× 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.


  1.  Home
  2. MIDRANGE-L
  3. September 2009

Re: Running with LVLCHK *NO in production

As long as -all- the programs were recompiled, and all of them were running properly, you should be able to CHGPF LVLCHK(*YES) [can you do that?], and be right with the world.

This would also protect against that one stray program that had NOT been recompiled, and was lurking for the right moment to wreak havock on your data!

--Paul E Musselman
PaulMmn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


At 1:35 PM -0500 9/5/09, Booth Martin wrote:
Now I am curious... Lets say you use LVLCHK(*NO) in 1998 but for one
reason or another, over the intervening years all the programs that use
that file are recompiled. Does that defuse the time bomb?


Wayne McAlpine wrote:
LVLCHK(*NO) allows you to add fields to the *end* of an existing record
without having to recompile all of the programs that use the record.
I've been guilty of using it on occasion but I agree that it's a time
> bomb when used in a production environment.

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.