What is the goal of the project James? To get the person back to work or to cut down the interactive tax from IBM? I ask this because we went through this exercise a couple of years ago, with the idea of letting the user get back to work. In the end we found the best and easiest solution was to teach the users involved how to have two open Client Access sessions, and to use the other session for jobs like you describe. The jobs run interactively still, and the user can see the progress bar still, but they can (and do) run other jobs on the front session. It proved the most attractive solution in the end. -------------------------------------------- Booth Martin MartinB@Goddard.edu 802-454-8315 x235 -------------------------------------------- -------Original Message------- From: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Friday, December 21, 2001 09:33:20 AM To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Interactive lock down while batch runs You could have the option that submits the job create a data area that is updated somehow by the submitted program. then have the interactive job display an indicator from the data area. Thanks, Mark Mark Walter Sr. Programmer/Analyst Hanover Wire Cloth a div of CCX, Inc. firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.hanoverwire.com 717.637.3795 Ext.3040 "James W. Kilgore" <eMail@James-W-Kilg To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com ore.com> cc: Sent by: Subject: Interactive lock down while batch runs midrange-l-admin@mi drange.com 12/20/01 07:26 PM Please respond to midrange-l Howdy, We are attempting to shift some legacy interactive workload to batch and have a situation that I would like some feedback on. For example, a Payroll process is usually a batch type work load. The menu system gives the user a choice to: (there's more but these are the batch type workload) 1) verify the payroll entries 2) run the calculations 3) print the checks 4) post the payroll It would be real simple to take option #1 and make it a SBMJOB, if, and it's a big IF, I could get the people to not run #2 until #1 is done. Now I know that I could lock an object and prevent #2 from being run while #1 is already running and have the user try again every five minutes or so. They won't go for that. Why? Because they are used to having a progress bar being displayed showing them how many minutes are left in the process so they can do some other stuff while they wait. They don't have do try and die, they just watch and wait. So here is what I would like to do: 1) have the job perform a SBMJOB to utilize the batch CPW 2) lock down the workstation, showing a process bar during the run If the payroll run were only one program I could have the interactive caller contain a data queue to sync with the SBMJOB process, but the batch process is a series of programs, each having their own progress bar: compute gross wages, compute 401k, compute section 125 medical, compute federal taxes, compute state takes, compute disability, compute garnishments, etc. I'm thinking that I would write an interactive "requester" that sits on a data queue to lock the workstation, does the SBMJOB and each step feeds back it's particular point in time back to the requester which displays the progress bar. Since the interactive session uses very little resources it should have minimum impact on the interactive CPW. Any better suggestions? TIA, J. Kilgore _______________________________________________
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.