As of December 1, 2020, Focal Point is retired and repurposed as a reference repository. We value the wealth of knowledge that's been shared here over the years. You'll continue to have access to this treasure trove of knowledge, for search purposes only.
Join the TIBCO Community TIBCO Community is a collaborative space for users to share knowledge and support one another in making the best use of TIBCO products and services. There are several TIBCO WebFOCUS resources in the community.
From the Home page, select Predict: WebFOCUS to view articles, questions, and trending articles.
Select Products from the top navigation bar, scroll, and then select the TIBCO WebFOCUS product page to view product overview, articles, and discussions.
Request access to the private WebFOCUS User Group (login required) to network with fellow members.
Former myibi community members should have received an email on 8/3/22 to activate their user accounts to join the community. Check your Spam folder for the email. Please get in touch with us at community@tibco.com for further assistance. Reference the community FAQ to learn more about the community.
TABLE FILE SGBSTDN BY 'SGBSTDN.SGBSTDN.SGBSTDN_PIDM' BY HIGHEST 1 'SGBSTDN.SGBSTDN.SGBSTDN_TERM_CODE_EFF' BY 'SGBSTDN.SGBSTDN.SGBSTDN_PROGRAM_1' HEADING "" FOOTING "" WHERE SGBSTDN.SGBSTDN.SGBSTDN_RATE_CODE NOT LIKE 'WSK%'; ON TABLE SET PAGE-NUM OFF ON TABLE NOTOTAL ON TABLE PCHOLD FORMAT HTML ON TABLE SET HTMLCSS ON ON TABLE SET STYLE * UNITS=IN, SQUEEZE=ON, ORIENTATION=PORTRAIT, $ TYPE=REPORT, GRID=OFF, FONT='TIMES NEW ROMAN', SIZE=10, $ ENDSTYLE END
Running it this way, I get 19k records returned. Moving the BY field program_1 to a print field, I get 57k records returned. Program_1 has nothing to do with uniqueness of the record, that is done by the first 2 fields. Why the major difference in records returned. Is there an order (internal) that commands are processed? I have also noticed that with the program_1 field moved to print instead of by, that the total number of records read changes from 57k (for by) to 128k (for print). Can someone please help explain the execution sequence. Thank you PaulThis message has been edited. Last edited by: Kerry,
Prod: WF 7.7.05, BID, MRE, 7.7.06M Server, Windows 2008, RedHat, Oracle 11gR1, MS Office 2010 Test: I wish we had one!
Table is in Oracle. It is about a 40 column table. Pidm is column 1, effective date is column 2, and program is down further in the table. Pidm and date are part of the primary key. The last part of the primary key is irrelevant for this issue. Is this what you need? What I have noticed more than once is that I have to have the BY fields in one section, write it out to a hold file and then write another section to read the hold file and apply the WHERE statement. Something is strange when there are BY and WHERE in the same section of code.This message has been edited. Last edited by: paulI,
Prod: WF 7.7.05, BID, MRE, 7.7.06M Server, Windows 2008, RedHat, Oracle 11gR1, MS Office 2010 Test: I wish we had one!
The fact that there is a third piece to the primary key is an issue. Unless the combo of SGBSTDN_PIDM and SGBSTDN_TERM_CODE_EFF creates uniqueness, there are more records to be seen (with PRINT) It doesn't matter at all which field you print, you will get all the records that pass the WHERE clause, and no aggregation at all.
I would recommend you spent some time with one of the WebFocus sample files like EMPDATA. You should do SUM, PRINT, and BY (with and without a verb) using some of the fields.
Compare and study the results. This will help you develop an understanding of what the various WebFocus verbs do.
Jim Morrow Web Focus 7.6.10 under Windows 2003 MVS 7.3.3