Re:Re: [IDMSVENDOR-L] Access to Lock Data Used in PMRM?

Discussion created by ca.portal.admin on Mar 10, 2010
Some bright spark had the idea of using CSYPGNUM, or a variant thereof, as an
xtended run unit in the premap to get a ""next number"" (as such the Cobol
rogram currencies would be included in the ADS currency save/restore logic) -
hich the user can then decide to use or not to use in the response process
usiness logic.
This may be the type of update that you are referring to?
Cheers - Gary
Gary Cherlet
ustice Technology Services
epartment of Justice, SA Government
"""""""" Telephone +61 (0)8 8226 5199
@@ Facsimile +61 (0)8 8226 5311
> Mobile +61 (0)41 333 1613
Murphy says:
. ""Everything is a system.""
. ""Everything is part of a larger system.""
. ""The universe is infinitely systematized both upward (larger systems) and
ownward (smaller systems).""
. ""All systems are infinitely complex (the illusion of simplicity comes from
ocusing attention on one or a few variables).""
This e-mail message and any attachments are qualified as follows: Addressing:
f you have received this e-mail in error, please advise by reply e-mail to the
ender. Please also destroy the original transmission and its contents.
onfidentiality: This e-mail may contain confidential information which also
ay be legally privileged. Only the intended recipient(s) may access, use,
istribute or copy this e-mail. Individual Views: Unless otherwise indicated,
he views expressed are those of the sender, not Justice Technology Services.
omputer Viruses: It is the recipient's responsibility to check the e-mail and
ny attached files for viruses.

----Original Message-----
From: IDMS Public Discussion Forum [mailTo:IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM] On Behalf
f Linda J Casey
Sent: Wednesday, 10 March 2010 4:00
Subject: Re: [IDMSVENDOR-L] Access to Lock Data Used in PMRM?
If they are seeing an update in a premap and then again in a response process,
hen I believe they have modified the code. I can't recall a single instance in
AS where an update was done in the premap and then again in the response
rocess. The dialogs had a similar rhythm to them. That said, users modified
he code on a regular basis.
Linda J. Casey, PMP, CSM
anaging Member
un Right, LLC

----Original Message-----
From: IDMS Public Discussion Forum [mailTo:IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM] On Behalf
f Cherlet, Gary (JTS)
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [IDMSVENDOR-L] Access to Lock Data Used in PMRM?
Don - question, accepting completely the NOTIFY locks used by ADS across
seudo-converse. Here's a scenario.
1) The dialog does OBTAIN on record types A, B and C, and a MODIFY of C in the
remap. At the pseudo-converse the update of C must be COMMITTED when the FINISH
f the run unit occurs - but ADS maintains NOTIFY locks on the 3 record types.
2) Now - in the response process the dialog does an OBTAIN and MODIFY of record
ype D - when ADS BINDs the Run Unit would it not re-acquire the NOTIFY locks as
atabase run unit locks PRIOR to doing the OBTAIN and MODIFY of record type D?
3) So it would be possible for the A, B or C record types to interact with other
ctive tasks - thus causing confusion for the developer who only sees record
ype D referenced in the response process code?
Just curious - as this is the sort of scenario that I believe the CAS user is
Cheers - Gary