Re: Activation Group Issues ? -- RPG400-L

I have an RPG program which uses a procedure in a service program to
populate fields in the output file based on a key passed to the
procedure.

I may use the same procedure several times in a row to populate
different flags based on various keys, like so:

[SNIP]

CallFlag  = S_MKIUFD_getVerticalFlag(K#Comp:HLJYNB:HLFQNQ:'CAL');
EmailFlag = S_MKIUFD_getVerticalFlag(K#Comp:HLJYNB:HLFQNQ:'EML');
FaxFlag = S_MKIUFD_getVerticalFlag(K#Comp:HLJYNB:HLFQNQ:'FAX');
HTMLFlag = S_MKIUFD_getVerticalFlag(K#Comp:HLJYNB:HLFQNQ:'HTM');
MailFlag = S_MKIUFD_getVerticalFlag(K#Comp:HLJYNB:HLFQNQ:'MAI');
RentFlag = S_MKIUFD_getVerticalFlag(K#Comp:HLJYNB:HLFQNQ:'REN');

What does this subprocedure do, exactly? I know, it "populates fields inan output file based on a key" huh? Does it open/close files? Whatis it returning? What do you mean by "populates fields in an output file"even?

All I've been able to pick up from your message is that you call asubprocedure, and that you don't like the performance. Okay, great. Whatdoes the subprocedure actually do that might affect performance?

I've done some reading on Activation groups in the ILE Reference, but
it's made my head go wobbly.  I'm guessing maybe I should update my
service program and change the shared activation group attribute to
*Yes.

If you compiled the SRVPGM with ACTGRP(*CALLER), then why would activationgroups make any difference in performance? Why would a shared activationgroup help? I'm missing your logic here.

Since ACTGRP(*CALLER) doesn't create an activation group, how can youshare it? Why would you want to?

Seems to me that your subprocedure does something that's not efficientenough. Maybe you're opening/closing a file each time, but didn't do thatbefre you used a subprocedure. Maybe you're using VALUE variables orcopying a big piece of data, and that's taking time.

You need to look at the code and figure out what could be slowing youdown...