Does anyone know the benefits vs. liabilities assoiciated with using the NOCOLS option for creating master files? From reading the documentation it appears that this would be the prefered option since modification of the underlying data source does not require modification of the master file. I realize that if you do defines in master files you cannot use NOCOLS and I assume if you do DBA security in master files you couldn't use NOCOLS. But other than that, are there any drawbacks? TIA....Kelly

The main benefit and purpose is, if the under line Datasource (TABLE) is changed on a regular and often bases then there is no needed to regenerate the METADATA. With that said the drawback, which has to be weighted, is that for every tool that needs METADATA info will now have to query the datasource to get it. Tools like Report Assist, Report Painter, ETL/Data Migrator, etc... So if the benefit out weights the drawback then NOCOLS can be useful.

Hope this helps

Thanks Scott. Do you know if there are any performance hits using NOCOLS?

I'm not sure. There could be. The best way to find out would be to open a case with NY.

K.S.

Just got of the Phone with the "TOP DOG" in NY. He says that there is a performance hit. Even when running reports it still has to hit the system catalog to get the information. Good info, and a important thing to weight in determining if you should or should not use NOCOLS.

Scott

Thanks a lot. I thought there might be some performance issues. I'll test before using. See ya....