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.
To append one hold file to other hold file, MORE Command can be used. In this case, required number of files are 2.
Or Single file can be opened in APPEND mode using FILEDEF. The o/p of two different queries with similar no of columns can be appended to the same file. In this case, only one file sufficient
Is there any advantages in the above two approach other than reducting the number of files?
Can we knwo the pros and cons of the two approaches?
Do webfocus provide this kind of information in any of the documents?
I don't think there is an official answer to this one. It's more of a personal preference.
I personally prefer the append option rather then the MORE. I find the rules for more are too constricting, while with the append, I don't have to have the same column names and aggregation etc. The only critical thing with the append, is that the output columns must line up exactly. A small price to pay for the added flexibility (in my opinion)
Some thoughts on the two methods. I have used both, and each has its own pros and cons. For me, I use whichever is simplest for the particular application.
If you use MORE: 1) The two files will be sorted together by the BY fields. 2)They both have to have the same field names and data lengths. 3)If you have in either file two fields of the same name (ie one you joined on), MORE will get confused, so you will have to reDEFINE one of them. Also if the fields aren't called the same name or data length to begin with you will have to reDEFINE them. Sometimes this leads to a lot of redundant DEFINEs. 4)You can append and display the result in one step. 5)If the job is to be run on Report Caster, you can not use MORE in the last table file command (#4 comment). You need to hold the result and reTABLE it, in that case.
If you use FILEDEF (APPEND: 1) There is no data checking that fields are lining up properly (in case of different data lengths)- I have gotten some of the appended files out of register with the others. 2) You will need another step to sort them. 3) Doesn't bother Report Caster.
Posts: 391 | Location: California | Registered: April 14, 2003
Another option is to use the HOLD AS ??? FORMAT FOCUS [ INDEX xxxx yyyy zzzz ] then use the USE command to treate the old files as one. I have done this with 5 hold files and one nice think is that you can set indexes.