Re: Table in use message -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Table in use message
From: CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:30:58 -0700
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On 27-Oct-2011 15:23 , Raul A. Jager W. wrote:

Sorry, I misspelled SQL.

CRPence wrote:

I am not sure what QSL is, but again, eliminating the allocation
which leads to the CPF3202 is the key to resolution.

On 27-Oct-2011 13:22 , Raul A. Jager W. wrote:

I get the same messages if I try to add the constraint from QSL.

Arghh. Seems so obvious now... that SQL ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT was tried versus ADDPFCST; with same result.

Might be worth trying the SQL request to ALTER TABLE ADD CONSTRAINT with commitment control active for the SQL request. That is a somewhat different code path than ADDPFCST. See if there is some difference or maybe even success with that path, as compared to the failing ADDPFCST request.

Regards, Chuck

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Table in use message , Raul A. Jager W.

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.