<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Strange result with processing search lists in Operating System - OpenVMS</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858826#M34758</link>
    <description>Next try on attachment:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Proost.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Have one on me.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;jpe</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:39:50 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Jan van den Ende</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2006-09-07T14:39:50Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Strange result with processing search lists</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858825#M34757</link>
      <description>Our development team ran into some strange behavior.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;They were able to boil it down to the handling of search lists.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I have appended a (pretty minimal) reproducer.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;In the beginning of the procedure are 4 specifications of the same file (AUTHORIZE.EXE, but that is just a pick because that will exeist on any system).&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Pick each one of those, to show the change in behavior.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Two of the specifications include (directly: SYS$SYSROOT; or indirectly: SYS$SYSTEM) a search list. Two others do not (directly, via SYS$SYSDEVICE, although we also tried its fysical name; or via SYS$COMMON).&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The procedure processes the same file spec repeatedly.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;And now for the surprise: using a search list specification, after some repetitions it will suddenly enter the main ELSE branch. No error or anything.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The number of repetitions is pretty constant on any node, but varies from about a dozen to about 70 on different nodes.&lt;BR /&gt;Strangely enough, on ONE node (which I personally have no account on) it is reported to have run 1000 loops without branching.&lt;BR /&gt;The really weird thing is, a filespec without search list reaches at least 10000 loops.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The phenomenon was detected on an application-defined search list, the system root example is just an generally testable reproducer showing it to exist there as well.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The routine shows a commented-out DUMMY search to try to reset the context. That makes no difference.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I DID try to add a one minute wait just a few iterations before the strange branch, to try and catch process statistics, but operational activities prevented me from trying them today. I hope tomorrow they will provide extra info, but in the mean time, I like &lt;BR /&gt;YOU&lt;BR /&gt;to have a look/show your insights/tell us why/share your view.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;If it somehow has to do with some quota or stack running out, I consider the fact that that is happening _SILENTLY_, _WITHOUT_ any message, to be a bug; and it will be hard to convince me otherwise.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So,&lt;BR /&gt;may I invite your vision and/or experience?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Proost.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Have one on me.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;jpe&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:28:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858825#M34757</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jan van den Ende</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-09-07T14:28:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Strange result with processing search lists</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858826#M34758</link>
      <description>Next try on attachment:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Proost.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Have one on me.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;jpe</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:39:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858826#M34758</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jan van den Ende</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-09-07T14:39:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Strange result with processing search lists</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858827#M34759</link>
      <description>He jan,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I didn't try it (too short term, will be off for a time after tonight) but one thing stroke me that might xplain the behaviour - somewhat.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The reproducer shows:&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;f$search("''wtm_file'.*",cnt) *so WITH context)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;in one branche and&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;f$search("''wtm_file'") (without context) &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;in the other.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Since the contents in the first branch will change with every loop (since cbt will be increased) f$search will restart the search. The second branch will use the default context and so expire when the list is exhausted.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Try specifying a fixed contents on both, or none at all. What would the outcome be?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;(I'll read the answer over two weeks)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Willem</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 15:20:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858827#M34759</guid>
      <dc:creator>Willem Grooters</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-09-07T15:20:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Strange result with processing search lists</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858828#M34760</link>
      <description>Patient: "Doctor it hurts when I do this"&lt;BR /&gt;Doctor: "Stop doing that, and you'll be fine"&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;What is the purpose of more than a few active SEARCH context in this, or any, application ???&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Which application can really usefully keep track of that? DCL+RMS certaintly need lots of memory to remember each context, ready to continue where the application left off, but here the application never comes back.&lt;BR /&gt;DCL memeroy is limited, and may vary from system to system, and may be context (sorry!) dependend. That is... how many files does dcl have open, how many symbols,...&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So my guess is that DCL/RMS simply runs out of memory and fails to nicely report that.&lt;BR /&gt;There is no 'status' for f$search so there is no good way to communicate a problem other then not retruning a name.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;If the application insists on using fresh context identifiers all the time, then it will need to learn to 'clear' any old context which is no longer needed.&lt;BR /&gt;It can do so by repeating the f$search untill an empty string is returned.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Or it could re-use the context with a new search string, thus closing the old, starting a new.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;The difference in reaction from the various ways of specifying the path, is the complexity of the context chosen. A simple wildcard filespec vs a searchlist.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Hope this helps,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;met vriendelijke groetjes,&lt;BR /&gt;Hein.&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 17:00:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858828#M34760</guid>
      <dc:creator>Hein van den Heuvel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-09-07T17:00:53Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Strange result with processing search lists</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858829#M34761</link>
      <description>Thank you both.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So much for quickly trying a reproducer without thourough inspection.&lt;BR /&gt;I had not yet noted the new stream id for every search   :-(&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;(the development team has accepted the explanation, and are addressing the issue)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Upon your note, I moved the "dummy" search into the first branch and uncommented it.&lt;BR /&gt;1000 loops without breaking.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;That tickled my curiosity, so now I tried again without dummy search, because I still was intrigued by the difference in using/not using search lists.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I _WAS_ able to have it blow with non-searchlist filespecs, _BUT_, now it consistently blew with the expected SYMOVF overflow error.&lt;BR /&gt;And from the MUCH larger number of loops I deduce some understanding of just HOW demanding searchlist processing is (!!)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So, the issue now changes into:&lt;BR /&gt;WHY does a symbol overflow error escape getting noticed in searchlist processing?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;To summarize once again:&lt;BR /&gt;unexplained different behavior in reacting to symbol buffer overflow in processing filespecs in searchlists compared to non-searchlist operations.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Anyone any reactions?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Proost.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Have one on me.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;jpe</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 13:34:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858829#M34761</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jan van den Ende</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-09-08T13:34:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Strange result with processing search lists</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858830#M34762</link>
      <description>In my testing it was the F$PARSE which failed when it returned "" and not ".".&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;And it failed after only 7 search contexts. I would imagine the structures for the F$SEARCH and F$PARSE are kept in an area sized by PIOPAGES.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;/Guenther</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 17:23:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/operating-system-openvms/strange-result-with-processing-search-lists/m-p/3858830#M34762</guid>
      <dc:creator>Guenther Froehlin</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-09-08T17:23:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

