I haven't tried an LE condition handler. I looked it up in the LE manuals, and it's definitely something worth trying. I will try it tomorrow.
Thanks for the suggestions! David Logan -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland Schiradin Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 1:54 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: C++ recovery from (an otherwise) system abend David, have you tried a LE-Condition-handler instead of catch()? I believe a C catch() wont work for an LE enabled assembler program. Did you get a CEEDUMP with the abend code? Have you tried a USRHDL or register a Condition handler? roland >The main problem with this solution (or any other solution) that checked >something before I make the PC call is that the server could crash (or be >brought down) between the check and the PC call. > >Were I to implement something like the solution you describe, I would hope >that I could either use the get name/token pair routine to check to make >sure the server is up, or perhaps be able to check for existence of the >servers ASCB or TCB, so that I didn't need to place anything into common >storage. > >What I was hoping for was a solution where there was no chance of >intermittent failure. The only way I know of to support that would be to be >able to trap the ABEND. Is there really no way to issue an ESTAE type of >recovery routine in C++ and return control to some function or something >similar? > >Thanks! > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
