Copyright © TIBCO Software Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright © TIBCO Software Inc. All Rights Reserved


Chapter 6 Specification of NLS Characteristics – @NLS1 Table : Example Specifications for locale.codepage

Example Specifications for locale.codepage
Factors to Use for Determining Specifications
You should try to exploit any similarity of specifications to minimize the overhead of character data code page translation for remote accesses. The best choice depends on the following:
Example 2 explains the consequences of not applying this consideration.
Example 1
The following is a valid specification for a cluster of three nodes running in Swedish:
Node Name
Translation Required
SVEN.IBM‑037
SVEN.IBM‑278
SVEN.IBM‑278
SVEN.IBM‑278
SVEN.IBM‑037
SVEN.IBM‑278
In the above example, NODE1 and NODE3 perform translations when they make requests from or respond to either of the other Data Object Brokers; NODE2 performs no translations.
Example 2
The following specification results in more processing, because it fails to exploit any commonality of code page representation. It forces each Data Object Broker to perform translations on each remote request and on each response to a remote request.
Node Name
Translation Required
SVEN.IBM‑037
SVEN.IBM‑500
SVEN.IBM‑278
SVEN.IBM‑500
SVEN.IBM‑037
SVEN.IBM‑500
Unless there is some compelling reason to use IBM‑500 as the communication code page, it would be more efficient to choose some other enterprise-wide communication code page value.
The above specification is invalid as SVEN.IBM‑500 is not a correct locale.codepage. It is used for illustration purposes only.
Example 3
Using the same scenario, IBM‑037 could be a better choice as a remote value. With this specification, only the z/OS node performs code page translations for remote requests/responses.
Node Name
Translation Required
SVEN.IBM‑037
SVEN.IBM‑037
SVEN.IBM‑278
SVEN.IBM‑037
SVEN.IBM‑037
SVEN.IBM‑037

Copyright © TIBCO Software Inc. All Rights Reserved
Copyright © TIBCO Software Inc. All Rights Reserved