Sam,

Thx I am looking at the msgxxx C functions..the lack of examples in the C Doc 
is maddening at times

Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
from my IPAD

'Infinite wisdom through infinite means'


> On Dec 4, 2013, at 4:25 PM, Sam Siegel <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> look at the msgctl, msggegt, msgrcv, msgsnd and msgxrcv in the c/c++ run
> time documentation.  sa22-7821.
> 
> These queue functions can be wrapped in C programs.  COBOL can call C.
> I've not used them, but they look very useful.
> 
> Since they are part of the C-runtime, they are include with the system even
> if the c/c++ compiler is not licensed.
> 
> Or you can google FIFO queue in "C" using google and get different
> implementations.  the main issue with getting code from google is the z/OS
> difference in locking mechanisms.
> 
> Or you can roll your own in ASM.
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Scott Ford <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Sam,
>> 
>> The answer is yes, but the ldap is java multi-threaded..I agree with a
>> queue ..the question is that would the queue be in assembler I assume yes
>> ...
>> 
>> Scott ford
>> www.identityforge.com
>> from my IPAD
>> 
>> 'Infinite wisdom through infinite means'
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 4, 2013, at 2:15 PM, Sam Siegel <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Scott - Do the security action messages and non-section action messages
>>> come into the process via the same tcp connection?  The based on type of
>>> processing (security vs.non-security) get processed by different
>> sub-tasks?
>>> 
>>> If the answer is yes, you may need 3 sub taks:
>>> 1) tcp processing
>>> 2) security processing
>>> 3) non-security processing
>>> 
>>> The task could be connected by queues.  The tcp task would put a work
>>> element on either the security or non-security queue based on processing
>>> needs.
>>> 
>>> the worker tasks would process the work and put the answer on a queue
>> going
>>> back to the tcp task.
>>> 
>>> depending on how you configure the processing will determine the number
>> of
>>> queues needed.  For example:
>>> 1 queue to security task from tcp task
>>> 1 queue to non-security task from tcp task
>>> 1 queue to tcp task to security task
>>> 1 queue to tcp task to non-security task
>>> With dedicated queues, you don't need to have "work" type identifiers.
>> The
>>> queue defines the direction and purpose.
>>> 
>>> If you use shared queues, then you need more info in the queue message to
>>> determine purpose ( sec vs. non-sec) and potentially direction.
>>> 
>>> It may be easier (design, coding and testing) to use dedicated queues.
>>> 
>>> Sam
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Scott Ford <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> All:
>>>> 
>>>> I have what seem to be a dumb question, but this is my first venture is
>>>> real multi-tasking...
>>>> 
>>>> We have a single thread Cobol STC that performs all the necessary
>>>> functions we need to do,
>>>> Two STCS  perform Security Reconciliation and Provisioning just to
>> provide
>>>> everyone with a general idea .
>>>> Our z/OS STCs talk via encrypted  messages to a LDAP that resides on
>>>> Windows or Linux or any *nix derivative.
>>>> 
>>>> I am not 100% percent sure based on my reading we can multi-thread Cobol
>>>> like we need to do . We can separate storage , i.e.;
>>>> with Local-Storage, no issue. I need to have two threads running TCPIP.
>> We
>>>> currently use EZASOKET, which performs and works fine. I need one
>> thread to
>>>> issue various security commands via r_admin and the other thread
>> performing
>>>> other not security type calls to other programs.  But can I do TCP calls
>>>> from a second thread or do I have to issue a 'ATTACH' in assembler and
>> call
>>>> the new Cobol code ? I am thinking about two separate listening ports
>>>> because our STC listens based on a parameter provided port.
>>>> 
>>>> If I do the 'ATTACH' how would the Cobol program 'POST' back ..
>>>> 
>>>> As always Best Regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Scott J Ford
>>>> Software Engineer
>>>> http://www.identityforge.com/
>>>> 
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>> 
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to