Search results

You could try using the -vs parameter to specify the tape volume size, though I must confess I have never seen this behaviour in Progress.

CAVEAT - V9 and below! In your DLC directory where Progress is installed there will be a series of files with the name "newkw*". The one called newkywd will contain the keywords that have been introduced since the most recent version.

Two machine - 1 Client - 1 Server. Client 1GB Ram Locally installed copy of Progress Client Networking. 1 CPU Server. As a general rule, this is where the money goes! As much much memory as you can afford. As many spindles as you can squeeze into the chassis. At least 2 CPUs...

Q. Advantages in having all extents of Approximately equal size? A. The DBA can say "I have 43 extents of 200MB each so my database is roughly 8.6GB. That's about all! Q. Is there any reason to limit an extent to 2GB A. History! Is there any reason to make it bigger than 2GB? I don't think...

You always ask the interesting ones Ron! THIS IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION!! To increase the percentage of BIW writes, go into the R&D options of Promon and start tinkering with the BIW tuning options. Whether or not this will help is a matter of trial and error. I've never found it necessary to...

Ok - Let me get this straight. You have taken tables that were in 5 seperate databases and put them all into 1 database. Now performance is suffering, but you have not changed the structure or indexing of each database. Suggestions. 1. Did you add all the space from the -B in the 5 old...

It's called no-lock in Progress. Not quite the same thing, as it will only show you the data before the transaction commenced, but it will allow you to read records that are locked.

OK - Lets see if we can help you out a bit. Rule 1. The only thing about BI size that matters is that it shouldn't "just keep growing". There is no rule 2 (except on older versions on Progress where 2GB was the hard limit for BI size) Tuning the BI. You should be aiming for checkpoints...

Hi You'll probably do better with this query on either the DB Admin section or the ODBC section. It sounds like either a) There is no ODBC started for the databases b) Cyberquery doesn't know where to find the ODBC connection. Toby

Presuming you are using the 4GL client rather than the SQL client... It's not so much that both want the same table, its that both want the same record. find <table-name> exclusive-lock where <field> = <criteria> and .... NO-WAIT no-error. The NO-WAIT tells the program not to stop if...

There are various tools to re-organise the data and indices, some of which are Version Dependant. Check under Database Administration Utilities in the Database Admin Guide and Reference.

First - you need to be able to get into the progress editor. next - in your start script (to get into the editor) you need to declare an enviornment variable called PROPATH and set it to the directories where the source code is. in your editor you type compile <program-name> save...

FWIW, my personal favourite is function Get_Last_Day returns DATE (input v-date as date): def var v-last as date no-undo. assign v-last = (date(month(v-date), 28, year(v-date)) + 4) v-last = v-last - day(v-last). return v-last. end. Short, sharp and uses...

Try chr(9) which is a TAB. I've found this to be the most useful one!

The next User Group meeting is announced below but first some important news from our August meeting. At the August User Group meeting, new committee members were elected for the new year and they are: President Nigel Allen - Prosmart Treasurer Toby Harman - Morningstar...

Yup - You should be able to read from a standard file and redirect output to a standard file. On Unix it would be comething like promon dbname < commands.file > Log.file

Restore from the backup you took immediately prior... There is no other way really. If your delta did not contain any DROP commands then you can just change your ADD commands to DROPs, but it will not give you the same CRC as you had before...

Ok- I'm still a little confused - RAID1+0 - 7 drives... I suppose one could be a spare.... I still think that the figure of 100 is sufficiently close to a single spindle write speed that it makes me wonder! What I would be tempted to do is recreate the arrays as three mirror pairs (RAID 1)...

Head over to www.peg.com and search the DBA archive there for Linux Benchmark comments. The other place that may be of interest is the "bunker" that was set up to do benchmarking of various O/S by some luminaries of the Progress world. Have a look at www.myfloridacottage.com/benchmark.html

So which is it cmm? Your first post indicates RAID7 and your last indicates RAID1+0... I still believe this is an I/O problem and is due to the number of writes per second the bi file can make. You can try increasing bibufs, -Mf, bi block size and bi cluster size and this may help.