Re: Complete job deletion -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Complete job deletion
From: rob@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 11:58:28 -0400
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

If spooled joblogs are being produced, and they are still associated with
the job, why wouldn't either SPLFILE(*YES) or LOGLMT(0) on the ENDJOB
command delete them?

<snip>
AFaIK if the run-time environment is such
that spooled joblogs are being produced, whether that is desirable,
passé, or otherwise, the ENDJOB SPLFILE(*YES) LOGLMT(0) will not assist
for a job which has already spooled its joblog.
</snip>

Rob Berendt

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Complete job deletion , Luis Rodriguez

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.