On 19/03/2013 10:05 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:50:15 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
Doesn't task termination automatically free some resources that
the programmer would need to free specifically after a LINK?
Also if the attached program abends it doesn't sink the entire ship.
I suspect that can be covered with an ESTAE in either case. But it's
easier with ATTACH.
It's certainly easier when you don't *own* the attached program, which
is usually when I've seen this technique used.
I know some programmers worry (excessively?) about task overhead,
even to the extent of developing alternatives (JES? CICS?), or keeping
a stable of idle tasks to be dispatched when needed. I think there are
better uses for development resources.
I'm not quite sure if I understand what your point is Paul. Are you
saying that a task (thread) pool scheduler is a bad design?
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
