|
Peter, What you are describing is very important. While it may be necessary to find a work-around, I would encourage you to open a problem with IBM. Journaling is the basis for system recovery in a number of scenarios and you have described a gaping hole in its reliability. If a transaction cannot be recovered or recreated using a journal, what good is the database? Unless journaling is ended, _all_ changes _must_ be journaled. If IBM thought they were doing a good thing by having the CHGJRN command process asynchronously, perhaps they need to rethink. Regards, Andy Nolen-Parkhouse > On Behalf Of Peter Colpaert > Subject: Re: CHGJRN > > > Mark, > > I was under the impression that, as long as you don't submit a command, > the > actions of this command are finished at the moment the next command is > executed. That's my idea of "immediately". > > The updates are not in the old receiver, in fact they are not found > anywhere, but the file shows them, so they _have_ been done. > > Also which message should I monitor? The online help only lists CPF > *escape messages, which would crash my program anyway. > > Thanks, > > Peter Colpaert > Application Developer
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.