RE: 4GL error -408
Posted in 1997
Topics: Installation, Setup & Upgrades, SQL Development & Query Writing, Connectivity: ESQL/C, 4GL & Embedded SQL, Server Administration, Platform-Specific Issues
Hello, Tony At 07:02 PM 8/18/97 CDT, you wrote: }We have had the same problem occur in our environment... I have found }this can be caused by the following.... } }a) The products are not the same version. We haven't done any upgrades recently, and everything seemed to be working until now. }b) High collisions in glance (option l). } The error occurs every time this query is executed. }This problem usually goes away when the user session logs out and in. } Our problem doesn't. }If you run the select in isolation, in ISQL or DBACCESS do you get the }same error ? Do you get the error all the time ? } Interestingly, I didn't get any errors in ISQL. I started getting it in 4GL when the number of rows returned by the query became 15. }Cheers, Tony. }#include <standard disclaimers> } ---------- }From: ilya@technium.com }To: informix-list@rmy.emory.edu }Subject: 4GL error -408 }Date: Tuesday, 19 August 1997 07:35 } }Hello all, } }A simple SELECT (actually, a UNION of 2 SELECTs) produces this error: } }SQL statement error number -408. }Invalid message type received from the sqlexec process. } }I4GL version is 4.13 UD1 with an SE engine under HP-UX 09.04 on a 9000 }box. } }The SELECT statement in question has an ORDER BY clause with 4 columns }listed, one of which is a CHAR(30). } }We attempted the following: } }Step 1: SELECT ... } UNION } SELECT ... } INTO TEMP tmp_table WITH NO LOG } }Step 2: DECLARE cur1 CURSOR FOR } SELECT * } FROM tmp_table } ORDER BY col1, col2, col3, col4 } }Step 3: FOREACH cur1 INTO ... (and so on...) } }Still, the error occured. There are only 15(!) rows in tmp_table. The }next }thing we did was: } }Step 1a: CREATE INDEX idx_tmp_table ON tmp_table (col1, col2, col3, }col4) } }Sure enough, that didn't help. Informix tech support suggested that the }problem }is caused by ORDER BY, but offered no solution other than an upgrade }which }*may* include a fix. The only way to get it to work is to remove all but }the }first column from ORDER BY. } }I wonder if anyone has experienced this weird error or knows a solution }or a }workaround. } }Thanks In Advance! } }Eliott. } } }