View previous topic :: View next topic
|
Author |
Message |
praveenhu
New User
Joined: 23 Jun 2006 Posts: 5
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have a copybook defined for the table. If I add a new field into the table, then I have to change the Copybook definition too right?
After changing the copybook definition should I have to recompile all the cobol codes that use this copybook even though they dont use the new field in the table or copybook?
Thanks in advance... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dick scherrer
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 23 Nov 2006 Posts: 19244 Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
Hello,
Why do you believe this is a db2 question?
A copybook is a copybook. . .
If a change was made "in the middle", everything that uses the copybook will need to be recompiled - and the data may need to be adjusted. If something new was added at the "end", only code using the addition(s) might need to be recompiled. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dbzTHEdinosauer
Global Moderator
Joined: 20 Oct 2006 Posts: 6966 Location: porcelain throne
|
|
|
|
Hi Dick,
your confusion stems from the lack of proper terminology by the TS.
I am assuming the following translation is correct
(or the following corrected text is a true definition of the TS's question)
assumed problem description/question
- adding a new column to a table.
- will have a new dclgen
- do I have to propagate this new dclgen even to modules that will not reference the new column?
even though this question has been asked and answered 10 times in the last year,
with the terminology used by the TS
he could never find the threads with a search. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dick scherrer
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 23 Nov 2006 Posts: 19244 Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
Hi Dick,
Quote: |
your confusion stems from the lack of proper terminology by the TS. |
Yup, quite possibly. . .
I tried to answer "kinda generically" and wait and see if Praveen would reply. . .
Maybe later
d |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|