× 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.



You need a new Order Entry system ! > From: SPorterfield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:07:31 -0500
Subject: RE: Impacts of changing the WaitRCD default?

I had one very similar years ago and changed the WAIRCD on just one logical to *IMMED. It was like a brand new world. It's amazing how long 60 seconds is when you're staring at the screen! Combined with a nice display of who is locking the record, it's great. Be sure to know your system though - you may inadvertently affect batch processes if they use the same file.
--
Sean Porterfield


-----Original Message-----
From: Koester, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 14:25
To: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Impacts of changing the WaitRCD default?

We have a file that was designed to restrict order entry access so that only one person can be entering/updating an order at a time. Works great, except from day-one (decades ago) the file has had the default WAITRCD value of 60 seconds. This means that any interactive session that encounters the locked order stalls out for 60 seconds before it gives control back to the user, along with a helpful message that indicates the record is in use by another job.

I could use an OVRDBF to change this on a per-program basis, but...
I'm proposing we use a CHGPF to set that file's WAITRCD time to 2 or 3 seconds, so the user can get on with their life, and I don't have to go looking for other places that need the OVRDBF treatment.

I was asked to inquire about possible adverse impacts that others may have encountered in using this more global approach to do this.

Note that I'm not proposing (yet) that we change the default value across the system -- just this one file.

Thanks for your thoughts.
-- Michael
--


This email is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) above and may contain information that is privileged. If you have received this message in error or are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender immediately and delete this email message from your computer as any and all unauthorized distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
--
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.


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.