>A long time ago, the disadvantages of a PF index were two-fold: First,
>was no way to create a LF without a key. And second, damage to an index on
>PF meant that you couldn't recover data from it.
>The first issue was resolved quite a while ago when IBM allowed LFs without
>keys. This meant that arrival sequence was possible without referencing the
>PF. (Contrary to the thought that arrival sequence is *never* necessary, I
>provide a number of data recovery scenarios where it *is* necessary.)
>The second issue, however, I've never seen anything that clearly indicates
>that it's been circumvented properly. Perhaps nowadays recovery can be
>complete through an attached, unkeyed LF. Personally, I'm not ready to
>damage on a PF just to test it out. I'd like to know the answer though.
>Me? I prefer PFs to be unkeyed.
This is the second time that I've seen a post which seemed to imply that a
keyed physical file can't be accessed in arrival sequence. This is not
true. Any physical file can be opened for arrival sequence or RRN access in
an HLL program just by coding the file spec for it, for example omitting the
K in the F-spec in RPG. CPYF can do it as well, just specify FROMRCD(1) on
your CPYF command. If the index is damaged on a physical file, this is how
you recover the data from it. Note: I BELIEVE this has worked since CPF
release 1.0, I KNOW it's worked since CPF release 5.1. (For those of you
unfamiliar with the /38, think of its OS releases as OS/400 Version Zero -
Dave Shaw, General Nutrition, Greenville, SC (just down the road from BMW -
Bubba Makes Wheels :)
The opinions expressed may not be my employer's unless I'm sufficiently