error B441 (OpenInsight 32-bit Specific)
At 30 NOV 2003 05:07:00PM jay rappaport wrote:
search the files and only references is over 5 years ago.
tried to install a sample on an associates pc to do an evaluations.
run an install of the evaluation oi4.1.3 and then an appbackup - to restore the sample programs and files I have been working on.
when trying to edit an item in the file, get a B441 error.
tried first to rebuild indexs, they rebult but same error.
tried deleteing indexs, same error.
tried to reattach the table's and same dbt - same error.
anyone have a clue as to what causes this and how to fix.
thanks
At 30 NOV 2003 05:45PM Donald Bakke wrote:
Jay,
It looks like you read enough to see that indexes seem to be the cause of this error message. Just to be sure, when you deleted the indexes did you do so manually? That is, are you sure the %FIELDS% and %PROTECT.SPEC% records were rebuilt after the datatables were carefully pruned for index references? Did you also rebuild the .DBT files after doing this? It might be helpful to edit the .DBT file directly to make sure all volume and table references are correct. AREV is a good editor for this file.
In summary, make sure your tables and volume is as clean as possible and test OI on this before adding indexes. Sometimes we replace our applications .DBT file with the SYSPROG.DBT file (i.e. COPY SYSPROG.DBT AppName.DBT) as a clean way to start from scratch.
At 01 DEC 2003 01:22AM jay rappaport wrote:
when I deleted the indexes I did it manually going thru database manager - and taking the index delete option. I even went so far as to recreate one simple btree and it worked with no problem?
That is what has me stumped in that I can recreate any index, yet if i edit a record (thru the editor) and then try to save it - i get the b441 error??
Not sure what is meant by "are you sure the %e FIELDS% and %PROTECT.SPEC% records were rebuilt after the datatables were carefully pruned for index references" I did do a "define database" to recreate the .dbt AFTER deleteing the indexes. Also tried running the "rebuild system index" as well as "sync database" from the devolpement options.
Once again, the thing that has me most stumped is that I can delete the indexes, I can recreate them, and I can do inquires using them, just can not seem to be able to write to the file in question.
Also - on further testing, two other files that HAD index's give me errors also - one gives me a B441 error also, the other gives me an error loading dictionary item on an xref index that i deleted. however, recreated the indexes on the second file allowed everything to run correctly on it!
Now - the one odd thing that could be related, is that file B has indxes for it built from values in file A. these are the two that give me the B441 error.
I would appear that some table is not being updated correctly - but have no clue other then that it is index related.
thanks
At 01 DEC 2003 02:03AM Donald Bakke wrote:
Jay,
Not sure what is meant by "are you sure the %e FIELDS% and %PROTECT.SPEC% records were rebuilt after the datatables were carefully pruned for index references" I did do a "define database" to recreate the .dbt AFTER deleteing the indexes.
When indexes tend to be a problem and using the Database Manager to rebuild them doesn't fix the problem then a manual rebuild of the indexes is usually in order. This process is described in this Knowledge Base Article.
At 01 DEC 2003 11:10AM Gerald Lovel wrote:
Jay,
Just last week I encountered (and posted) a question about Attach_Table and Save_Database. Seems that @Volumes is not updated with the filenames by Attach_Tables, so Save_Database detaches the files. I found that if I attached the files in the 4.1.3 database manager, then saved the database through the manager, the files were reattached. Is this related to what you are experiencing?
I was getting SYS1301 errors, among others. However, I suspect that searching the forum for strings which include numeric digits may not be working correctly, as I couldn't find anything on that error.
Gerald
At 01 DEC 2003 12:49PM Richard Hunt wrote:
Let me take this opportunity to suggest that the "indexing" system be "looked at".
It appears that the "indexing" system is flawed and frequently is in need of rebuilding or flat out manual deleting and recreating.
It just seems to me that the "indexing" system is a weak link. The "indexing" system should never have to be rebuilt, unless a disaster occurs.
This is my opinion. It is based on what I read in these discussion boards and a little of personal experience.