Please take a look at APAR IX76147.  If you do not have at least 4 MB of free
DB space for
use bythe SQL engine temporyary tables, then the ORDER BY clause will give you
invalid
results and no error will be reported.

This has been corrected in the referenced APAR

Mike Kaczmarski
IBM Corporation
ADSM Development
kacz AT us.ibm DOT com



ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU on 05/14/98 06:43:56 AM
Please respond to ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject: Re: Bad results from a SELECT ...


Replying to: "Mapes, Mark" <MWM4 AT PGE DOT COM> (Wed, 13 May 1998 07:10:25 
-0700)
>Mike,
>Mike,
>
>Yes, the SQLMATHMODE does explain the difference between the "q vol" and the
>"select *".
>
>By the way, my "select volume_name as volume, pct_reclaim, pct_utilized from
>volumes" as identified below worked too.  I have seen this before, where I
>did get funny results from SQL, but after exiting and re-entering the
>dsmadmc environment, the result seem to look good.  But the real problem
>still exists, that is when I issue the following select statement, the
>results for all three numeric colums comes back being the same.
>
>select left(volume_name,6) as volume, pct_reclaim, pct_utilized,
>pct_reclaim+pct_utilized from volumes order by 4 desc
>
>Do you get the same results?

There seems to be a problem with ORDER BY. I tried the command you suggested
and pct_reclaim and pct_utilized displayed the same value as
pct_reclaimed+pct_utilized. Without the ORDER BY the values look OK.

Further testing shows that whenever you specify a numeric column and ORDER
BY any column the numeric values displayed will be those of the last column.

AIX Server V3.1.1.2

--
Rui Malheiro,
Rui Malheiro,
6 Mil - Tecnologias de Informacao
URL: <http://www.6mil.pt/>