|
In a message dated 97-09-20 04:31:56 EDT, you write: > DAsmussen@aol.com wrote: > > > Art, > > > > > Got to go with LVLCHK(*NO). Remember to compile all programs that add > > > or update that file. It'll work smooth. > > > > > > Art (seat of my pants) Tostaine, Jr. > > > > Those pants must be awfully tight! ARE YOU NUTS????!!!! How does CHGPF > > alter this over just adding the field and compiling the file (other than > > making sure you save the data)? How does the speed difference between > > compiling the file and using CHGPF make or break taking the customer's > > business? How much MONEY is the customer going to lose because YOU > > missed a program that added to or updated the file? THAT's what LVLCHK is > > FOR!!! > > > They won't lose any money. They'll make more. We got the users off for > 30 minutes at lunch time. There was no time to recompile all of the > programs. They did get recompiled over the weekend, though. As most of us do. So again, what's the big deal? > > If you already know what programs add/update the file, why DON'T you know > > which ones access it at all (HINT: DSPPGMREF to an outfile) If you know > > both, what the heck is the big deal with re-compiling them ALL? Yes database > > changes require careful consideration, but simply adding a field is NOT > > rocket science! > It is for me. I use STRSEU (or PDM option 2) on the DDS, add the field > at the end, then recompile using LVLCHK(*NO). Adding a field is rocket science to you, but LVLCHK(*NO) isn't a problem? I'd say that LVLCHK(*YES) would be more of a requirement in this case than in any other... > > I disagree VEHEMENTLY > > VEHEMENTLY? Are you shouting? Agree or disagree vehemently that the > Clinton is a lousy president (he is), or that Key West has the best > sunsets, but not on LVLCHK(*NO). Go outside or something. The aforementioned examples do not require a shout. Clinton is an agreed example by most, and sunsets are irrelevant (any of the latter that I get to see without being locked inside of the computer room is a good one!). Obviously, LVLCHK requires a little more attention ;-). > > with using LVLCHK(*NO) under ANY circumstances. I'll > > make the same challenge that I did with GOTO > > Oh yeah, the GOTO challenge. Almost as exciting as the If/Then/Else > challenge. I don't recall an If/Then/Else Challenge. Art, this response isn't typical of you! > > -- show me a SINGLE example > > under which it would be valid, and I'll admit my mistake (haven't > > gotten one > > in almost a year on GOTO yet, but you're welcome to try with LVLCHK). > > How 'bout GOTO ENDOFTHISTHREAD? You know that I could join in, but I'll refrain... > > Otherwise, I've still got a couple of customers with S/34's in their > > warehouse that they're trying to get rid of -- ITS database should > > suit you > > just fine...IF you can afford the electricity to run it :-). > > > > Many AS/400 owners are small to medium size companies. They have little > to no MIS staff. Certainly no DBA's. Their computers are wedged in > tight somewhere in their phone closet. It's hot in their offices in the > summer, and cold in the winter. Not everything is perfect. I agree > that a perfect world doesn't use LVLCHK(*NO). I agree that there can be > problems. But in the case that I stated, it was the only way to go. > Guess what? The programs worked, nothing bombed, they landed a new > customer, and I got the job done. Do you think that if I told the > customer that I really can't get the programming changes done today > because it is bad form to use LVLCHK(*NO) they would understand? No, > they would say, "make it happen." I still fail to see how LVLCHK(*NO) aided you. All I want to know is how LVLCHK(*NO) could possibly be of help. I, personally, can see NO benefit. I never used it at small accounts, and I won't allow it at large ones. > Maybe I can use those Sys/34's to heat some of my customers offices in > the winter. > > The largest MIS shop that I've ever worked for (largest MIS shop, not > largest customer) had 8 programmers on staff, and 8 consultants full > time (I was one of the consultants). They had 8 programmers with their > feet up, and 8 consultants working 16 hour days getting the projects > done. I made a fortune. The company as a whole didn't get much done. > They talked about projects in man-years. My customers want > man-minutes. What's the smallest company you've ever worked for? Ever > work without a DBA? Or a system operator? Ever change a ribbon in a > printer because the only other person in the company who knew how to > quit? Until the last two engagements, I've ALWAYS worked without a DBA -- and the DBA's were incompetent at both locations (although the situation has recently improved at my present primary client). I still believe that all but the largest shops have no need of a DBA. In fact, those large shops could do without one as well if they would implement decent standards. At the smallest account that I worked for, myself, the President, and two clerks sat in the same room with the 5362 (with ANCIENT Okidata printer as P1 and a PC/XT as the console). I have several that weren't much larger, but that was the smallest. All of these accounts measure in man-minutes, but I fail to see where LVLCHK(*NO) gains you any -- it can, in fact, COST you quite a few! At my smallest AS/400 account, I used the bookkeepers' terminal (the console) and sat next to their 9404 "C10" model. This is where I learned the AS/400. Amazing that I quit "screwing up" when I wrote a utility to change all of their files BACK to LVLCHK(*YES). The point is, LVLCHK prevents new people coming into an account from "screwing up" programs that are already in place. > Some people are just too passionate about the wrong things. I'm done > with this thread. On to the Gui/Green screen thread. 5250 rules! Have I, perhaps, hit a "sore spot" here? Could it be that you've known using LVLCHK(*NO) to be wrong all this time, and are afraid to admit it? Bringing up my old nemesis, the 5250 data stream, recalls the Southern expression "Guilty dog barks first". Art, I didn't mean to impugn your abilities in any way. I just disagree with LVLCHK(*NO), and was looking for a situation under which it would be valid. Regards, Dean Asmussen Enterprise Systems Consulting, Inc. Fuquay-Varina, NC USA E-Mail: DAsmussen@AOL.COM "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." -- Aristotle +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com". | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com | and specify 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.