Hello Kris, You are right. I had just changed an existing rexx that was constructed
this way. Or rather, I had put a READTO into the rexx just to be able to be able to process the input before it enters a pipeline in the rexx. And indeed it would be better to PEEKTO/READTO or even more so, to check returncodes. I don't mind to delay records here, the stage writes records to disk and doesn't output them to an output stream. But the original, as well as my new one use 'CALLPIPE *:' rather than 'READTO input ; CALLPIPE VAR input,'. So in this case the input is not checked. The jeremy stage did note that inside the rexx stage a callpipe specs was in wait.locate and a lookup wa s in wait.locate but nothing about the returncode of the READTO command. An d I didn't trace the rexx itself in that detail so I didn't notice the rc 1 2 of READTO. I did now and indeed the return code is 12. Just a test with CALLPIPE *: reveals that the CALLPIPE do not end in a returncode so even when the input stream has severed the callpipe *: doesn't notice it and doesn't set the pipeline returncode. Instead it continues processing. So now, with the connector in the callpipe I do need to check my input stream before the callpipe connects to it. Regards, Berry. On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 15:08:05 +0200, Kris Buelens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >'STREAMSTATE INPUT' should not be required here... > >My guess is that "process" has set the returncode to 0, so your >do-loop condition check is not testing the return code of READTO. >The pseudocode also suggests your stage does "delay the record". You >should code it like this: >'PEEKTO INPUT' /* Get first record, without consuming it */ >Do while rc=0 > <process> > 'READTO' /* consume the handled record */ > 'PEEKTO INPUT' /* get next record or stop */ >end
