Re: (Date/Time fields in DB file)

I differ. Not that I can recall the last time I fired up WRKMBRPDM, and
STRPDM has been years, but PDM allows you to create user defined options
you could bury RUNSQLSTM in.

I'll grant you that I'm not sure that V4R5 supports CREATE OR REPLACE TABLE.

And DDL without CREATE OR REPLACE has a different paradigm where you often
just use ALTER TABLE vs recreating it. If you want the raw DDL recreated
as you're not sure if the existing DDL is in sync with reality there are
APIs to generate the DDL from the table. I thought there was a GEN*
command but I'm not finding it.

Funny you mention CHGPF with DDS. How many still run into people who
weren't aware that has been supported for decades and they still run into
people who create a new table and copy everything into it from the old
version?

On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 6:41 PM Patrik Schindler <poc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello Rob,

Am 10.08.2023 um 21:36 schrieb Rob Berendt <robertowenberendt@xxxxxxxxx>:

Here's the problem: "... an existing database file (DDS)".
Quit that. Use SQL's DDL instead. DDL will allow you to default new

columns to current date, etc. DDS will NOT. Sure, you can add triggers
and stuff but that isn't really DDS, is it?

You are correct about DDS lacking helpful features compared to SQL[1].
However, the convenience of DDS being a sole source for generating the
table object, and recreating that object is a matter of typing 14 beneath
the source member in PDM (or bringing the source member and the PF in sync
with chgpf) appears to me superior compared to SQL. I think this fact might
be especially important for developers with testing environments.

I have not yet found out how to get a textual table definition with pure
5250 tools, that I can just shove through runsqlstm to regenerate an SQL
table equally easily, compared to DDS.

Manual adjustment of a text member becomes hairy when one forgets to a) do
it and b) the syntax of table alteration is different than the one for
creating it (and beingg the content of the text member) which creates more
possibilities to fail at a future point in time. Thus, this is not a viable
solution for (at least) me.


[1] With my V4R5 box, the number of helpful features compared to DDS is
equally low as my motivation to "let go" of DDS. ;-)

:wq! PoC



--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.