Prev: Why read CLC?
Next: Cobol Netexpress 3.1. XP and W98 Conflicts
From: Robert on 9 Jun 2008 22:24
On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 00:30:05 -0700 (PDT), Rene_Surop <infodynamics_ph(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

>Need help on file status code on MF file status code. Im "writing a
>record to a file" and got the below file status code.
>
>Got an "extended" file status code below;
>02 = status key1
>52 = status key2
>
>While on standard file status code, it is 24.
>
>MF has no relevant documentation of the extended status code, though
>status key1 suggest that the key is duplicated to the declared non-
>duplicate field.... so it means INVALID KEY is executed. So if it
>"duplicated" as it shows it has, the duplicate record is not written,
>BUT the first/original record is supposed to be there right?
>
>But wrong, the duplicated record is NOT written as well. So what is
>file status code "52" then?
>
>Platform:
>Windows 2000 Server
>File category is NTFS
>Using MF Fileshare
>noRAID
>SATA drive
>
>File index structure: IDXFORMAT"4"
>File DAT is 1,048,576KB
>File IDX is 1,387,178KB
>Primary key: 50bytes (no duplicate)
>Second key1: 23bytes (dups)
>Second key2: 19bytes (dups)
>
>The file is working then, but it won't "normally" add a record now (it
>is adding a few records though at random). What's wrong with it?

Go to extfh.cfg and check FILEMAXSIZE. The manual says it defaults to 4 but it defaults to
1 for idxformat"8". If it is not set, try setting it to 4.


From: Rene_Surop on 10 Jun 2008 05:13
The Extfh.cfg file already has this parameters;

[XFH-DEFAULT]
fastread=on
filemaxsize=4
filepointersize=8

But according to MF, putting "filemaxsize=8" will handle DAT file
beyond 1GB. I still need to test it if it really will go beyond 1GB in
size. Im still asking MF is there are complication now (that the file
is created) changing it to parameter value 8.

Hoping it would, at least it adds a few records (or years) to my
historical data.

Thanks for the response Robert.
From: Rene_Surop on 10 Jun 2008 05:21
Another thing concerning IDXFORMAT"8". MF advises this type of index/
file structure for large data because it supports DAT file beyond 2GB.
It doesn't create IDX file... but rather it combines it in the DAT
file.

Tried it before but there is a usual data corruption and it is quite
slow compared to IDXFORMAT"4". Any specific feedback on IDXFORMAT"8"?
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Why read CLC?
Next: Cobol Netexpress 3.1. XP and W98 Conflicts