RE: RPG ILE and *INLR

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Andrew Borts
>
> >From the web stuff I've been doing, I adopted the following standard;
>
> Named activation groups ALWAYS - never *NEW - according to the little
> chart made by IBM about performance & the HTTP server, named activation
> groups were 30% faster then *NEW activation groups.

I'm not arguing the point, but with a named activation group I lose the
automatic cleanup of subprocedures which was my primary reason for going to
*NEW in the first place.  The second time I invoke a program in a named
activation group, all its subprograms will still be hanging around.  That
is, of course, unless I do a RCLACTGRP on the named activation group, but
I'm betting the 30% speed increase only works when you don't do a reclaim.
Or did the little chart explicitly contradict that assumption?

Joe