RE: Initializing a timestamp field when adding a record

["Dennis Lovelady" <dlovelady@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Vern:

No, fields are not updated by default.  The DFT value only applies when the
record is written (added), and that field is excluded from the present
view.  For updates, only the fields in the current view can be altered.

HTH
Dennis





Vern Hamberg <vhamberg@centerfieldtechnology.com>@midrange.com on
01/14/2003 01:04:18 AM

Please respond to Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
       <midrange-l@midrange.com>

Sent by:    midrange-l-bounces@midrange.com


To:    Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@midrange.com>
cc:
Subject:    RE: Initializing a timestamp field when adding a record


We find this to be exactly the behavior we want for keeping track of
time-dependent matters. It's more accurate (precise?), in my view, than
executing a TIME opcode or gettimeofday() function, then converting to the
right date format, then writing the record. Of course, we don't update it
with "last used", purely for ordering various events by time.

So this is a matter of knowing how the system behaves, using this knowledge
to whatever advantage you see in it.

I suspect that this behavior (default values for unspecified fields in
logicals) has been around for a long time. It's use was news to me, and for
us it is effective.

Now my question is, will an update through the logical file update the
timestamp as well? I doubt it.

Regards

Vern

At 11:12 PM 1/13/03 -0500, you wrote:
>This explanation makes sense; unfortunately, the documentation doesn't.
>
>You don't want the system "helping" you by automatically posting values to
>fields you want to keep "empty" (like timestamp indicating a "last use").
>
>A before trigger is an excellent suggestion but my requirement is simple;
>adding another line of code to the program is the best solution (it
provides
>the desired result with minimal code and no confusion).