×
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.
On 29 Aug 2012 16:42, Rory Hewitt wrote:
<<SNIP>> turn off the trigger by using the CHGPFTRG command and
specifying STATE(*DISABLED). You don't need exclusive file access to
use the CHGPFTRG command (unlike the ADDPFTRG and RMVPFTRG commands).
<<SNIP>>
If that claim about the Change Physical File Trigger command is
accurate [about the exclusive lock no longer being a requirement; i.e.
no CPF3202 F/QDBTRIG2 T/QDBCHGTR, as was still the case in v5r3 and IIRC
still in v5r4; I saw nothing in the docs nor anywhere else to confirm
any change], then the trigger could be disabled before the file is
opened in the job and then enabled again after the file is opened [given
the change can still be effected while the file is open in the job; i.e.
no CPF3220]. Given the batch job was designed to open the file and keep
that file open, then the trigger would not be activated for its I/O
requests because whether the trigger is active is established upon open
and thus is an attribute of the ODP. But all opens during that [even
very brief] period of time while the trigger was disabled, would
similarly lack triggered I/O requests.
Even if the exclusive allocation is [still] required to effect
CHGPFTRG, the same means as noted above, still could be utilized.
However, the batch job would need to have established an exclusive lock
on the file for the window of time that the changes would be made to
*DISABLED and then *ENABLED, with the open request(s) between the two.
Unfortunately a database *FILE [effectively] can not be locked
exclusively. The ALCOBJ locks a member with the specified lock state
[the *FILE object is only locked with *SHRRD], so a multi-member [or
only just capable] file would have to have all members locked, yet a
locked member does not even prevent adding a new member... so depending
on how the file is used, a semaphore [or something] could be required to
fully ensure no other job was allowed to open any member of the file
while the series of actions [the trigger being disabled, the file
opened, and the trigger being re-enabled] were being performed, to be
sure all other openers would have the trigger activated for their open
requests.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
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.