Validating QUIZ source that has mulitple passes
Joe Boyle
joeboyle_adt at hotmail.com
Wed Sep 20 15:52:32 CDT 2006
QTP does loads of buffer initialization stuff that quiz does not need to do,
so Quiz will always be faster than qtp, especially/particularly when sorts
are involved - also, add 'show statistics' to the end of your quiz job to
see similar stats to those offered by qtp.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Langendock" <Ken at Langendock.com>
To: "'Robert Mills'" <robert.mills at pinnaclearvato.co.uk>;
<powerh-l at lists.sowder.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 2:11 PM
Subject: RE: Validating QUIZ source that has mulitple passes
> Faster using QUIZ may be marginally true.
>
> But with QTP, you can reduce many programs to one extract and see the
> statistics of how many records were read from each file by request.
> With output phase reading, you can tune QTP to be fast enough to justify
> the reduced source code/feedback benefits.
>
> IMHO, quiz is dumb. It's just useful to read a file/subfile and report
> the results.
>
> Ken
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Mills [mailto:robert.mills at pinnaclearvato.co.uk]
> Sent: September 20, 2006 8:57 AM
> To: Ken at Langendock.com; powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
> Subject: RE: Validating QUIZ source that has mulitple passes
>
>
> Ken,
>
> Reason for using Quiz: IT'S FASTER THAN QTP.
>
> Reason for using QTP: Can create records > 255 bytes long (Next release
> negates this reason!!!)
>
> regards,
>
> Robert W.Mills
> MIS Systems Development Manager
> Windsong Services
> +44 (0)20 8309 3604
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> powerh-l-bounces+robert.mills=pinnaclearvato.co.uk at lists.sowder.com
> [mailto:powerh-l-bounces+robert.mills=pinnaclearvato.co.uk at lists.sowder.
> com] On Behalf Of Ken Langendock
> Sent: 20 September 2006 13:38
> To: 'Brett Greiner'; powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
> Subject: RE: Validating QUIZ source that has mulitple passes
>
> I'm afraid that unless you are going to create massive scripts that test
> every scenario in batch, you should consider changing your quiz to
> compiled programs (replace the GO with BUILD).
>
> With compiled code, you can create a mass-compile script that at least
> validates the syntax of your changes.
>
> One more thing. Not knowing your scenario, I am not sure as to why you
> did this but I NEVER create a subfile in QUIZ. Using that method is very
> limiting. Creating subfiles in QUIZ was a part of Powerhouse that was
> created for End Users, not programmers. QTP is much more powerful and
> allows output phase reads to cut processing times down.
>
> Just my two cents worth.
> Ken
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: powerh-l-bounces+ken.langendock=rogers.com at lists.sowder.com
> [mailto:powerh-l-bounces+ken.langendock=rogers.com at lists.sowder.com] On
> Behalf Of Brett Greiner
> Sent: September 19, 2006 11:38 PM
> To: powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
> Subject: Validating QUIZ source that has mulitple passes
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> I am not familiar with compiled QUIZ source programs. All QUIZ reports
> used on our clients site are executed as uncompiled quiz source (ie. As
> a .qzs). 90% of them are made up of many passes to produce a report,
> each pass has a 'go' to run that pass. For example, pass 1 creates a
> subfile, pass 2 prints the report.
>
> Example mock of the clients report.
>
> access AP_OPEN_ITEM &
> link to VENDOR
> report summary &
> VOUCHER_NUMBER &
> VENDOR_NUMBER
>
> set subfile name APDUEDATES01
> set report nolimit
> go
> ;--------------------------
> access *APDUEDATES01
> sort on VENDOR_NUMBER &
> on VOUCHER_NUMBER
> @IF DETAIL
> report &
> VENDOR_NUMBER heading "" &
> VOUCHER_NUMBER heading ""
> @ENDIF
>
> footing at VENDOR_NUMBER &
> VENDOR_NUMBER count
> go
>
> What ways can we use to validate the QUIZ source before the .qzs is used
> in production, as we have had some use files modified and placed into
> production and has stopped some the programs running in production with
> an error. We could execute each source after each change but it would be
> tedious for use files changed that affected hundreds of programs.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Brett Greiner
> Synoptix
> New Plymouth
> New Zealand
>
>
>
>
> --
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Mailing list:
> powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
> Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to
> powerh-l-request at lists.sowder.com
> Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe <password>" in message body to
> powerh-l-request at lists.sowder.com
> http://lists.sowder.com/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
> This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber.
> Add 'site:lists.sowder.com powerh-l' to your search terms to search the
> list archive at Google.
>
> --
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Mailing list:
> powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
> Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to
> powerh-l-request at lists.sowder.com
> Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe <password>" in message body to
> powerh-l-request at lists.sowder.com
> http://lists.sowder.com/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
> This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber.
> Add 'site:lists.sowder.com powerh-l' to your search terms to search the
> list archive at Google.
>
>
> --
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Mailing list: powerh-l at lists.sowder.com
> Subscribe: "subscribe" in message body to
> powerh-l-request at lists.sowder.com
> Unsubscribe: "unsubscribe <password>" in message body to
> powerh-l-request at lists.sowder.com
> http://lists.sowder.com/mailman/listinfo/powerh-l
> This list is closed, thus to post to the list you must be a subscriber.
> Add 'site:lists.sowder.com powerh-l' to your search terms to search the
> list archive at Google.
>
More information about the powerh-l
mailing list