RE: RPGIV to Java prototype/call miss-match

Pete;

We're at 6.1.

With the enhancements to RPGIV thread handling in 6.1 I tested another Java interface process with and without *SERIALIZE and found no problems with the results but performance of the process without *SERIALIZE was much better.

This may bite me later, but I have a note in the production source as to the reason Thread(*SERIALIZE) is not set and a caveat to put it in if problems occur.

I don't know that leaving Thread(*SERIALIZE) off is "good" or "bad" but it seems to work. I assume someone (Scott? :)) will tell me if I am being foolish in my assumptions.

Duane Christen


--


Duane Christen
Senior Software Engineer
(319) 790-7162
Duane.Christen@xxxxxxxxxx

Visit PAETEC.COM


-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pete Hall
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 8:55 PM
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: RPGIV to Java prototype/call miss-match

Christen, Duane wrote:

Pete;

This is the original code: http://code.midrange.com/795c6c994c.html

This is the modified code: http://code.midrange.com/dde8570204.html

The modified code is not stripped down, but basically the only difference is the addition of the object (variable) instance.

Duane Christen

Thanks Duane.

I notice you do not use THREAD(*SERIALIZE) in the H spec. Is that only necessary when you call an RPG module from java? In this case, I assume you are initiating a multi-threaded environment from a single threaded one, and therefore it's unnecessary? As you can probably tell, I have not done this.

--
Pete Hall
pete@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i (RPG400-L) mailing list To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.