Fw: I hate Activation Groups....

["John Taylor" <john.taylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Oops!

> a bad application design. If there is a valid reason for the service
program
> to run in it's own AG, then the CL pgm should have been created by
> specifying a *NEW AG. A named activation group would also work, but would
> require a call to CEETREC in order to clean up the AG itself, because the
CL
> is at the top of the call stack. QILE would be a bad idea because there
may
> be other programs running in it.

Sorry, I hadn't looked at the call sequence since yesterday, and I ended up
forgetting about the RPG program in there. What I should have said is that
the RPG program should have been running in a *NEW or named AG, not the CL!
In which case, CEETREC wouldn't be used destory the named activation group,
but rather the RCLACTGRP command.


John Taylor
Canada



+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---