Hi John
How did you update the file?
Its been a while since I looked into using VARLEN fields, but according to
my memory, the size of the field is in fact an extra 25 characters (I
think) more than the number of characters in the field
Saying that, it should still be less than the original
Alan Shore
Programmer/Analyst, Distribution
E:AShore@xxxxxxxxxxx
P:(631) 200-5019
C:(631) 880-8640
"If you're going through Hell, keep going" - Winston Churchill
"John Allen"
<jallen@xxxxxxxxx
om> To
Sent by: "'Midrange Systems Technical
midrange-l-bounce Discussion'"
s@xxxxxxxxxxxx <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
11/25/2009 03:53 Subject
PM Another Question about variable
length fields
Please respond to
Midrange Systems
Technical
Discussion
<midrange-l@midra
nge.com>
Maybe I am misunderstanding the variable length field concept.
I thought it could reduce my file size??
OK, I have a physical file with a field that has fixed length of 256
I change the file to have variable length field 1028 and the allocated
length of 30.
Most of the records have 0 - 10 bytes of data in the field (I may reduce
allocated size to 10)
I then updated the file so that the new file with the new variable length
field has data truncated to minimum length (stripped off trailing blanks)
I then compare the file size (using DSPOBJD) and the new file with the
variable length field is quite a bit larger then the old file with the
fixed
length field.
I expected to see a smaller object size?
Or am I looking in the wrong place to compare the before and after sizes?
John
--
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.
midrange.com
