Bizarre QTP problem - Solved

[Maloney, Charlie]

John:

Oops!  Yes, you're perfectly right, fully qualified item names solve your
problem.

Arthur Kogan explains why in his 1-27-99 message to the list (Re:  Multiple
subfiles), and reminds us about the ASSUMED file.   To paraphrase Arthur:
since you have not specified which file the field AI-VENDOR-NBR is from, QTP
assumes you are referring to AI-VENDOR-NBR from the nearest previous file
definition, in this case AI-VENDOR-M.

In other words, AI-VENDOR-NBR of AI-VENDOR-M is initialized to itself!

Fully qualified item names solve lots of problems in PowerHouse.  

By the way, since AI-VENDOR-NBR is the same name and datatype in both the
"input" subfile and the "output add" master file, QTP will automatically and
correctly initialize the item in the master file, if you allow it.  QTP (and
QUICK) only perform automatic initialization on new records, and only if you
don't specify initialization yourself.

So, if you remove your "item AI-VENDOR-NBR initial AI_VENDOR_NBR" statement,
QTP will display an item statement after the "GO" statement similar to this:
>    access *BIINVFL2
>    sorted on AI-VENDOR-NBR
>    
>    output AI-VENDOR-M add at AI-VEN-NBR
>      item AI-VENDOR-IND final   "    "
>      go
Item AI-VENDOR-NBR of AI-VENDOR-M initialized (fixed) to AI-VEN-NUM of
BIINVFL2

Executing request ADD-VENDOR-M ...

QTP waits until you have specified all your "item initial" statements before
telling you how it will initialize what's left over.  The only way QTP knows
what's left over is to wait for the next OUTPUT, SUBFILE, REQUEST, BUILD or
GO statement.

Charlie Maloney
Cognos Corporation
Partner Operations Technical Acct Mgr
PH:  781 313 2305
FX:  781 229 6426


-----Original Message-----
From: John MacLerran [mailto:macljohn@isu.edu]
Sent: Monday, February 01, 1999 5:42 PM
To: powerh-l@lists.swau.edu
Subject: Re: Bizarre QTP problem - Solved


I don't know exactly why, but when I fully qualify the item statement  in
the
output construct, it works:

>    output AI-VENDOR-M add at AI-VEN-NBR
>      item AI-VENDOR-NBR initial AI-VEN-NBR of BIINVFL2
>      item AI-VENDOR-IND final   "    "
>      go

Executing request ADD-VENDOR-M ...
Records read:
  BIINVFL2                                 9
Transactions processed:                    9
Records processed:                     Added    Updated  Unchanged
Deleted
  AI-VENDOR-M                              9          0          0
0
Finished.
>

Maybe Qtp is using an internal file of some sort, and got confused as to
which
file the AI-VEN-NBR was in?  I don't know, but it's working now.

Thanks to all who e-mailed me with solution attempts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  John MacLerran
  IT Systems Analyst                       email:   macljohn@isu.edu
  Idaho State University                             V(208) 236-2872
  http://www.isu.edu/~macljohn                       F(208) 236-3673
----------------------------------------------------------------------


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Subscribe: "subscribe powerh-l" in message body to majordomo@lists.swau.edu
Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe powerh-l" in message to majordomo@lists.swau.edu
powerh-l@lists.swau.edu is gatewayed one-way to bit.listserv.powerh-l
This list is closed, thus to post to the list, you must be a subscriber.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Subscribe: "subscribe powerh-l" in message body to majordomo@lists.swau.edu
Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe powerh-l" in message to majordomo@lists.swau.edu
powerh-l@lists.swau.edu is gatewayed one-way to bit.listserv.powerh-l
This list is closed, thus to post to the list, you must be a subscriber.