josessegura
New User
Joined: 12 Feb 2015 Posts: 6 Location: México,D.F.
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I'm trying to migrate from CA (7.1) to DFSORT (V1R12), but the result of both is different record level, happens when the keys for those ordered are equal, eg:
instructions in CA
Code: |
DATA NAMES = (ONE, 01.14, CH)
(TWO, 15.10, CH)
SORT FIELDS = (ONE, A, TWO, A) |
When I migrate to DFSORT, is as follows:
Code: |
SORT FIELDS = (01.14, CH, A,
15.10, CH, A) |
the SORTIN the process is as follows:
Code: |
AAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDD4
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCC2
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAFFFFFFFFFFFF3
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEE1
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEE2 |
The result in CA is:
Code: |
AAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDD4
[b]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEE1
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEE2[/b]
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAFFFFFFFFFFFF3
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCC2 |
DFSORT the result is:
Code: |
AAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDD4
[b]AAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEE2
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEEEE1[/b]
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAFFFFFFFFFFFF3
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBCCCCCCCCCC2 |
The system logic is correct in both cases, but the system level record is not the same.
that differences should be?
how I can match the results?
thx
Code'd |
|
enrico-sorichetti
Superior Member
Joined: 14 Mar 2007 Posts: 10873 Location: italy
|
|
|
|
when using DFSORT or any smart sort program
for <duplicate> keys the order is unpredictable,
the workaround for DFSORT is to use OPTION EQUALS
which will for <duplicate> keys preserve the original relative sequence
speak to Your support to find out the defaults for each product, and You will find the why for the different behavior. |
|
Bill Woodger
Moderator Emeritus
Joined: 09 Mar 2011 Posts: 7309 Location: Inside the Matrix
|
|
|
|
A couple of things to add.
Talk to IBM. If you are migrating to DFSORT, the DFSORT team will be happy to assist with questions that arise.
It looks like CA-Sort can define symbols. So can DFSORT. Have a look at SYMNAMES in the documentation, and SYMNOUT which shows the generated symbol table. (I hope that ONE and TWO are only examples for this post...).
All the DFSORT manuals are available online.
1.12 is somewhat dated, you may want to check with IBM about support (or your boss should want to). |
|