go to post John Murray · Aug 30, 2017 Setups are managed in the Security subsection of the System Administration section of Portal.Key documentation is at http://docs.intersystems.com/latest/csp/docbook/DocBook.UI.Page.cls?KEY=...Parts specifically relevant to SQL access to data include:http://docs.intersystems.com/latest/csp/docbook/DocBook.UI.Page.cls?KEY=...http://docs.intersystems.com/latest/csp/docbook/DocBook.UI.Page.cls?KEY=...http://docs.intersystems.com/latest/csp/docbook/DocBook.UI.Page.cls?KEY=... (in particular, the subsection titled "Modifying a User’s SQL-Related Options")
go to post John Murray · Aug 29, 2017 Since 86400 is the number of seconds in one day, did you mean to write "it will run every day" rather than "it will run every two days"? Or have I misunderstood something?
go to post John Murray · Aug 29, 2017 It'd be easy enough to write a method that notes the current collation of locals for the process - ##class(%Library.Collate).GetLocalNumber() - and if it's not 5 (the number for "Cache standard") then temporarily set it - ##class(%Library.Collate).SetLocalNumber(5) - before doing the ]] test, then reinstate the noted collation if necessary.
go to post John Murray · Aug 29, 2017 This is a good point. I was relying on the doc at http://docs.intersystems.com/latest/csp/docbook/DocBook.UI.Page.cls?KEY=... being correct when it says:Binary Sorts after tests whether the left operand sorts after the right operand in numeric subscript collation sequence. In numeric collation sequence, the null string collates first, followed by canonical numbers in numeric order with negative numbers first, zero next, and positive numbers, followed lastly by nonnumeric values.
go to post John Murray · Aug 25, 2017 How about using the "sorts after" operator ]] for this? USER>w "0.12345"]]$c(0) 1 USER>w ".12345"]]$c(0) 0 USER>
go to post John Murray · Aug 24, 2017 There's a hyperlink at the top of part 2 above. Maybe it wasn't there when you first looked.
go to post John Murray · Aug 24, 2017 Per the OP's comment here, in this case it's an 8-bit Caché instance, so Unicode characters aren't available on the server.
go to post John Murray · Aug 24, 2017 Per the OP's comment here, in this case it's an 8-bit Caché instance, so Unicode characters aren't available on the server.
go to post John Murray · Aug 24, 2017 Yes, that's a DC limitation at the moment. One workaround is to copy the link from the hyperlinked word "Comment" at the foot of whichever comment you consider to be the answer, then add a new answer that references this, e.g. Answered by this comment.Then you can accept your own comment.
go to post John Murray · Aug 24, 2017 Uri, I assume your two references to %GSIZE above are supposed to say %GSET.ISC published information about %GSET the past, and documented it being renamed to %SYS.GSET at 5.1. I think it's a pity they now consider it only to have been 'internal'.
go to post John Murray · Aug 22, 2017 Judging by this subsequent post by [@Mike.Kadow6569] he resolved this issue. I'm posting this answer so his question no longer reports as having no answer.This link posted in a comment by [@Joyce Zhang] is a good resource for Mike's problem.Mike, please set the checkmark against this answer, or any other that may appear, so as to mark the question "answered" in DC.
go to post John Murray · Aug 22, 2017 Are you running a Unicode version of Caché? If you're not sure, post your $ZVERSION string here.
go to post John Murray · Aug 22, 2017 Uri, when you get an answer from WRC please come back here, post it as an answer to your question, and set the checkmark against your answer so the DC question shows as "answered".
go to post John Murray · Aug 22, 2017 Looks like this functionality was moved to a routine named %GSET.At least, in earlier versions (I checked 2008.1) the %GOF utility used %SYS.GSET but in newer ones (I checked 2017.1) it uses %GSET.
go to post John Murray · Aug 21, 2017 Good to hear Rubens helped you Coty. The best way of giving him due credit on DC is for you (as OP) to set the checkmark alongside his answer. Look for it above, in the area I've highlighted in my screenshot below:
go to post John Murray · Aug 21, 2017 I don't see an ISC Staff indicator as meaning the post is inherently more valuable or more reliable. Rather, that a lot of posts are by people without that indicator, including posts that get lots of positive votes. I think this could help counter any impression that DC is some kind of "WRC-lite".
go to post John Murray · Aug 21, 2017 I previously posted a request for display of which participants are InterSystems staff:https://community.intersystems.com/post/there-way-telling-if-poster-memb...
