RE: QINTACTITV & QINACTMSGQ

["Mark A. Manske" <mmanske@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

We have ours set to 120 minutes, basically not problems, the accounting
package
that we have is Infinium, so batch statuses are easy to re-set.  So far we
have
not had any major problems with in house code, but be careful, if you have
some
code written that does not adopt well to being restarted, or continued in
the
middle of a process, it could be very messy.  We have been "lucky" here as
those
type of jobs have high usage, so the tubes are not left at a job step that
would
be hard to recover from.

good luck

Mark A. Manske
Minter-Weisman Co.
Sr. Project Lead



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-midrange-l@midrange.com
[mailto:owner-midrange-l@midrange.com]On Behalf Of
James_Johnson@berryplastics.com
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 8:51 AM
To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
Subject: QINTACTITV & QINACTMSGQ


We would like to remove inactive users from our system.  These inactive
users can cause our JDE sleeper jobs to hang.  We are investigating setting
the system value QINTACTIV = 180 minutes and QINACTMSGQ = ENDJOB.   Is
anyone ending user jobs with this approach?  Are there any problems with
implementing QINTACTIV and QINACTMSGQ.      Thank you
-
James Johnson
Berry Plastics Corporation
PO Box 959
Evansville, IN.  47706
812-429-9556
Fax 812-433-5383
james_johnson@berryplastics.com

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@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
+---