🚀 go-pugleaf

Thanks Binyamin

You mentioned "your statement above indicates a bug.". What is the bug?

Thanks
Ing


On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:04:52 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
<bdissen@dissensoftware.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 14:12:53 -0400 Ing Usar <inguser2005@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>
>:>On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:43:30 +0300, Binyamin Dissen
>:><bdissen@dissensoftware.com> wrote:
>
>:>>On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:44:02 -0400 Ing Usar <inguser2005@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
>
>:>>:>One other problem -  I am getting an 0C4-11 when calling one of the
services
>:>>:>in SP. Apparently the SP just waits by calling a WAIT macro (It doesn't
>:>>:>expect the client to POST it - so waits endlessly).
>:>>
>:>>Not too bright - check out the COMM ECB.
>
>:>Ing#### Question I have is is there any harm in letting the SP thread WAIT
>:>endlessly if it has nothing else to do  (at least for now) after
>:>establishing the  CMS environment. Won't the client when it calls a PC run
>:>on its own TCB?
>
>Always a good idea to allow the job to terminate cleanly.
>
>:>>:>                                                    Also the services are
>:>>:>not LOADed but is loaded into LPA. Could this be the reason for  this
abend?
>
>:>>Could be.
>
>:>Ing#### I tried placing this in LPA and fix it dynamically thru setprog. But
>:>still the same result. So are the services typically loaded ?
>
>Typically no need to place the services in common (may be different running on
>real old ESA hardware).
>
>:>>What is it referencing? What addressing mode?
>
>:>Ing##### Amode 31. The service I have currently does nothing as I am still
>:>trying to establish this connectivity from client to server and back. So all
>:>it does is BAKR & PR
>
>Look at the 0C4 information - it will tell you a bit.
>
>Look at the PSW and at what is being referenced.
>
>As a side point, your statement above indicates a bug.
>
>:>>:>Or do I need to explicitly make it non-swappable?
>
>:>>It would be a good idea.
>
>:>Ing##### Should I make both the SP and the services fixed in memory in
>:>addition to making the SP address space non-swappable?
>
>The service A/S must be swapped in when the service is invoked. The code
>itself need not (unless it is invoked by some service running in a state that
>cannot tolerate page faults).
>
>:>>:>Typically how are the service providers designed while waiting for a
request
>:>>:>to come? Do they just execute WAIT ?
>
>:>>Depends on what else they do.
>
>:>>Why are you building this? Is it just practice, or do you have a use?
>
>:>Ing##### We have a need to consolidate a bunch of services callable from a
>:>few other address spaces. This is being done mostly to ease the maintenance
>
>Have you considered how to update them on a running system? Or that a failure
>in one can affect all of them?
>
>--
>Binyamin Dissen <bdissen@dissensoftware.com>
>http://www.dissensoftware.com
>
>Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel
>
>
>Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
>you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.
>
>I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
>especially those from irresponsible companies.