Re: Named Activation Groups

["Buck Calabro" <buck.calabro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Does anyone know of a current IBM recommendation
> for Named Activation Groups. I see stuff from 1995
> but nothing current, or at least, that I can find.

I doubt IBM is going to have any recommendation, since activation
group strategy is deeply tied to your application design.

> My understanding is that ILE programs running
> in the default activation group (OPM) running
> slower than ILE programs running in named
> activation groups.

I can't say I've ever heard that.

> That ILE programs are meant to run in ILE
> activation groups

Well, yes.  ILE programs run in an ILE activation group.  That's what
makes them ILE and not OPM.  That sounds way too circular.  Let's go
back a step.  When you say 'ILE program' you really mean 'program in
RPG IV syntax' don't you?  Are you using RPG IV programs which have
subprocedures?  Planning on a gradual changeover from OPM to ILE with
a mixed OPM/ILE program stack?  Tell us a little bit about your
environment and what you plan to achieve and perhaps we can be more
helpful.
  --buck