× 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.


  1.  Home
  2. RPG400-L
  3. June 2007

Re: Activation Group

Jerry,

It should be pointed out that IBM recommends that you create your trigger
programs using ACTGRP(*CALLER) - I guess because of the commitment control
issue. Not that IBM is always right, but it's definitely worth documenting
your system clearly in the trigger program and elsewhere for the sake of the
next guy...

Rory


On 6/1/07, Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[SNIP]
However -- a while back, Birgitta told me that this is a bad practice.

Her reasoning is that commitment control is scoped to the activation
group. So if you have commitment control active and you write to a file
that's in a different activation group, then whatever that trigger does
is not covered by the commitment control, thus screwing up the "all
these things are part of one transaction" nature of commitment control.

By contrast, if you use ACTGRP(*CALLER), the trigger will be under the
same commitment control definition as the program that fired it, which
is preferred.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
Follow-Ups:
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.