RE: SQL Question

[Joe Teff <JoeTeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>I can see this, but, again, design seems to be the issue.  As a user, if I
>were to see an order with 10 items numbered from 127 thru 136, I would 
>think something is quite wrong with the system.  This would most likely
> manifest itself as "... I don't like the new system... ...it just seems
>wrong...
>...even though I can't quite put my finger on what...".

The original query had a where clause checking for odcst = '36000' so
I assumed that is why we can't just check for the lowest seq no = 1 and
didn't bother to ask. Any way, most times we are asked to add or
fix something that someone created, so how it was designed is
irrelevant. I've seen many situations where seq numbers don't start
with 1. In one case, the users were allowed to key thier own seq numbers
and had reserved ranges for different reasons. Good design? Not in
my mind.

Joe Teff
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---