Re: SQL Filling Job Log

[Vernon Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Kurt

Thanks for taking the time to say more - I had not connected with the 
idea that this is a test environment.

Vern

On 6/7/2013 4:05 PM, Anderson, Kurt wrote:
> "I must admit to a bit of surprise at the notion of using STRDBG to prevent updates to production files. I hope I stated that rightly - I'd have to find your original post, again, to see if this is in a true production setting, where I see no need for this - so I must be confused!!!"
>
> I was hoping the thread wouldn't deviate down this path.  ;)    I'm well aware that people view this method of testing as subpar.  Can't say I disagree.  But that's the current state of things.  With no system administrator and being short-staffed (aren't we all), I don't see this changing any time soon.   Not all of our testing is done like this.
>
> Essentially it's a situation where the libl looks like this:
>
> myLib - contains some files that will be updated
> client's Lib - contains all of the clients files, including some I will be using as input-only
> other libs
>
> We do have specific test environments where the client's files are copied into a test library so the client's library isn't in the library list at all.  I've done a decent job promoting that method of testing, although we don't test 100% like that yet.  So our Test CL's all start out by issuing STRDBG to prevent updating of production files.
>
> -Kurt