Also, I think this behaviour is different on various releases and possibly
models (?).
ChadB@wheeling-ni
sshin.com
Sent by: To
midrange-l-bounce Midrange Systems Technical
s@xxxxxxxxxxxx Discussion
<midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
04/25/2007 07:50
AM Subject
Re: Interactive job adopting
priority 89 !!
Please respond to
Midrange Systems
Technical
Discussion
<midrange-l@midra
nge.com>
I've seen this happen when the interactive capacity is exceeded for too
long of a time period... look for warnings about that condition hitting the
QSYSOPR message queue and history log. If the excess interactive keeps up
for too long, the CFINT task ramps up and eats up CPU percentage first, but
then eventually it will set the rest of the interactive jobs to a high
priority setting (or effectively low priority I guess!). I saw it happen
once at an old job I had and I believe the value the system set the
interactive jobs to was 89 in that case.
<c.chambers@xxxxx
om>
Sent by: To
midrange-l-bounce <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
s@xxxxxxxxxxxx cc
Subject
04/25/2007 05:23 Interactive job adopting priority
AM 89 !!
Please respond to
Midrange Systems
Technical
Discussion
<midrange-l@midra
nge.com>
We had a situation whereby all interactive jobs seemed to adopt the
priority of 89 (rather than the default 20 they normally run under) and
all sessions seemed to grind to halt - understandably.
Is this an automatic action taken by OS400 when certain conditions are
met - or do we have a rogue operator changing the priorities ?
Ideas??
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
midrange.com
