[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