Re: RPG400-L Digest, Vol 8, Issue 738

[Barbara Morris <bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Terrence Enger wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 09:54 -0400, Jon Paris wrote:
> > ... 
> > But in the case of a "real" ILE program the only thing that really  
> > takes them out completely is the Activation Group dying.  I don't  
> > think even LR on will kill the storage.
> ...
> I wonder why it works this way.  It seems to open another way for an
> incorrect program to seem to work "by accident".  Perhaps performance?
> Concern about address space exhaustion?  I know that the storage for a
> main procedure is static, but I did not know that it is *that* static
> <grin />.
>
> Are you there, Barbara?

Yes, I'm here, but I don't really know why ILE works that way.  Jon is 
completely right.  Only OPM programs and DFTACTGRP(*YES) programs will 
have their storage deallocated with LR on.  ILE programs retain their 
storage for the lifetime of the activation group; for RPG, the 
re-initialization after LR on is handled by RPG, not by the system.

OPM and dftactgrp(*yes) programs deactivate themselves when they end 
with LR on.  It's not possible for ILE programs to deactivate 
themselves.  Even if it was possible, it would have to be at the module 
level, since each RPG module has its own private RPG cycle.

I don't know if "they" ever considered allowing ILE programs or modules 
to deactivate themselves and free up the static storage, but I doubt it. 
 The ILE static and dynamic linkages between programs, modules, and 
service programs is much more complex than the OPM dynamic linkages 
between programs.