Re: Lock on command processing program ignored -- MIDRANGE-L

If it is your own command, then you should change the CPP to ALCOBJ *EXCL
on some *DTAARA object and release the lock when it is finished.

Then you can have the validity checking program check for locks on that
same *DTAARA objects and issue an error if it is locked.  Of course I would
also do the same in CPP in case the validity checker is removed.

Hope this helps.

Mark







                      Vernon Hamberg
                      <vhamberg@mn.media         To:      
midrange-l@midrange.com
                      one.net>                   cc:
                      Sent by:                   Subject: Re: Lock on command 
processing program ignored
                      midrange-l-admin@m
                      idrange.com


                      02/13/02 02:14 PM
                      Please respond to
                      midrange-l






This is our own command and program. I want to make sure only one job
can run it at a time.

There are no messages coming out in the joblog.

I will be trying an ALCOBJ *EXCL in the validity checker. I'm just
curious as to why a locked-exclusive CPP can still be used.

Evan Harris wrote:
>
> Vern
>
> any reason why wrapping the command in a CL (or RPG for that matter) is
not
> an option ? Then you could just lock the program you are calling.
>
> It seems to me that locking a CPP might be dangerous (for some reason I
am
> getting the impression you are talking about an IBM CPP) as depending on
> the command the program could be in use elsewhere which might or might
not
> cause unpredictable results - it might even be exactly what you want :).
>
> As to why it fails, an error message or some code showing what is
happening
> might help suggest an answer.
>
> Regards
> Evan Harris
>
> >I want to have only one job runa program at a time. CL Programming
> >suggests ALCOBJ *EXCL on the program object. In this case, it's a
> >command processing program that I want to restrict. Calling it directly,
> >or trying to debug, fail. However, another job can run it through the
> >command. Is this normal? Is there a way around it?
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
Vern Hamberg

Would you like to see a challenging little arithmetic puzzle
that might get you or your kids or grandkids more interested
in math? Go to <http://cgi.wff-n-proof.com/MSQ-Ind/I-1E.htm>

Sillygism--

Something is better than nothing.
Nothing is better than a ham sandwich.
Ergo
Something is better than a ham sandwich.
_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.