RE: MCH3601 unmonitored by RCF100 at statement E000000

["Vincent Forbes" <vforbes@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jon

Thanks for confirming my suspicion.

Nothing has changed in the programs or files for over 2 years.  My guess is
that it was the order of programs called that caused this problem.  There
are about 20 RPG *mod & III programs in the group that can be called in
almost any order.

As for the pointer error, my guess is it was caused by an RPGLE *mod calling
an old RPG III program.


Vincent Forbes


-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Jon Paris
Sent: August 16, 2010 4:19 PM
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: MCH3601 unmonitored by RCF100 at statement E000000

You are looking in the right place. The error indicates that you are  
using a shared ODP and the opens do not match. I don't see an Add on  
the fist F-spec but maybe my vision is worse than I think.

Normally when a shared ODP is in use a dummy open is done in the CL  
that issues the override to ensure that the file is opened with full  
capabilities - that way if subsequent programs are called in a  
haphazard sequence it doesn't matter. When you rely in the RPG to open  
the file you have to be sure that you have a full open in the first  
program called.

Has the CL changed? Or the call sequence?

I'm surprised that it blows with a pointer error, but then you're not  
trapping any errors on the write (and assumedly have no PSSR in the  
program) so most anything can happen I guess.


Jon Paris

www.Partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com



On Aug 16, 2010, at 4:02 PM, rpg400-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I noticed the Diagnostic error:
> CPF4123 - Open options ignored for shared open of member FKITMSTR.
> The type code is 1. - The input, output, update, or delete options  
> are not the same as or a subset of those specified on
> the first open operation.
>
> I am guessing that the problem has to do with the fact that the file  
> was opened with update/add then with output/add.
> Or should I look elsewhere?