RE: ILE performance considerations

[Buck Calabro <Buck.Calabro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Thanks for your comments, Simon.  I was
>starting to wonder what had happened
>to all the ILE proponents out there.

Some of us just haven't got enough experience with the environment you're
working with <grin>

>Another question:  The initial call to this
>system is to a cl program that runs in *CALLER
>and saves everything (libr lists, lda, etc)
>about the caller's environment and then
>calls this program(s) which run in their own
>named activation group.  On termination,
>the cl reclaims that activation group and
>restores the caller's original environment.
>If a second user, in another job, is using the
>program code reentrantly (is that a word?), what
>will happen when the first user's job tries
>to kill the activation group.

The activation group is a subdivision of the job, so JOB(123) AG(PAYROLL)
has no common storage with JOB(789) AG(PAYROLL).  So JOB(123) can do
whatever it wants with it's AG and not worry about all the other jobs.
Think of it like QTEMP for storage.
  --buck