Re: Service Program issue.

[mlazarus <mlazarus@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Phil,

 Is commitment control active on this file?  If you have uncommitted 
records then PGMB might not see them yet.

 -mark

On 6/10/2021 2:59 PM, Mark Waterbury wrote:
> Charles and Phil,
>
> You could easily (inadvertently) get that *SRVPGM activated into more than one activation group.  This can affect override scoping, etc.  :-/
>
> If the programs issue OVRDBFs, it may not always give the expected result, due to poor defaults chosen for OVRDBF with respect to ACTGRP scoping.
>
> If the *SRVPGM is ACTGRP(*CALLER) they could easily call procedures from within a program that itself runs in the *DFTACTGRP, and as you well know, this is almost never "a good thing."
>
> You might also have other programs invoking this same *SRVPGM from some other *NEW or named AG, such as QILE, etc., and then you could easily have more than one copy of the same *SRVPGM "activated" within the same job  (but not in the same AG).  Then you will likely have a bad day.
>
> Things only get worse as you try to follow that rabbit down the rabbit hole.
>
> Just saying ...
>
> Mark S. Waterbury
>
>    
> > On Thursday, June 10, 2021, 01:33:32 PM EDT, Charles Wilt<charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
> >      
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 11:21 AM Charles Wilt<charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>    
> > One or more of those statements is incorrect.  (unless maybe you're way
> > behind on PTFs)
> >
> >      
> I suppose that's a bit harsh and not the best way of putting it...
>
> Point being, SETLL and READE work the same way every time.  So there's
> something else going on.
>
>
> Charles
>