RE: Interactive lock down while batch runs -- MIDRANGE-L

James,

I don't know if your locked into using a *DTAQ or not.  I think what Nathan,
Evan, and I are suggesting is something slightly different.  A simple
display program that just shows the progress of the job.  Not tied to the
actual job, because you can implement the lock down as part of the second
CL.

Could be run from any terminal, at any time.

The advantage is that we're guessing you've already written that program.
Just need to point it to a *DTAARA that holds the status info.  Then it's
just a matter of taking the interactive job and doing a submit...

I like *DTAQs also...!  But think this other approach would be simpler, in
this case.

jt


| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Evan Harris
| Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:11 AM
| To: midrange-l@midrange.com
| Subject: Re: Interactive lock down while batch runs
|
|
| JameS
|
| I would think client/server, or client requester for the enquiry
| end of the
| process.
|
| In case I have my terminology wrong, what I mean is that, I would have a
| process that allowed you to inquire or feedback the progress of
| the payroll
| job IF someone wanted to track it or see where it was up to, but (unless I
| am misunderstanding) you are proposing making the display part of
| the process.
|
| What happens if the interactive portion of the program abends ? Will this
| prevent anything continuing ?
|
| Update a user space or something and allow some kind of on-going
| or one-off
| enquiry to retrieve where the process is up to rather than communicating
| directly with it. Write some kind of API to allow user jobs to
| retrieve the
| process name and where the progress details are kept and display them if
| thats what the user wants. Side effect is that more than one user
| can watch
| the process :)
|
| Is this something that is/should be an asynchronous process ?
|
| Do you get what I mean or have I just sounded dense ? Am I using
| terminology I'm not sure of ? :)
|
| regards
| Evan Harris
|
|
| >Nathan, Richard, all,
| >
| >I've used the data area technique in the past with a status of
| 1) need to run,
| >2) am running, and 3) am done, for each step.  It worked great
| for an abend
| >during any step and a programmed recovery/restart.
| >
| >That works well for the individual steps and the whole process.
| >
| >Back to my original question and the problem I'm trying to solve:  How do
| >I lock
| >up the work station, showing step progress bars, while
| submitting the whole
| >process to batch to use the better CPW?
| >
| >"Nathan M. Andelin" wrote:
| > >
| > > As Richard Reeve suggested, having each batch program update
| a data area
| > > (indicating progress), sounds like a good solution.  If the
| batch programs
| > > are called from a CL program, the CL program can monitor for
| abnormal end
| > > conditions and pass that event back to the interactive job
| via the data
| > area
| > > too.
|
|
| _______________________________________________
| This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
| mailing list
| To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
| To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
| visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
| or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
| Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
| at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
|