|
I find that when QBATCH is not accepting more work, it is because someone submitted a server or NEPS job that is holding the one activity level for the job queue. QBATCH should only be used for batch processing, QPGMR should be used for program compiles, and QSERVER should be used for jobs that wait for work to do, (server jobs that is.) Christopher Bipes Information Services Director CrossCheck, Inc. 707.586.0551, ext. 1102 707.585.5700 FAX Chris.Bipes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx www.Cross-Check.com Notice of Confidentiality: This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me by e-mail (by replying to this message) or telephone (noted above) and permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof. Thank you for your cooperation with respect to this matter. -----Original Message----- From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Jedrzejewicz Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 3:44 PM To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion Subject: Re: Compiled Programs stuck in QBATCH On 12/8/05, pnelson@xxxxxxxxxx <pnelson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Brian, > > You would probably be better off if you used QPGMR for your stuff. Your > programmers will get cranky if their compiles are held up because QBATCH > is busy. > -- I would be far more concerned about cranky users when their jobs are held up because of long compiles. They are actually transacting business! That said, the compiles should absolutely be in a separate subsystem. That subsystem and the compile job descriptions can be tuned to find the best balance between the programmer whining and user convenience. Programmers who game that system should be dealt with stermly. How about forcing the programmers to use WDSc and reducing the number of compiles that are required?
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.