Re: HTTPPOSTCLOBVERBOSE - invoking a HTTPS web service

On 28-Jul-2016 02:41 -0500, Eric wrote:

Sorry for the late reply.
I just checked.

*** This is only a subset of the PTFs which I think is relevant to my
DB2 query ***

*On the machine that my SQL works with HTTPS*
Level PTF Group Text
<<SNIP\pared to what is most likely relevant>>
15317 SF99710 CUMULATIVE PTF PACKAGE C5317710
39 SF99701 DB2 FOR IBM I
23 SF99572 JAVA

*On the machine that my SQL does not work with HTTPS*
Level PTF Group Text
<<SNIP\pared to what is most likely relevant>>
14283 SF99710 CUMULATIVE PTF PACKAGE C4283710
137 SF99709 GROUP HIPER
33 SF99701 DB2 FOR IBM I
20 SF99572 JAVA

The above pared list is probably the most relevant; i.e. Cumulative, HIPer, DB2 for i, Java. The C4283710 and 14283 designations are CyJJJVRM and YYJJJ respectively, for which YY is the last two digits of the year, JJJ is the number of days into the year, y is the last one digit of the year, C means Cumulative, and VRM is the Version-Release-Modification level. They signify the set of cumulative maintenance on the failing system was created for a tentative release of 10-Oct-2014, comprised mostly of PTFs that had been created in the several months prior; i.e. implying the maintenance on the system is around two years old. Contrast that with the system on which the request is not failing, whereby the cumulative reflects 13-Nov-2015, implying such maintenance on that system is some 13 months more recent.

I'm not familiar with PTFs and hardware but judging from the list.
There are a lot of missing DB2 Web Query which I assume is needed to
run the DB2 service SQL?

The DB2 Web Query for IBM i is a separate product, quite unrelated to the DB2 for i SQL functions used to access web services. And FWiW, the relationship of this topic thread about the use of the subject SQL feature with /web/ [aka browser-based] topics is quite tangential; similar to a relatedness of an SQL topic to any specific HLL when the issue with the SQL is irrespective of host language. In a prior reply that I had composed, one that I chose to file rather than send, I was going to offer: "To avoid replies merely trying to dissuade using the SQL features, perhaps consider posting on midrange-l instead. Despite having a relationship to the web as a back-end, that particular SQL usage shown, is not inherently related to either the front-end\client\browser-based work or the IBM i as HTTP server, for which topics about 'Web Enabling the IBM i' would generally be [re]directed here."