoid this side effect. have a look at the source code attached , I did not test it , but it could be a clue / starting point

It is up yo you... It could be display or output, it depends of your needs

Hi You could have a look at source code attached . I am not able to insert it in the post as code . Patrice

Hi, You should store/record the cCombinedOrder and set it to "" after each "Do while " <code> DEFINE BUFFER order2 FOR order. DEFINE VARIABLE iOrderDetail as INTEGER INITIAL 0. DEFINE VARIABLE cCombinedOrder as CHAR INITIAL "". define temp-table tt No-undo field first-order as INTEGER...

HI You have a bug In this line "FIND order2 NO-LOCK WHERE Order.Number = iOrderDetail NO-ERROR." You should have "FIND order2 NO-LOCK WHERE Order2.Number = iOrderDetail NO-ERROR. " Patrice

Hi I notice several potential performance issue on code like "for each ttcustomer where not ttcustomer.found" . Even if there is an index on the field found , the request will not use it = > Whole-Index. You should have "for each ttcustomer where ttcustomer.found = false" You could have a...

You can also try this code , you will have no read on orderline but 100 on its index. <code>def var ii as int no-undo. def var iord as int no-undo. do ii = 1 to 100 : for each order no-lock where...

The request stops to read the index and the records when the value of this index does not respect the value of the index you specify For example ; for each order where custnum = 10 no-lock , the process will stop to read the data when it find an index with custnum > 10 for each customer...

Hi , It is OK that you read one index more than records on each part of your query (the last one , to show it does match your index key) 83 records on customer => 84 read on index 207 order + 83 request => 290 read on index 873 orderline + 207 request => 1080 read on index. If the read on...

Hi I have some issue with high -n on older release of Progress when the "-shmsegsize " was too small. Could you try to start your db with the line below proserve sports -S 13000 -n 1606 -Mn 42 -Mpb 40 -Ma 32 -Mi 5 -shmsegsize 2G -minport 18500 -maxport 22000

Hi , I have no issue with "-Mn 42 -Mpb 40 -Ma 40" . proserve dbnewdb -N TCP -S 4.... -n 1606 -Mn 42 -Mpb 40 -Ma 40 -Mi 5 OpenEdge Release 10.2B0830 as of Mon Feb 16 03:35:45 EST 2015 09:26:47 BROKER The startup of this database requires 70Mb of shared memory. Maximum segment size is...

Hi , Ron, i do not think this is your case (CDC was considered at length but it caused problems for us), but others could be interresting to know this If you are not avail on the record creates , instead of doing. Create newrecord. Buffer-copy sourcerecord to newrecord. You could do...

Hi Ron You can also do the buffer-copy and the assign in 1 code line "BUFFER-COPY X TO Y ASSIGN Y.Seq = ti-NextSeq ." (without "." between them). So all the fields are assigned in the same instruction. Depending of your OE version , it could be faster . Only 1 index create instead of 1 index...

Hi I think there is no update between ( i assume this WHERE find-customer.cust-num instead of WHERE customer.cust-num) FIND FIRST find-customer WHERE find-customer.cust-num = 1 NO-ERROR. and FIND CURRENT find-customer NO-LOCK. because you use a Shared-lock (no lock option)...