(Posted to both Works and the common list.)

I have some awkward problems with System Editor under Win 2000. Both searching and saving will fail. Could somebody else please check the following in System Editor under Win 2000:

1. Create a stored procedure. Nothing fancy. The following will do:

function Test_Something( Dummy )

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

***1K

2. Make the procedure larger by copying and pasting the chunk of asterisks a few times. The chunk is approximately 1K, as indicated. Go for e.g 20K. Then put a recognizable line of your own at the very end.

3. Save the procedure. Don't compile.

4. Do a search on some string in the procedure text, e.g, "test". The search will succeed.

5. Now repeatedly paste another 5K of text (asterisks) and search again. See if you reach a point where the search fails. That's what happens with me.

6. If so, save the procedure again, close and reopen it. See if it's smaller than it should be - if it's back to the size from the first save (look for that recognizable line of yours). That's what happens here.

7. You can also try to make another largish procedure, e.g function Test_Something2, but not try to save it until it's big enough for search to fail. See if the Save dialog fails to suggest a procedure name. That's what happens here.

8. If so, type in the name yourself, e.g TEST_SOMETHING2, save, and close. Then try to reopen the procedure. See if that doesn't fail too. That's what happens here. No trace of the procedure.

- Oystein -

Oystein,

Okay I ran a test on my system Windows 2000 with SP2 and OI 3.74. I closed OI and reopened it for the test.

Good news and bad.

First bad news. I couldn't duplicate your situation.

Good news. Hey potentially it looks like the system editor can hold more than we think.

I copied the *.*s 1k block. I had no problem in searching at 20K, 25K, 35K, 45k, 56k, and finally 59k.

I stopped at 59k because I got a message saying that the "maxmium buffer size has been reached." Practically speaking, we may not be able to have programs that size because of spacing or whatever, but I was surprise at the number.

I was also able to save it, close it, and reopen this sample item. Now of course, if I could only get my large AREV programs that I converting to behave similarly.

For example, if I were to bring up a large AREV program (GT 50K, but less than the 59k above) into the system editor, I sometimes don't see the programs at all. That is, the system editor is just "blank". Why I don't know. Again maybe related to "spaces" used in AREV.

If you need me to test anything else, let me know.

Ray

[email protected] onmouseover=window.status=imagine … ;return(true)"

Symmetry Info

Ray Chan ~ Symmetry Info

I tried that. Mine seems to work OK.

I got to just under 60K with the paste before I got a message saying

Maximum buffer size has been reached.

Maybe your version of Windows has been through the X-ray machine at the airport!

I know how frustrating this can be. You don't have any large arrays of common variables by any chance do you?

Hi Oystein

Have you tried installing OI 3.7.4 somewhere, then borrowing the system editor from that? ie the DWB.exe thing.

I was having trouble with an OI 3.3 application, mostly the checkouts and stuff wouldn't work, but the debugger wasn't speaking to me either. So I copied OINISGHT.EXE, OENGINE.EXE and DWB.EXE across from my OI 3.7 app into a "development" copy of my 3.3 app, and this improved things no end. I don't know why I didn't copy revdebug.dll too, but debug worked after I had copied the other three things.

I could get more stuff into the stdproc with the newer version of DWB.EXE too. So I am wondering if the OI3.7.4 version of system editor is more reliable with Win2K than OI3.7.

So now I will go test my system on Win2K…

Janet

Hi Oystein

On the win2000 setup, I got to 59K chars or so, didn't quite make it over 60 chars and the thing complained about maximum buffer exceeded.

I know what you are talking about though because sometimes I have gone into my bigger procs and sysed has tried to eat the end of them. Fortunately for me usually the first thing I do is paste the stuff I am about to work on, into a word doc or something so I can print it nicely.

BTW thats with Win95 too.

With windows 2000 I tried having everything open at once, access, word, outlook, my app, OIPI preview, large chunky bits of my app etc and the available memory never got much below 6000K. I was thinking of turning off the virtual memory and hard drive extensions to the RAM next. I had in the icon for starting up my app, "run in separate memory space". It seemed to behave quite nicely although app was installed on the C drive of the win2000 machine.

The OIPI install was weird. I thought I needed to do the NT style install. I could not persuade regsvr to run. Eventually I wrote a bat file to run it but the window opened and shut so quickly I have no idea if it was successful. Then I did the win95 install anyway and it seemed to work, despite the fact that I haven't connected this box to a printer yet (I only previewed with OIPI).

This test PC had 64MB ram. The win SYSinfo kept saying there was only 5K Ram left, even before I ran my app (maybe thats what outlook does?)

I'll try across the net tomorrow, and without the hard disk RAM extensions.

Scott

(Posted to both Works and the common list.)

Thanks to you (on the common list) who tried to replicate my problems.

This morning I found the problem only occurs on my computer. I tried to run my OI on another Win 2000 computer, identical to mine, and no problem occurred (except of course the row in the end got too big for Sys Ed).

So perhaps something bad happened to my Windows recently. I have two suspects:

(1) That OIPI 4 installation that went wrong

(2) My new Wacom Graphire cordless pen/mouse/tablet.

Any help still appreciated!

- Oystein -

I'd suspect the mouse/pen. For some reason anything other than vanilla mice (mmmmmmm….) always seems to cause grief with the system editor!

The Sprezzatura Group

World Leaders in all things RevSoft

Sprezzatura,

But weren't the other problems people have reported much less severe? Remember I have even saves that do not work. When I save, everything seems normal. The Status Line says "Entity has been locked successfully" (new rows) or "STPROC*MYFUNC, nnnnn characters" (already existing rows). But in reality nothing (no changes) is saved.

- Oystein -

Hi All

You think one of you would have stopped me.

I know I don't know anything about Win2000 but I figured it wouldn't be that different to Win NT and Win 95. Wrong. And it lied to me. And then it wreaked havoc.

Ok 64MB ram PC. What I didn't know is that Win2000 uses all 64MB ram all by itself, no matter what it says about available memory.

So I naively set the paging file size min and max to its min and min max of 2MB ie it said it would run with 2MB ram. It doesn't.

I rebooted to make setting stick and logged back in and look nothing works. I can't even change the desktop settings to reduce the video memory use. I certainly can't get back in to control panel to reset the page file size either.

I tried cranking to safe mode too but the only person allowed to log in at this point is the person who installed the software (which was our LAN guy not me). Handy for protection against burglars, but I expect they'd have their own win2000 boot disk…

So I hereby abandon my attempts at testing low memory.

Scott

Guarranteed to find the weak points in any software.

Sprezzatura,

(Posted on both sides.)

It was indeed the new tablet drivers.

First I tried to remove the new hardware: I ran Control Panel's Add/Remove Hardware and physically unplugged the thing. That wasn't enough. I had to remove the drivers as well, with Control Panel's Add/Remove Software. The latter being necessary might be obvious to those of you with more knowledge of Windows 2000 than me.

But I still want my tablet. Last week I went to my boss and said there's this neat and useful device costing just $100 - can I get it please? Now I have to go back and ask for a separate computer to run it on, costing ten times as much…

- Oystein -

I am having similar problems compiling a Stored Procedure on a WIN NT 4.0 dial-in machine at one of our client's sites. Both saving (non-compiled) and compiling give no error messages, yet changes that are made are not saved. Like the situation described above, it also is not allowing a search function.

Then, something even stranger happened. I went back into the same stored procedure and it was blank.

Any thoughts?

View this thread on the forum...