Date:         Wed, 6 Nov 2002 13:04:15 -0800
Reply-To:     CICS List <CICS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Sender:       CICS List <CICS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Bob Juch <bjuch@UNICOMSI.COM>
Subject:      Re: TDQ situation
In-Reply-To:  <sdc92338.083@BHGWMESG01.BAPTIST-HEALTH.ORG>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Brad,

In the first place it seems strange to be reading all of the records then writing all but the first back. What is the point of that?

Are you _really_ sure no transaction is being kicked off after the first record is written (back) to the TDQ? One should be even before the subsequent records are written. Perhaps the ENQ causes the transaction to quietly go away before reading?

Bob Juch
Director of Technical Services
UNICOM Systems, Inc.
http://www.unicomsi.com
818-838-0606 x7018


-----Original Message-----
From: CICS List [mailto:CICS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU]On Behalf Of Brad Terry
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 12:12 PM
To: CICS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: TDQ situation

I've kinda asked about this before, but now I know more about it.

We are trying to get to TS1.3 in our AORs and we are having one problem we can't get to the bottom of.  It seems we have a TDQ with a trigger level of 1.  When records are written to this TDQ they are written 3 or 4 at a time.  The transaction that is triggered Enques the TDQ, reads all records into working storage, processes one record, writes the other records back to the TDQ, Dequeues, and ends.

In 4.1 the transaction is then started again because there are records in the TDQ.  However, in TS1.3 the trigger isn't fired again until more records are written to the TDQ by another transaction.

I'm a systems programmer so I'm not real clear on the ins and outs of the application, but I have checked the TDQ definitions and transaction and program definitions and they are the same between the two different regions.

Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Brad Terry
Baptist Health
Little Rock AR