RE: Ending job has priority 16!?!

["Al Barsa, Jr." <barsa2@xxxxxxx>]

At 02:21 PM 1/15/98 -0600, you wrote:
>I THINK (don't hold me to this) that the system does that internally to
>expedite ending the job - especially if it's taking a while to kill it.
>Depending on the LOG values set for thos job however, this could cause
>it to spend a LONG time producing a massive joblog.  One way to prevent
>this when killing a job with ENDJOB is to make sure you limit the # of
>log entries produced with the LOGLMT parameter.  Maybe something
>reasonable like a couple of hundred entries (if you want to try to see
>what's happened if the job may be looping) or just LOGLMT(1) if you
>don't care about the joblog.
>
>... Neil Palmer                                     AS/400~~~~~      

I agree with Neil, but I didn't think that the system admitted that it
changed the priority.  I thought it just lied, and showed you the old
priority.

Al



Al Barsa, Jr. - Account for Midrange-L
Barsa Consulting, LLC.  
400 > 390

Phone:  914-251-9400
Fax:    914-251-9406





Private mail should be sent to barsa@ibm.net
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---