We've had a number of discussions in the past about commitment control. I don't recall if it was on this list or another. I recall the topic being discussed on the Easy400 Yahoo group too, if you're patient enough to research the archives.
I pointed out an instance where I believed commitment control was valid, and argued the point, but the discussions convinced me that commitment control was generally over-hyped and over-used in many contexts, where it really didn't add value to programs that use record-level-access methods (chain, update, write). So you might want to consider removing commitment control. The imagined value may not be real.
On the other hand, once you've taken the time to implement code, it's hard to pull it out. And office politics sometimes override common sense. So if you're bent on using commitment control, I believe the consensus on the Easy400 site was to modify the programs to use persistent CGI.
Nathan.
----- Original Message ----
From: "hrabar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <hrabar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 10:52:30 AM
Subject: Re: [WEB400] RPG-CGI using commitment control
We are not doing any updating until we have all of the data, and have
validated it.
The problem is with starting/ending commitment control ,and with the
opening/closing of files.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
