View previous topic :: View next topic
|
Author |
Message |
Bharath Nadipally
New User
Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Posts: 22 Location: Hyderabad
|
|
|
|
I am raising this question as I am on bench and dont have access to mainframes to test it.
I have a existing cobol-db2 program, modified the cobol code(not db2 queries), compiled it but dint bind it. If I try to run it, will it give SQLCODE -818 (Timestamp mismatch)? Or It depends on pre-compiler option? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ksk
Active User
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 Posts: 355 Location: New York
|
|
|
|
Gives TIme Stamp Mismatch error. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bharath Nadipally
New User
Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Posts: 22 Location: Hyderabad
|
|
|
|
As I am not doing any DB2 query changes in program, I dont want to bind it again. Is it possible by using any of Pre-compiler options? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dbzTHEdinosauer
Global Moderator
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 Posts: 6966 Location: porcelain throne
|
|
|
|
Quote: |
I dont want to bind it again
|
until you bind it again,
you will continue to receive some time of sql error return code
when you try to execute the module. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ramakrishnag
New User
Joined: 10 Sep 2008 Posts: 6 Location: india
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Bind is not thing but the SQL code internally converting into Cobol code.
So, even you have not done any code changes at DB2 part, still you have to bind once again.
The code will be inserted in during the compilation.
Thanks,
Rama |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dbzTHEdinosauer
Global Moderator
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 Posts: 6966 Location: porcelain throne
|
|
|
|
RAMA,
what you described is the precompiler step.
The bind does not even look at the source or load module. only deals with the dbrm.
it is Pre-compile (build DBRM, insert COBOL code)
compile convert source program to object module
BINDER (know as the linkage-editor) convert OBJECT into EXECUTABLE
DB2 BIND - proofs dbrm against db2 catelog.
pre-compile, compile, linkedit are done without db2 running.
you need db2 to perform a db2 bind.
and no, that is not a definitive list of everything that goes on. but was a little more expansive and correct than what you stated. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|