Re: JT400 Record-level access problem -- JAVA400-L

Subject: Re: JT400 Record-level access problem
From: CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 10:53:51 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/java400-l>
List-help: <mailto:java400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Java Programming on and around the IBM i <java400-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:java400-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/java400-l>, <mailto:java400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/java400-l>, <mailto:java400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On 19 Oct 2012 10:46, CRPence wrote:

I suppose a likely problem origin is for use of CCSID 37 instead of
FOR BIT DATA; the collation [Sort Sequence] would be moot for the
kind of issue I am thinking of. <<SNIP>>

Actually the use of CHAR, even with FOR BIT DATA, would likely suffer the same type of problem I alluded. That is to suggest, even the declaration of CHAR FOR BIT DATA is still "character-string" data for which the blank-pad character changes between encoding choices ASCII vs EBCDIC. Thus I presume the data type to support 8-byte unsigned integer *must* be BINARY... which I expect the database key processing *must* *never* infer any pad-character to be used for comparisons.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

RE: JT400 Record-level access problem , Dan Kimmel

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.