Re: 6.1 Create Index - Format Level Identifier

On 09-Jun-2010 18:08, Crispin wrote:

<<SNIP>>

Given that the V5R4 PTFs dealt with TABLE and INDEX (DDL) do
you think it's possible that the RCDFMT addition at 6.1 was
not taken into account?

From the described, though without actual sources, I would infer there is probably a defect versus a usage problem.

In prior releases there was no possibility for the SQL INDEX to have anything other than a shared record format; i.e. the record format for an SQL INDEX always would be defined as a redirection to the PF over which it was created. Having excluded the SQL INDEX from any corrective actions on the Level Identifier for that type of database *FILE would not have been an issue.

It is possible that the QDBCRTFI changes in prior releases to /correct/ the specific condition for the improper inclusion of the DATE, TIME, and TIMESTAMP separator in the calculation of the FmtLvlID hash, accidentally excludes the SQL INDEX file attribute even after the enhancement to describe a new record format for the INDEX with the RCDFMT clause. That supposes the various QSQCRTxx interfaces also were never updated to specify the /correct/ [i.e. consistent with the DDS] separator definition for those data types... although perhaps memory does not serve me correctly, and it was the DDS which had the defect but the SQL was changed to match because SQL does not care about the RcdFmtLvlID.

Regards, Chuck