× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Hi Frank,

Whether using journaling or a trigger, you get the same thing: a before and
after value, and you write the value to a file.  Using journal receivers,
you build all your logic into one processing program which has to be managed
operationally; with triggers, you build logic into each trigger program and
risk some performance degradation.

I don't believe the results will be different depending upon which approach,
trigger or journal receiver, you use.  It's about implementation, stability,
and performance. 

You're correct about object authority controlling receiver deletions.

Fortunately, I don't have to make a decision right away; I'm still
uncommitted to a particular approach.

My thanks to you and the rest of the Group for your contributions!

-rf

> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Frank.Kolmann@xxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 6:30 PM
> To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Fastest way to get a unique identifier/tracking column
> changes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Reeve,
> 
> As I am using journalling I must address this crimp.
> Surely when a user wants to know what changes have happened to this
> customer or this product this does not equate to what changes have
> happened to a row in a table.  Is this a case of the classic childs swing
> 'what the user really wanted' vs
> 'what the engineer designed'  vs
> 'what was actually built'
> If I cannot address the 'really wanted' issues with journals then I
> must reconsider.  Even if the 'primary key' changes in a record
> 'God forbid' I believe I will be able to track this with sufficient
> rigor using journals.  Issues such as a programmer or operater deleting
> revceivers can be readily address using object security.
> What am I missing.
> 
> Frank Kolmann
> 
> >date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:12:19 -0400
> >from: "Reeve" <news@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >Note on using journals: Table/member/RRN is an inspired thought (even
> >though I don't use multi-member files for mission-critical functions),
but
> >there are still a lot of programmers and operations managers determined
> to
> >reorganize files whenever possible (i.e. you're not looking).  If V5R3
> >reorg-while-active physically changes the RRN (which I assume it
> does),
> >that puts a crimp in the journal receiver solution.
> >
> >-rf
> 
> --
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
> list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.