IFS objects will generate this message either if in use and/or checked out.
SAVW Active has no impact on IFS objects, there is no retry, the message is sent as soon as the lock is seen.
Previous call with IBM, many hours spent trying to clean up IFS save.
Either live with the message or omit the object(s) from the save.
This applies to both regular save or BRMS save.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James H. H. Lampert
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 12:47 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Weird CPFA09E/CPD384E on a SAV
This weekend, I discovered some locked-up daily backup jobs, with CPFA09E and CPD384E messages for three IFS files.
Looking up CPFA09E, I found this page
<
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=nas8N1016325>
which says:
If an Integrated File System object is checked out and the UPDHST
parameter is set to *YES (the default), the save operation will
receive message CPFA09E.
. . .
If an Integrated File System object is checked OUT and UPDHST is set
to *NO on the SAV command (as seen in the following example), this
could be used as a work-around
But in fact, the default for UPDHST is *NO.
The only way I could find locks was to bring up iNav (I'd forgotten I even HAD a working iNav!) and look at the "Use" tab of "Properties" on them. One has a single job "Shared (All) - Write only," while the other two have a single job each "Shared (All) - Read/Write."
I tried a command line save of just the IFS directory,
SAV DEV('/qsys.lib/qtemp.lib/foo.file') OBJ(('/foo/bar/db'
*INCLUDE)) SAVACT(*YES) SAVACTOPT(*ALL) CLEAR(*ALL) DTACPR(*HIGH)
and got this:
Save-while-active checkpoint processing complete.
Object in use. Object is /foo/bar/db/bazdb.lck.
Cannot open object /foo/bar/db/bazdb.lck.
Object in use. Object is /foo/bar/db/bazdb.lobs.
Cannot open object /foo/bar/db/bazdb.lobs.
Object in use. Object is /foo/bar/db/bazdb.log.
Cannot open object /foo/bar/db/bazdb.log.
4 objects saved. 3 objects not saved.
And yet, I can look at the contents of the files with DSPF or even EDTF.
The files are being used by a webapp context running in a Tomcat server, in connection with Google Integration, and I'm told that they are HSQLDB files (why we are using HSQLDB and not DB2/400, I don't know).
Any insights as to what's going on?
--
JHHL
--
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.
Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.
midrange.com
