Page 1 of 1
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 7:06 pm
by Leisher
What's the command to send the messages from qsysopr to qsecofr?
Not the dspmsg qsysopr command, but the one that actually sends all the messages that go to qsysopr (or whatever queue) to your session until you logoff...
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 7:39 pm
by GORDON
Damn, I don't remember.
It'll be some system setting... wrkmsgq, or some such.
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:31 pm
by TheCatt
"Buy a new OS"?
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:46 pm
by Cakedaddy
No kidding. Windows stuff is SO going to replace the old IBM mainframes and be the only usable operating system. Get with the times. Geez.
Actually had some moron chick at an old place of employment do her college thesis on the above topic, and came to that conclusion. Turned it into the CEO of the company, and we, as the IT department, had to defend our reasons for having not dumped the AS/400 yet.
They also paid someone thousands upon thousands upon thousands of dollar to build a DB application using macros in Lotus 1-2-3. It of course never worked and was created in a couple weeks on the AS/400.
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 9:04 pm
by GORDON
And the AS/400 is unhackable.
Yeah, I said it.
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:13 pm
by Leisher
We interviewed a programmer tonight and his company dumped their 400 in favor of SQL based software.
My current programmer: Why would you ever let management make a decision like that.
Interviewee: Well, that's the way they wanted to go.
My current programmer: How's it working out?
Interviewee: It's complete garbage. It doesn't work at all.
Apparently their company executives dictate IT policy no matter what their IT people say. Their IT policy is, of course, based on buzz words and whatever misinformation they hear from other executives.
Morons.
Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:32 pm
by TPRJones
Sounds like where I work. The management of IT is doen by people that used to be professors who gravitated into administration. All of them have masters or phd's in education, with fields ranging from Biology to English.
Needless to say, our IT is horrid.
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 6:09 am
by thibodeaux
We use SQLServer and we're doing OK.
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:09 am
by Malcolm
We use SQLServer and we're doing OK.
Same here.
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:57 pm
by GORDON
Apparently using SQL servers makes you lower your standards.
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 6:59 pm
by Cakedaddy
When you don't know anything else, what you have is fine.
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 7:13 pm
by Malcolm
I've been repeatedly asking my Mac-Java fanboi boss if there's better database shit out there than SQL.
He always says, "No."
There HAS to be. Ain't no way everyone saw SQL & decided it was the best of the best & no one could ever hope to improve upon it.
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 7:37 pm
by GORDON
I guess it's Optimized.
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 9:05 pm
by TheCatt
It all depends on what you want, but relational is generally best.
And can we distinguish b/w SQL Server and relational? I think they were used interchangeably, but I could be wrong.
Edited By TheCatt on 1131761182
Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:03 pm
by GORDON
You can run SQL on a 400 against a 400 database.