Re: EOFDLY not working with full procedural file, only primary

[Peter Dow <petercdow@xxxxxxxxx>]

A further note on this issue:

In the below code, if I leave the F-spec as keyed, but change

    setll (*loval) ORDERH1;

to

    setll *start ORDERH1;

it pays attention to the EOFDLY.

--
*Peter Dow* /
Dow Software Services, Inc.
909 793-9050
petercdow@xxxxxxxxx
pdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

/
On 5/3/2022 3:18 PM, Peter Dow wrote:
> This is on a v7r3 machine.
>
> I'm using an OVRDBF with EOFDLY(9) on a logical file that has 
> select/omit criteria.
>
> IBM says
>
>  "Also, special consideration should be taken when using end-of-file 
> delay on a file with a keyed sequence access path, opened so that the 
> keyed sequence access path is used. In this case, after end-of-file is 
> reached, the system retrieves only those records added to the file or 
> those records updated in the file that meet the specification of the 
> read operation using the keyed sequence access path."
>
> (from 
> https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/i/7.3?topic=rdr-waiting-more-records-when-end-file-is-reached)
>
> The ORDERH1 file is keyed by order#, and selects only unprocessed 
> records, indicated by a flag set to 'R'.  In order to handle the 
> situation where an order might be added that has a lower number than 
> an already processed record, I put the SETLL before the READ.  When 
> there are no records in ORDERH1, the program completely ignores the 
> EOFDLY, and ends immediately.  If I remove the SETLL, it waits on the 
> READ for the expected 9 seconds.
>
> Here's the code:
>
> ORDERH (PF)
> A          R ORDERHR
> A            POORDN        16
> A            INTSTATUS      1
>
> ORDERH1 (LF)
> A          R ORDERHR                   PFILE(ORDERH)
> A          K POORDN
> A          S INTSTATUS                 COMP(EQ 'R')
>
>
> h option(*nodebugio: *srcstmt)
> h dftactgrp(*no) actgrp(*caller)
>
> FORDERH1   UF   E           K DISK    USROPN
>
> IORDERHR
>
>    open ORDERH1;
>
>    dou %shtdn
>        OR %eof(ORDERH1);
>
>       setll (*loval) ORDERH1;
>
>       read ORDERH1;
>
>       if not %eof and not %shtdn;
>          INTSTATUS = 'P';
>          update ORDERHR %fields(INTSTATUS);
>       endif;
>
>    enddo;
>
>    close ORDERH1;
>    *inLR = *on;
>
>
> If I remove the keyed access, and change the SETLL to SETLL *START 
> ORDERH1, it pays attention to the EOFDLY.
>
> In this situation, the aforementioned website says
>
> "Special consideration should be taken when using end-of-file delay on 
> a logical file with select/omit specifications, opened so that the 
> keyed sequence access path is not used. In this case, after 
> end-of-file is reached, the system retrieves only those records added 
> to a based-on physical file that meet the select/omit specifications 
> of the logical file."
>
>
> So the questions I have are
>
> 1. Why does the SETLL cause the program to ignore the EOFDLY?
>
> 2. In the un-keyed version, IBM says it will retrieve only added 
> records.  If the file is re-using deleted records, will it find 
> records added in the middle of the file?
>
> --
> *Peter Dow* /
> Dow Software Services, Inc.
> 909 793-9050
> petercdow@xxxxxxxxx
> pdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx /