Logical File: CONCAT vs SST

[Ted Barry <TBARRY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I have a client that needs access to our Land Management database.  In
particular our key is assessors parcel number (APN) 3 separate fields
that comprise the APN.  Each field is 6A, so total length of 18.

My problem is the database we're trying to link it to only uses the first 3
pos. of each of those fields (9A total).  The numbers are said to match
up, which I'm not concerned about...

The frustrating thing is the syntax of SST in a logical, according to the
book, the field that I'm SSTing into has to exist in the PFILE.  Am I reading
this correctly?  I could use CONCAT, but don't think this is acceptable to
the client. Why is it that you can create fields using CONCAT, but can't
w/SST?  This seems really stupid and is causing me a major headache. 
I'd hate to have to create another file, just to satisfy my clients
request...Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Ted J. Barry
Programmer/Analyst
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place
Martinez, CA 94553-4392
(925) 229-7389
(925) 676-7211 fax
tbarry@centralsan.dst.ca.us
http://www.centralsan.org
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---