Re: Java Stored Procedures

[Scott Jordan <Scott.Jordan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Only when it is called from JDBC do we get 1.2 when we call it 
interactively it obeys the system-level SystemDefault.properties, or the 
user-level SystemDefault.properties (if available).

Tried dropping & recreating the procedure many....many...times.  :)

Unfortuntely, it has moved past interesting from our perspective! :)  We 
are closer to annoying!  :)



Bruce Jin <brucej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: java400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
08/03/2006 04:17 PM
Please respond to
Java Programming on and around the iSeries / AS400 
<java400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
Java Programming on and around the iSeries / AS400 
<java400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
Re: Java Stored Procedures






Very interesting!

This means the code is running in a pre 1.4 JVM. But you said you did 
not have jdk 1.2 on the system. Do you have jdk 1.3? When you run Test 
locally on AS400 (which calls SSIAPI) , the statement 
System.getProperty("java.version") produces a “1.4” while the same 
statement in SSIAPI produces a “1.2”?

Maybe try to drop the procedure and recreate it.

Regards.



Scott Jordan wrote:
> Hey Bruce!
>
> It blew up when I tried 1.4 code.  :(
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> Bruce Jin <brucej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
> Sent by: java400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> 08/02/2006 09:50 AM
> Please respond to
> Java Programming on and around the iSeries / AS400 
> <java400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> To
> Java Programming on and around the iSeries / AS400 
> <java400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: Java Stored Procedures
>
>
>
>
>
>
> How do you know you are getting JDK 1.2 from a remotely called stored 
> Procedure?
>
>
> Scott Jordan wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > We are writing Java Stored Procedures on V5R1.  Our Java.Version always 

> > returns 1.2.  However, when we run the same procedure interactively, we 

> > get JDK 1.4.  We've tried messing with the SystemDefault.properties 
both 
> >
>
>
> > for the system and in the user's directory, as well as QUSER, and even 
> > QSYS!
> >
> > We removed JDK 1.2.  We still get JDK 1.2 from a remotely called stored 

> > procedure.
> >
> > Has anyone else experienced this?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Scott