[Babase] errors

Karl O. Pinc babase@www.eco.princeton.edu
Mon, 12 Jul 2004 20:30:20 -0500


On 2004.07.12 15:55 Stephanie Combes wrote:

>>>> 3) Cycles must be sequential for each female and the first seq for
>>>> each female must be 1.  While these are sensible rules, it's 
>>>> messing
>>>> up on a lot of females.  All of the females I checked (and I 
>>>> checked
>>>> most of them) have seq's (in cycles) from 1 to whatever BUT there
>>>> are many situations where their order in cycles goes something like
>>>> 2,3,4,1,5,6,etc.  The conversion program doesn't seem to like this.
>>>> Look at DAD or EST for examples, although there are others.
>>> KARL, WHAT IS THIS ABOUT?
>> 
>> When one of the cycles won't go in due to an error, all the rest with
>> higher numbers won't go in either because that'd make a 'gap'.  Fix
>> the one that won't go in and these errors go away.
>> 
> 
> **YES, BUT IF THE CYCLES ARE IN THERE AND THEIR SEQ NUMBERS 
> CORRESPOND WITH CONSECUTIVE CYCLES DOES THE PROGRAM NOT PUT THEM IN?

Yes, it should.

> I'M NOT SURE WHY THE PROGRAM IS HANGING UP ON THIS.  AS FAR AS I CAN 
> TELL, THE DATA SHOULD GO IN.

Please give me example data.

> 
> 
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 4)  cycle is not a conception and has no dates.  This is ok, right?
>>>> Apparently these are "fillers"? - because in some cases these lines
>>>> are totally blank in cycles.  Of course, I am a little confused as
>>>> to why there are totally blank lines in there in the first place.
>>>> help.
>>> 
>>> WE NEED FOR INFO ON THIS
>> 
>> We talked about this.  This is for pregnancy conception cycles.  I 
>> thought
>> I got the rule changed, but maybe I didn't or havn't installed it 
>> yet.
>> Been busy with speeding things up.  Can Steph take a look and see
>> if these are pregancy conception cycles?
>> 
> 
> 
> **I CONFIRMED THAT ALL THE BLANK CYCLES IN CYCLES ARE CONCEPTIONS. SO 
> DATA-WISE WE ARE OK.  KARL - I DON'T THINK THE RULE WAS CHANGED AND 
> THE ERROR MESSAGE IT POPS UP IS WRONG.  OR MAYBE I GOT THAT MESSAGE 
> BECAUSE PREGS ISN'T BEING CONVERTED YET???

That sounds like it.


>>> 
>>>> 7) error: sexskins cid blah: maturedates.matured cannot be less 
>>>> than
>>>> sexskins.date.  OK, in theory this error makes sense to me.  But,
>>>> the female it's referring to matures well before the listed sexskin
>>>> dates.  So karl, where is it looking?  what's maturedates.matured?
>>> 
>>> KARL?
>> 
>> Maturedates is now on the MATURES table, not biograph.
>> 
>> I think this rule is just wrong and it should be the other way 
>> around.
>> Right?
>> 
>> 
> 
> **WHERE IS THIS MYSTERIOUS MATURES TABLE?  SHOULD I HAVE A COPY OF IT 
> SOMEWHERE OR IS IT A NEW CREATION?  I THINK THE RULE IS BACKWARDS.

It's in the new database for which there's no docs.

Karl <kop@meme.com>
Free Software:  "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
                  -- Robert A. Heinlein