help with tables
in [Cobol]
|
Prev: oracle10g SQLBEX giving 114 with Oracle Dynamic SQL Method 4(ora9 works well)
Next: compile+link Fujitsu Linux
From: William M. Klein on 1 Feb 2008 15:25 "Robert" <no(a)e.mail> wrote in message news:mkj3q3pmtvmn64pjnhk0s3mfcgplas1hcs(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:26:34 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: > >>In article <gfl2q319rd84spnb10q3f9huuvjq2254f9(a)4ax.com>, >>Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: >>>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:37:24 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: >>> >>>>In article <bav1q3t26jjt26156j9eh4lpp1ivtot9a0(a)4ax.com>, >>>>Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: <snip> >> >>Now think of expanding your experience, Mr Wagner... and imagine that the >>TEST TEAM (caps original) makes a copy of their documentation... and >>returns it (in exchange for a signature, of course), to the programmer... > > Tests plans and results, along with all other project documentation, reside in > a framework > repository that's accessible to everyone. There is no reason to print them > out. > >>who brings this stack o' foolscap along when he sits down with other folks >>at a Prod Implementation meeting. > > Our meetings are held in cyberspace using NetMeeting or similar. Participants > are all over > the world; they are not sitting in a room. > > Moreover, the development team is often disbanded before the project goes to > production. > There is no reason for a programmer to be the project's advocate; that's the > job of > project managers. > Let me get this stratight, you are saying the development team gets disbanded BEFORE the application has made it thru testing (by the testing team). No wonder that shop uses contractors, their management is REALLY screwed up. <G> -- Bill Klein wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
From: Robert on 1 Feb 2008 18:57 On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:25:13 GMT, "William M. Klein" <wmklein(a)nospam.netcom.com> wrote: > >"Robert" <no(a)e.mail> wrote in message >news:mkj3q3pmtvmn64pjnhk0s3mfcgplas1hcs(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:26:34 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: >> >>>In article <gfl2q319rd84spnb10q3f9huuvjq2254f9(a)4ax.com>, >>>Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: >>>>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:37:24 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf(a)panix.com () wrote: >>>> >>>>>In article <bav1q3t26jjt26156j9eh4lpp1ivtot9a0(a)4ax.com>, >>>>>Robert <no(a)e.mail> wrote: ><snip> >>> >>>Now think of expanding your experience, Mr Wagner... and imagine that the >>>TEST TEAM (caps original) makes a copy of their documentation... and >>>returns it (in exchange for a signature, of course), to the programmer... >> >> Tests plans and results, along with all other project documentation, reside in >> a framework >> repository that's accessible to everyone. There is no reason to print them >> out. >> >>>who brings this stack o' foolscap along when he sits down with other folks >>>at a Prod Implementation meeting. >> >> Our meetings are held in cyberspace using NetMeeting or similar. Participants >> are all over >> the world; they are not sitting in a room. >> >> Moreover, the development team is often disbanded before the project goes to >> production. >> There is no reason for a programmer to be the project's advocate; that's the >> job of >> project managers. >> >Let me get this stratight, you are saying the development team gets disbanded >BEFORE the application has made it thru testing (by the testing team). It's normal practice in ALL big companies where I've worked. There's no reason to keep a team of developers who have nothing to do for two months. They do keep one or two, called 'fix it team', to fix defects found during testing. By the same principle, they don't convene a test team until a week before testing begins. >No wonder that shop uses contractors, their management is REALLY screwed up. <G> Contractors and employees both charge their time to project and activity codes. Each code has a staffing budget. The reason companies use contractors is not necessarily screwed up management, the reason is bureaucracy. The bigger the company, the more time employees spend in nonproductive meetings. It gets to the point where they don't have time to do their jobs. They can handle routine maintenance, but not maintenance PLUS significant change. Meetings cannot be cancelled because no single person is responsible for calling nor approving them. Most meeting time gets charged to ongoing maintenance. When time spent on 'maintenance' becomes excessive, the application becomes a candidate for outsourcing. Last week, my system and a dozen others was outsourced for $100M/yr, a 20% saving to the company. The outsource company deducts 20% profit, does the same work with (a) 60% of the people or (b) the same number of people earning 60% as much. How? Mostly by eliminating time-wasting meetings, including Team Building events. The losers are (a) 40% of former employees or (b) 90% of former employees with a corresponding win for programmers in India.
