ca.portal.admin

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=20
xtended run unit in the premap to get a ""next number"" (as such the Cobol=
=20
rogram currencies would be included in the ADS currency save/restore logic=
) -=20
hich the user can then decide to use or not to use in the response process=
=20
usiness logic.=20
This may be the type of update that you are referring to?
Cheers - Gary=20
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
\/ MailTo:gary.cherlet@sa.gov.au
Murphy says:
. ""Everything is a system.""
. ""Everything is part of a larger system.""
. ""The universe is infinitely systematized both upward (larger systems) an=
d=20
ownward (smaller systems).""
. ""All systems are infinitely complex (the illusion of simplicity comes fr=
om=20
ocusing attention on one or a few variables).""
This e-mail message and any attachments are qualified as follows: Addressi=
ng: =20
f you have received this e-mail in error, please advise by reply e-mail to=
the=20
ender. Please also destroy the original transmission and its contents.=20
onfidentiality: This e-mail may contain confidential information which al=
so=20
ay be legally privileged. Only the intended recipient(s) may access, use,=
=20
istribute or copy this e-mail. Individual Views: Unless otherwise indicat=
ed,=20
he views expressed are those of the sender, not Justice Technology Service=
s.=20
omputer Viruses: It is the recipient's responsibility to check the e-mail=
and=20
ny attached files for viruses.

----Original Message-----
From: IDMS Public Discussion Forum [mailTo:IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM] On=
Behalf=20
f Linda J Casey
Sent: Wednesday, 10 March 2010 4:00
To: IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
Subject: Re: [IDMSVENDOR-L] Access to Lock Data Used in PMRM?
Gary,
If they are seeing an update in a premap and then again in a response proc=
ess,=20
hen I believe they have modified the code. I can't recall a single instan=
ce in=20
AS where an update was done in the premap and then again in the response=
=20
rocess. The dialogs had a similar rhythm to them. That said, users modif=
ied=20
he code on a regular basis.
L
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=20
f Cherlet, Gary (JTS)
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 8:28 PM
To: IDMS-L@LISTSERV.IUASSN.COM
Subject: Re: [IDMSVENDOR-L] Access to Lock Data Used in PMRM?
Don - question, accepting completely the NOTIFY locks used by ADS across=
=20
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=20
remap. At the pseudo-converse the update of C must be COMMITTED when the=
FINISH=20
f the run unit occurs - but ADS maintains NOTIFY locks on the 3 record typ=
es.
2) Now - in the response process the dialog does an OBTAIN and MODIFY of=
record=20
ype D - when ADS BINDs the Run Unit would it not re-acquire the NOTIFY loc=
ks as=20
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=20
ctive tasks - thus causing confusion for the developer who only sees recor=
d=20
ype D referenced in the response process code?
Just curious - as this is the sort of scenario that I believe the CAS user=
is=20
eeing.
Cheers - Gary

Outcomes