Re: CPF5090 - unexplicable (or is it)?

A unique key doesn't have to be enforced by a logical...

do a DSPFD, look at the constraints section:
Constraint Description
Unique Constraint
Constraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : CST
Q_CTSC_W_TESTCMW_MYKEY_00001
Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : TYPE *UNIQUE
Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : KEY MYKEY
Number of fields in key . . . . . . . : 1
Key length . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 10

HTH,
CHarles


On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Åke Olsson <ake.olsson@xxxxxx> wrote:

We have a heavily used file with 8 logicals attached. None of the logicals is coded "unique". The system is on v6r1.

DSPDBR shows no other relations than these same 8.

All of a sudden any write operation to the file fails with a CPF5090 (indicating unique key violation). There is plenty of space for more records as the file has been reorged recently.

There have been no restores of the file.

The problem was that the file is very much key in many processes so we had to shut everything down at peak time for half an hour so that we could create a fresh file (compile) and copy data from the old file.

Has anyone else experienced this situation? Explanations?

PS
We know that ops have at times been a bit behind in applying ptf:s for the op.sys. Is there a known ptf for this problem?
DS

Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards

Åke H Olsson

--
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.