e270a01@hubcap.UUCP (Demetrios Yannakopoulos) (06/08/87)
Try to "INDEX" a file ( not too big -- 2,500 records is enough) using
the option "UNIQUE". I guarantee you the system will die in the middle of
the "INDEX"ing process leaving the screen idle with the (promising) message :
" 50% of the file is indexed...." !!!!!
The file I was using had one-field records (7 characters each) and it had been
created by a (some kind of) random selection from a much larger file.
The only way I could overcome the dead end was by "SORT"ing the file into a new
one and THEN "INDEX"ing "UNIQUE"ly the new file on the same key.....
I have already called Ashton-Tate. They've admitted their error and they'll send
me an updated version. My question is:
Why didn't they notify all the registered users about the bug, instead of
letting us find it the hard (and beleave me: frustrating) way ?????
Demmetrios Yannakopoulos
CPSC Dept
Clemson University
Clemson SCleonard@percival.UUCP (06/09/87)
In article <184@hubcap.UUCP> e270a01@hubcap.UUCP (Demetrios Yannakopoulos) writes: >Try to "INDEX" a file ( not too big -- 2,500 records is enough) using >the option "UNIQUE". I guarantee you the system will die in the middle of >the "INDEX"ing process leaving the screen idle with the (promising) message : >" 50% of the file is indexed...." !!!!! Oh boy! Another one. We finally tracked down a problem involving trashed indexes to the the fact that we had TALK set to OFF during a PACK. The bug shows up at 2048 records. USE file INDEX index SET TALK OFF PACK USE file INDEX index And you get a cute little error message. #^^%#^*^&! You might also try using SET UNIQUE and then indexing on a numeric field. I did this to check on how many different values we were getting in our data (range ~= 1 to 100). From a 20k record file I got 800 entries.... (yes these *are* integers!) -- Leonard Erickson ...!tektronix!reed!percival!leonard CIS: [70465,203] ...!tektronix!reed!percival!!bucket!leonard "I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'. You know... I'd rather be a hacker."