Format difference in 11.2 and 11.5 incremental DF? - OpenEdge RDBMS - Forum

All Replies

Posted by Libor Laubacher on 25-Feb-2015 08:46

This loads fine in 11.5 (at least on Linux64).

I am talking about the MeterSiteChargePerioed table, as I had to take everything (drop/update on existing objects) else out since I don’t have the ‘master’ .df.

[collapse]

From: James Palmer [mailto:bounce-jdpjamesp@community.progress.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 1:37 PM
To: TU.OE.RDBMS@community.progress.com
Subject: [Technical Users - OE RDBMS] Format difference in 11.2 and 11.5 incremental DF?

Format difference in 11.2 and 11.5 incremental DF?

Thread created by James Palmer

We're testing 11.5 and hit up against a problem. We applied schema changes to our 11.2.1 production system at the weekend and now I want to apply those to our 11.5 test system so I can test that the rcode from 11.2.1 works ok with an 11.5 DB. Unfortunately the df generated in 11.2.1 will not apply in 11.5. Errors below. I've also attached the df. Anyone got any ideas? I'm going to raise a support request too, but just in case anyone's come across this am posting here too. delta.df

2015/02/25 12:18:11.511+00:00 [hobt1.ICMASLIV] load database definitions - delta.df:Request start

2015/02/25 12:18:11.511+00:00 [hobt1.ICMASLIV] load database definitions - delta.df:Save definitions start

2015/02/25 12:18:14.780+00:00 [hobt1.ICMASLIV] load database definitions - delta.df:Request failed

Error message:

"Error occurred during load of data definitions. "

Additional messages:

"** Error during ADD TABLE MeterSiteChargePeriod **"

"Invalid table attribute"

Stop receiving emails on this subject.

Flag this post as spam/abuse.

[/collapse]

Posted by James Palmer on 25-Feb-2015 08:51

Thanks Libor. I'm having to load it through OEM. I wonder if that's the problem?

Posted by James Palmer on 25-Feb-2015 09:02

I've managed to get it to load through a CHUI session (-rx for the win!) and it loads fine so it's a limitation with OEM.

Posted by Robert Lee on 25-Feb-2015 09:07

James did you contact Tech Support as well? It's important to see what the might be causing the issue in OEM. [mention:89fc5d694d9c44e28801ce6a5d07a449:e9ed411860ed4f2ba0265705b8793d05] can someone on the OEM side look into this?

Posted by Libor Laubacher on 25-Feb-2015 09:08

It loads fine in OEM too.

The only limitation IMO is that it won’t let you know it loaded it, so I went to load it again, and got the very same error as you have, but the tables was already in the database.

[collapse]

From: James Palmer [mailto:bounce-jdpjamesp@community.progress.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 4:03 PM
To: TU.OE.RDBMS@community.progress.com
Subject: RE: [Technical Users - OE RDBMS] Format difference in 11.2 and 11.5 incremental DF?

RE: Format difference in 11.2 and 11.5 incremental DF?

Reply by James Palmer

I've managed to get it to load through a CHUI session (-rx for the win!) and it loads fine so it's a limitation with OEM.

Stop receiving emails on this subject.

Flag this post as spam/abuse.

[/collapse]

Posted by Libor Laubacher on 25-Feb-2015 09:16

But again, I only have the modified .df …

[collapse]

From: Libor Laubacher [mailto:bounce-llaubach@community.progress.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 4:09 PM
To: TU.OE.RDBMS@community.progress.com
Subject: RE: [Technical Users - OE RDBMS] Format difference in 11.2 and 11.5 incremental DF?

RE: Format difference in 11.2 and 11.5 incremental DF?

Reply by Libor Laubacher

It loads fine in OEM too.

The only limitation IMO is that it won’t let you know it loaded it, so I went to load it again, and got the very same error as you have, but the tables was already in the database.

[collapse]

RE: Format difference in 11.2 and 11.5 incremental DF?

Reply by James Palmer

I've managed to get it to load through a CHUI session (-rx for the win!) and it loads fine so it's a limitation with OEM.

Stop receiving emails on this subject.

Flag this post as spam/abuse.

Stop receiving emails on this subject.

Flag this post as spam/abuse.

[/collapse][/collapse]

Posted by James Palmer on 25-Feb-2015 09:16

[mention:d39d270254ab4fc296a4a954c69cd6cd:e9ed411860ed4f2ba0265705b8793d05] Yes I've got a case on the go. Case#: 00305031

[mention:44a028c96ca44788b729e5185220e84a:e9ed411860ed4f2ba0265705b8793d05] Interesting that it loads ok for you in OEM. It loaded ok in Data Admin so therefore can't have loaded successfully in OEM for me.

Tech support have a full df and st of the db prior to the change and the incremental df so should hopefully be able to replicate. I'm not at liberty to divulge the full st/df here,.

Posted by Marek Bujnarowski on 25-Feb-2015 09:26

Yes, the "official" case with full material is under scrutiny as well. I'll post the final conclusion as soon as investigation is over...

Posted by James Palmer on 25-Feb-2015 09:30

Thanks for your assistance [mention:f20304bb0b2f43cfb86a93dcfab76681:e9ed411860ed4f2ba0265705b8793d05]

Posted by Robert Lee on 25-Feb-2015 10:30

James, Marek and Libor, thanks for you help on this. We'll watch for an Issue and work with the OEM team if needed.

Posted by Marek Bujnarowski on 25-Feb-2015 10:54

Thanks Robert....

In such a case here's the short update in this thread:

So far I'm unable to reproduce it. The load of the same delta works as expected in my case:

2015/02/25 16:53:20.691+01:00 [vmbujnaro6.icmasliv] load database definitions - delta.df:Request start

2015/02/25 16:53:20.691+01:00 [vmbujnaro6.icmasliv] load database definitions - delta.df:Save definitions start

2015/02/25 16:53:23.200+01:00 [vmbujnaro6.icmasliv] load database definitions - delta.df:Save definitions complete

2015/02/25 16:53:26.200+01:00 [vmbujnaro6.icmasliv] load database definitions - delta.df:Save schemas start

2015/02/25 16:53:26.204+01:00 [vmbujnaro6.icmasliv] load database definitions - delta.df:Save schemas complete

2015/02/25 16:53:26.456+01:00 [vmbujnaro6.icmasliv] load database definitions - delta.df:Request complete

Still researching though....

This thread is closed