This problem has been resolved, it turned out to be a bug in the program
caused by the dataset being in use by another job.
Thanks for all the suggestions
Dana
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
In listserv%201105180951397570.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/18/2011
at 09:51 AM, Dana Mitchell mitchd...@gmail.com said:
Does anyone know if the FREE=CLOSE process that happens in response
to step 4 is synchronous in nature?
Yes. But I don't know what type of free is used.
This has been working
In listserv%201105191000362037.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/19/2011
at 10:00 AM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
Grrr. I detest designs that require the programmer to use delays to
(hopefully) resolve race conditions.
This doesn't look like a race issue in CLOSE. It looks like either an
What kind of dataset it is? Try looking at the ICF Catalog record via
processing
SMF Type 60-65 ...MXG/SAS if you have can be handy in generating
reports..also on the basis of type 15...
snapshot of type 15
Record type 15 is written for non-VSAM direct access, or VIO tape data sets
that are
On Thu, 19 May 2011 10:00:36 -0500, Paul Gilmartin
paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2011 08:56:49 -0500, Tim Deller wrote:
I would try coding a wait (for a few seconds at least) after the dataset
close.
This would allow time for the deallocate and catalog update to complete.
Grrr.
On Fri, 20 May 2011 09:32:27 -0500, Dana Mitchell mitchd...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks everyone for the ideas so far. It happened again yesterday and now
I'm leaning more towards this being caused by the dataset being in use by
another job.
Dana - You could use DAF to check your SMF data to see
: Fri, May 20, 2011 9:50:10 AM
Subject: Re: Question about Dynamic allocate
On Fri, 20 May 2011 09:32:27 -0500, Dana Mitchell mitchd...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks everyone for the ideas so far. It happened again yesterday and now
I'm leaning more towards this being caused by the dataset being in use
I would try coding a wait (for a few seconds at least) after the dataset close.
This would allow time for the deallocate and catalog update to complete.
Tim
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
On Thu, 19 May 2011 08:56:49 -0500, Tim Deller wrote:
I would try coding a wait (for a few seconds at least) after the dataset close.
This would allow time for the deallocate and catalog update to complete.
Grrr. I detest designs that require the programmer to use delays
to (hopefully) resolve
Hello all,
We have an inhouse written STC that processes messages from MQ and writes
them to a dataset. This processing goes like this:
1. DYNALLOC on DATA.SET.NAME
a. Request the current generation ( done by putting 0 in DALMEMBR)
b. Specify DALCLOSE (equivalent to
Hi Dana,
I would try coding the DYNALLOC free request (removing FREE=CLOSE) and
see what RC's you get. That may give you more clues.
Also, are you coding DYNAMNBR= on the STC's EXEC card? Might try that
first, it's easier than debugging DYNALLOCs :-)
-- Jim Blalock, Clemson U.
On
On Wed, 18 May 2011 11:18:08 -0400, Jim Blalock ca...@clemson.edu
wrote:
Also, are you coding DYNAMNBR= on the STC's EXEC card? Might try that
first, it's easier than debugging DYNALLOCs :-)
-- Jim Blalock, Clemson U.
Jim, I'm not sure what DYNAMNBR would help me with in this situation?
I'm not sure if it would help either, but it's an easy thing to try :-)
On 5/18/2011 11:29 AM, Dana Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, 18 May 2011 11:18:08 -0400, Jim Blalockca...@clemson.edu
wrote:
Also, are you coding DYNAMNBR= on the STC's EXEC card? Might try that
first, it's easier than debugging
13 matches
Mail list logo
