|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
dbzTHEdinosauer
Global Moderator
Joined: 20 Oct 2006
Posts: 6966
Location: porcelain throne
|
|
|
|
and yet another thought.
I imagine that you have not compile/bind your system under 9 since
installing and running on vsn9.
good chance this -312 would have shown-up in pre-compile or
bind at a vsn 9 level.
(obviously the vsn 8 pre-compiler/bind allowed it)
yes, stuff compiled/bind under vsn 8 will run in 9,
but that is based on the fact that the vsn8 sql is good sql.
if it is not, you end-up with runtime negative sql codes.
and I reiterate,
code in CALL's to DSNTIAR for negative SQLCODEs.
it will make solving your problems a lot easier.
and learn to read all of the documentation about each negative SQLCODE.
to have read about a -312 and then respond with
'it is not dynamic or trigger'
indicates you have a long way to go before you are proficient in solving problems.
you need to change the way you go about analyzing problems
and utilizing the information provided. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rohit Umarjikar
Global Moderator
Joined: 21 Sep 2010
Posts: 3051
Location: NYC,USA
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
besides, most sites do testing prior to migration
or are you in the testing phase?
I will be surprised if it has anything to do with GTT. |
Yes, it is only with the GTT same stuff works fine with normal tables.
| Quote: |
imagine that you have not compile/bind your system under 9 since
installing and running on vsn9 |
Yes, one more strange that I found is we had 2 SPs in prod which has the same code as we have discussed, now one of the SP got rebind with V9 and failing with -312 but other one is still bound to V8 but running fine in V9.
Another problem we have faced with GTT is that, in V8 the way we were inserting the data to GTT and eventually GTT has some left outer join with some other tables with cursor.Now that cursor when fetched giving the data in the same way that we did insert but in V9 the order gets changed randomly so every such query we have changed and added additional ORDER BY clause.
| Quote: |
If many, many customers have been caught by the same situation, there may be an IBM workaround or fix available. You need to ask IBM support what choices you might have. |
Yes sure, as of now the code has been changed and CASE statement removed from the SQL. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dick scherrer
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 19244
Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
Hello,
As you have continuing issues with GTT (or something), it would be best to have IBM in the loop and learn if this is something they have seen before and what they have done about it (if anything).
If some developer(s) implemented code that IBM does/did not support, they may answer that the code has to be changed, but maybe they can provide info on situations where this has happened to others. Then you will have a better idea what to look for (rather than having production processes misbehave). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rohit Umarjikar
Global Moderator
Joined: 21 Sep 2010
Posts: 3051
Location: NYC,USA
|
|
|
|
| Thanks Dick. I shall let this get noticed to IBM. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
