Re: MCH1210 Message

Although the full details of the symptom for the error msgMCH1210 and the release & PTF level were left unstated, because the code runs S/36E and was at least somewhat UNPREDictable, I would recommend reviewing the APAR= SE26704 for its PTF as a possible correction.

R530 SI25310 UP06/10/16 cNone
R540 SI25311 UP06/10/16 c7107540
CIRCUMVENTION:
Turn off file caching option via ?CHGS36A or CHGS36 /* Environment */
. or .
Remove the PTF for the *PGM QDBSIZFI

To determine the current PTF for QDBSIZFI, issue DSPOBJD QSYS/QDBSIZFI *PGM *SERVICE, record the _PTF number_, and then issue DSPPTF 5722SS1 _PTF number_ to review if there is a temporarily applied PTF that can be removed.

Regards, Chuck
-- All comments provided "as is" with no warranties of any kind whatsoever.

Jerry Adams wrote:

Ok, I had a problem this morning that I really don't expect anyone to be able to help me with, but the insight of the group members never ceases to amaze me so here goes.

<<SNIP>>
It blows up on the CRTPF command with an MCH1210 (Receiver value too small to hold result). I have legitimately seen this error in an ILE RPG program when the result of an EVAL is too small to hold the resulting calculation. Just to be certain that this CL was the one that reported the error (it is part of a 36 procedure that is full of LOAD's, 36 commands, and CL's), I put the program under debug. The &LIBR and &FILE parameters were what I expected them to be (specifically and respectively, QS36F and A.ONAMD2). The 36 procedure line, by the way, which invokes the CL is: CALL PGM(CRTPKTKON) PARM(?FLIB? ?L'1,1'?.ONAM?WS?); the first byte of the LDA contains the group file id ('A' in this case).

But it gets a little weirder. I ran this procedure three [3] times and received the same error. I ran it a fourth and fifth time flawlessly.
This is, by the way, a pretty common (several times a day) process in our company, and it has never reported an error of this nature. Although I have had no complaints from users (I was running it as part of a test), if there is/are any inherent bugs that anyone notices, I would like to correct them before I leave for COMMON tomorrow. Or, at least, put my boss (an Access / VB programmer) on alert with a remedy.

Thanks.