Re: D-spec using the same file name twice

[Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Which is _precisely_ why you should use Commitment Control for this  
kind of situation. It keeps the logic simple and guarantees that you  
can never get half and update.

Not getting at you personally, but I never understand why folks are so  
reluctant to use it.  The performance issue was valid in an S/38 world  
and even early AS/400 but not these days. I once worked with a client  
who refused to implement CC because it was "too expensive" but freely  
admitted that his staff spent hours each month writing fix-up routines  
to deal with problems left behind by partial updates. I pointed out  
that even ignoring the labour and CPU spent compiling fix-up routines  
etc. that just the restores and re-running of batch updates etc. more  
than ate up any "saving" but I never did convince him.


Jon Paris

www.Partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com



On 18-Nov-09, at 9:22 AM, rpg400-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> But good old Mister Murphy and his law stipulates that at some point  
> in
> time, THIS WILL HAPPEN. I know, I speak from experience.
> Obviously if someone can see a hole in my thought pattern, I will  
> always
> listen to their point of view. I'm no genius. Speak to my wife.