Embedded SQL Host Variable Mapping: GnuCOBOL versus Micro Focus Divergence

In a repeatable COBOL development pipeline, consistent mapping of EXEC SQL host variables between COBOL data structures and relational schema is required across compiler vendors. The goal is to determine whether a given COBOL record binding to a database column produces identical runtime values when compiled with GnuCOBOL and Micro Focus.

Both compilers support the ANSI EXEC SQL syntax, but their preprocessors generate divergent boilerplate for host variable allocation, cursor management, and error handling. Copybook picture clauses such as PIC 9(5)V or PIC A(20) are translated using compiler-specific rules, often resulting in silent truncation or type mismatches when COBOL records bind to SQL tables. Runtime cursor FETCH behavior also differs, with some compilers targeting predefined working-storage fields while others require explicit LOCK/RELEASE statements, impacting transactional consistency.

Do GnuCOBOL and Micro Focus emit equivalent host variable declarations for the same EXEC SQL SELECT statement when targeting an identical PostgreSQL table? How do picture clause translations for edited numeric fields affect data rounding or truncation during host variable assignment? Can a unified copybook-to-schema mapping strategy be defined that preserves semantic equivalence across both compiler runtimes?