Uniqueness of Implementation Names

[George Jeffcock]

 

Should this be possible? I expected "one-to-many cardinality violations,"

 

Can you check your version of Plex?

 

 

Uniqueness of Implementation Names

CA Plex takes some measures to check that implementation names are unique. However, it is not possible for these checks to be foolproof and, in some cases, you can deliberately assign the same implementation name to two or more objects. The following checks are performed:

• When an impl name (or file name) triple is created (either manually or automatically), CA Plex checks that it does not conflict with any other impl name (or file name) triples that are visible in the current configuration of the local model. Conflicts are reported as "one-to-many cardinality violations," and the second triple is not created.
• Two users working in separate local models could simultaneously create the same name object. In this case, CA Plex recognizes the problem as an object name conflict and renames one of the name (NME) objects during the retrieve catalog process.
• The impl name and file name triples are not inheritable.
• Once an object has been assigned an implementation name, the name remains fixed unless you decide to change it manually.

[Deactivated User]

George,

 

It's quite possible to have a File and a Program with the same implementation name on the IBM i, so it has to at least be catered for within Plex.

 

I was quite surprised that you could assign the same implementation name to a Table and a View, they are resolved to the same Object Type, so that is not possible (within the same Schema/Library). Then again, it is still possible to have the PF/LF reside in a different library, so I guess there is a need to cater for that?

 

It looks like the validation check is made at the Object Type level, which seems reasonable (bar the Table/View example). I was able to see the same behavior at Plex 7.1...

 

Crispin.

[George Jeffcock]

thanks cripsin for confirming 7.1

 

I was also quite surprised as Table / View is why I found this and considered it to be an issue. Name allocation has been assigning Table and View the same imp name (client is using a bespoke name allocator) but Plex should stop this happening irrespective of what the allocator is spitting out.

 

It is hard to write help text but it does say this should not be possible either manually (my screen cast) or  automatically (name allocator)

[Deactivated User]

George,

 

I'm not sure that it is incorrect. There are situations where the PF and LF could have the same implementation name, and I think Plex should cater for that. The clients Name Allocation routines should prevent it...

 

Crispin.

[George Jeffcock]

Enough doubt not to contact support and move on. Thanks again for sharing some of your time. Congrats on two years at new place

[Deactivated User]

Cheers George!