From: Robert on 1 Feb 2008 19:12 On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:42:31 -0700, "Frank Swarbrick" <Frank.Swarbrick(a)efirstbank.com> wrote: >>>> On 1/30/2008 at 8:25 PM, in message ><med2q3hfb6vi8gbtvf436o07sr4k1jg0n5(a)4ax.com>, Robert<no(a)e.mail> wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:55:18 +0000, Frederico Fonseca >> <real-email-in-msg-spam(a)email.com> >> wrote: >>>...... >>> PROCEDURE.... >>> exec sql >>> FETCH NEXT CURSOR-X >>> into :T2-NAME, :T2-DEPT >>> for 100 rows >>> end-exec >>> >>>It seems that Windows/Unix versions do not allow multiple fetch/insert >>>rows. Pitty. >> >> Hard to believe. I think the non-singleton select caused the error. > >You're welcome to try it yourself, or at least provide an example that you >think would work and I could try it. Change the select to: EXEC SQL DECLARE C1 CURSOR FOR select name, dept from table2 where name in (select distinct name from test.table1) END-EXEC. EXEC SQL OPEN C1 END-EXEC. EXEC SQL FETCH FIRST C1 INTO :TABLE2-ENTRY FOR 100 ROWS END-EXEC. EXEC SQL CLOSE C1 END-EXEC.
From: Robert on 1 Feb 2008 19:17 On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:56:10 -0700, "Frank Swarbrick" <Frank.Swarbrick(a)efirstbank.com> wrote: > SQL0060W The "COBOL" precompiler is in progress. > 19 SQL0008N The token "occurs" found in a host variable > declaration is not valid. > 51 SQL0306N The host variable "TABLE2-ENTRY" is undefined. > SQL0095N No bind file was created because of previous > errors. > SQL0091W Precompilation or binding was ended with "3" > errors and "0" warnings. > >I also tried this and got the same error > 05 table2-entry occurs 100. > >Now of course you can remove the occurs, but then you're stuck with fetching >one row at a time. > >I see no way to do a multi row (at once) fetch using DB2/LUW. > >More thoughts would be welcome. I believe this will work for sure: 05 table2-entry. 10 t2-name pic x(30) occurs 100. 10 t2-dept pic x(04) occurs 100. fetch t2_curs into :t2-name, :t2-dept
From: Frank Swarbrick on 1 Feb 2008 19:27
>>> On 1/31/2008 at 5:17 PM, in message <c3p4q3tji85k6tegudomp2k4f4bmtk744o(a)4ax.com>, Robert<no(a)e.mail> wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:56:10 -0700, "Frank Swarbrick" > <Frank.Swarbrick(a)efirstbank.com> > wrote: > >> SQL0060W The "COBOL" precompiler is in progress. >> 19 SQL0008N The token "occurs" found in a host variable >> declaration is not valid. >> 51 SQL0306N The host variable "TABLE2-ENTRY" is undefined. >> SQL0095N No bind file was created because of previous >> errors. >> SQL0091W Precompilation or binding was ended with "3" >> errors and "0" warnings. >> >>I also tried this and got the same error >> 05 table2-entry occurs 100. >> >>Now of course you can remove the occurs, but then you're stuck with > fetching >>one row at a time. >> >>I see no way to do a multi row (at once) fetch using DB2/LUW. >> >>More thoughts would be welcome. > > I believe this will work for sure: > > 05 table2-entry. > 10 t2-name pic x(30) occurs 100. > 10 t2-dept pic x(04) occurs 100. > > fetch t2_curs > into :t2-name, :t2-dept Nope. I tried that one too. LINE MESSAGES FOR tabtest.sqb ------ -------------------------------------------------------------------- SQL0060W The "COBOL" precompiler is in progress. 21 SQL0314N The host variable "t2-name" is incorrectly declared. 22 SQL0314N The host variable "t2-dept" is incorrectly declared. 20 SQL4007N The host structure "table2-entry" has no fields. 18 SQL4007N The host structure "table2-area" has no fields. 51 SQL0104N An unexpected token "t2_curs" was found following "<identifier>". Expected tokens may include: "INTO". SQL0095N No bind file was created because of previous errors. SQL0091W Precompilation or binding was ended with "6" errors and "0" warnings. Frank |