Denys writes:
 
-- snip snip --
 
 
>So Elbert, let me get this straight.  DDX has been around for a while now,
>but you have not used it because you feel that you would have to change all
>your code?   I am not saying that's right or wrong, I just want to find out
>more about user environments.
>
>I wonder how many people have reached the same decision as you.  If this
>is/was such a big issue, how come you did not bring it up before?
>
>Confused in Spring, TX.
>
>Kind regards,
>
>Denys. . .
 
 
Dear Confused in Spring, TX:
 
I do use it (DDX) but ---
 
(A 1) Our app has up to 6 databases. Total of more than 150 data sets.
Many moons ago (1980s) some ares of our code were made smarter to
determine amount of available unused space in a data set. This so
we did not end up with an incomplete transaction was was
considered very important (critical) to future well being of the
application. Due to many things, this was not implemented
every place a DBPUT was gonna happen (on every data set).
Works real fine.
 
Now comes well intentioned DDX. I turn it on. But now it is
really only effective for the LESS CRITICAL data sets because
I don't have code (written years ago) to try to figure out if
I have room before I DBPUT. In this case, DDX works great.
However, now my 'smart' code on the critical DBPUTs does not
do anything -- in fact, it is detrimental to the application.
 
So, why don't I change all those places in code and yank out
the now useless DBINFO calls?
Priorities. It sort of works. I can use DBGENERAL to manage the rest.
It has been working for 12 years +/-. No additional effort on my part.
For the same reason HP doesn't fix their software.
Too many (code) places to change, so little time.
 
Others on this list can attest to the downsizing of the
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
application support in this company.
 
(Q 2) I thought it was resolved in last years thread on this
      subject.
 
Patiently,
 
Elbert
 
p.s. Is 'Spring' what it feels like down there, or what you wished
     it felt like?