× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Mark,

I'm interested in following this thread, but I've got a couple of thoughts now.

Assuming a finite set of stored procedures are being accessed, why
would the resources continue to go up? The only explanation I can
come up with is there's a ACTGRP(*NEW) involved.

Otherwise, I assume that the finite set is large enough that the
resources required for a job that has "everything" already active
would be too much.

In that case, the only answer I can think of would be to change the
MAXUSE parameter of the pre-start job entry for the subsystem so that
the jobs are not reused so often.

HTH,
Charles


On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Mark S. Waterbury
<mark.s.waterbury@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi, all:

An IBM i5/OS customer is running DB2/400 SQL stored procedures from a PC
via a Java-based client using JDBC ...

This runs in the QZDASOINIT job -- the top level program is QZDASOINIT,
which is itself an ILE *PGM created with ACTGRP(*CALLER) but for some
reason it runs in the default activation group (*DFTACTGRP) ... :-o

The problem is, they have commitment control, triggers, etc., and the
application programs, triggers and stored procedures etc. are all
writtin in ILE RPG IV and compiled using CRTRPGMOD and CRTPGM and set up
to run as "true" ILE programs with ACTGRP(*CALLER) as they were never
intending to run them in the *DFTACTGRP.

Does anyone know how IBM suggests to support this kind of environment,
when accessing stored procedures via JDBC?  Apparently, because
QZDASOINIT is running in the *DFTACTGRP, this is causing these ILE
programs to get activated into the DAG, which is of course a "bad idea"
and there is no way to "clean up" these programs, e.g. via RCLRSC or
RCLACTGRP, and so the jobs in the connection pool just keep growing and
growing (in terms of their storage requirements).

Any suggestions, hints or tips would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Mark S. Waterbury

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.