Re: avoid running ILE programs in the DAG...

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Larry Ducie <larry_ducie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Maybe the problem you describe is a side effect of the DB being

sandwiched between your calling code and your trigger. I'd imagine IBM had
to do some serious smoke/mirrors stuff there to try and take the DB out of
the equation when using a trigger with *CALLER. I'd imagine the DB runs in
the DAG so there'd be two control boundaries in there but I'm sure a trigger
running in *CALLER still takes the AG from the object that called the DB
code. This suggests there's some serious fudging going on in there to make
that happen!. Maybe they haven't got it quite right yet. It maybe be that
particular circumstance where your issues arise and not in the general ILE
environment itself.

I'm with you Larry, I think IBM is doing something special behind the
scenes for trigger programs.

I pointed out over a year ago to Allen that his trigger (mediator)
program was using a named activation group instead of the *CALLER
that IBM recommends and that his example service programs also were
created with a named group instead of the recommend *CALLER.

That may have been why he didn't see commitment control working,
*CALLER is basically a requirement for that.

Charles
--
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.