RE: Monitor for existing job.

["Dan Bale" <dbale@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ahhh, now I understand!  <slap on forehead>  Of course, why create a data
area to lock since you'll use the same determination as you're using in your
example, i.e., locking the program object.

I will say that I'm still leaning towards the data area when wanting *EXCL
locks on RPG program objects for the simple reason that I can easily perform
the data area lock *inside* the application via *LOCK IN, as someone gave an
example for earlier in this thread.  If you try to allocate the program
object outside, and before you call, the program, you haven't prevented the
possibility that some other job may attempt to directly call the program,
and avoid the CL wrapper app altogether.  Obviously, if it's a CL app you
want to "lock", you could do that right in the app.

- Dan Bale
(I am *NOT* "Dale"
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/200105/msg00281.html )
SAMSA, Inc.
989-790-0507
DBale@SAMSA.com <mailto:DBale@SAMSA.com>
  Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
  (Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
[mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Carsten Flensburg
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 3:05 PM
To: midrange-l@midrange.com
Subject: Re: Monitor for existing job.


Dan,

The lock as such does not prevent the program being called directly.

The idea is to always call the program through the CL-program that will
perform the check for an existing lock against the program.  Similar to the
"lock data area" approach - but instead of using yet another object I
decided that the program object itself would be just as good a lock target.
And the CL-program provides a generic solution - if there are no parameters
involved in the call.

Best regards,
Carsten Flensburg

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Bale" <dbale@samsa.com>
To: <midrange-l@midrange.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: Monitor for existing job.


Carsten, I just tried ALCOBJ *EXCL on an program object in one job and was
able to call it in another job.  Which was the gist of what your code in the
archive post was getting at.  Did I miss something else that your code was
doing?

In fact, when I do a WRKOBJLCK on that program, I see the job where I did
the ALCOBJ, but not the job that currently is running it.  I have never
understood this mystery.

I think that locking the data area is the easiest and most reliable way to
go.

- Dan Bale
offsite today
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Carsten Flensburg" <flensburg@novasol.dk>
Reply-To: midrange-l@midrange.com
Date:  Tue, 9 Apr 2002 19:27:30 +0200

>And here's something along the same lines - using the program itself as
lock
>object - from the archives:
>http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/199911/msg01701.html
>
>Best regards,
>Carsten Flensburg