Error: code=-99 [General repository interface 'other error']

atan003 · Post by **atan003** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:36 am

the sequence log is :

-------------------------
11:53:30: StartLoop_Activity_dailbigX_btm_source loop iteration 4 started
11:53:30: dailbigX_to_btm_source_main_prev6 (JOB dailbigX_to_btm_source_main_prev6) started
11:54:29: Exception raised: @dailbigX_to_btm_source_main_prev6, Error calling DSRunJob(dailbigX_to_btm_source_main_prev6), code=-99 [General repository interface 'other error']
11:54:29: Exception handler started
11:54:35: dailbigX_to_acm_account_dt_1_base (JOB dailbigX_to_acm_account_dt_1_base) finished, status=2 [Finished with warnings]
11:58:56: blfmaster_mstr_to_cus_water_meter_rel (JOB blfmaster_mstr_to_cus_water_meter_rel) finished, status=2 [Finished with warnings]
11:58:57: Sequence failed (restartable)
-------------------------

the exception happened when sequence called job to run.

so I run Director to get the log of the job "dailbigX_to_btm_source_main_prev6"
but it failed ,and the error message is :

-------------------------
Error selecting from log file RT_LOG6345
Command was: SSELECT RT_LOG6345 WITH @ID LIKE '1N0N' COUNT.SUP
Error was: Internal data error.
File 'C:\Ascential\DataStage\Projects\BISETL/RT_LOG6345/DATA.30':
Computed blink of 0xDEC does not match expected blink of 0x0!
Detected within group starting at address 0x80000000!
-------------------------

I don't know what is wrong.
Can you help me.

It is sometimes OK, sometimes Fail.

narasimha · Post by **narasimha** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:04 am

Similar problem here

This could be a start to resolve your issue.

atan003 · Post by **atan003** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:53 am

Thank you very much.

narasimha · Post by **narasimha** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:30 am

Nice :D

ray.wurlod · Post by **ray.wurlod** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:40 pm

For future reference note that address 0x80000000 is 2GB.

narasimha · Post by **narasimha** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:41 pm

ray.wurlod wrote:For future reference note that address 0x80000000 is 2GB.

Wow thats new to me!
Just curious Ray, how can we associate same address (0x80000000) to different 2GB files created.

ray.wurlod · Post by **ray.wurlod** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:47 pm

When you get a BLINK (backward link) error at this address it typically indicates an attempt to take a hashed file beyond 2GB, which is not possible with 32-bit pointers (and which, therefore, is why the structure becomes corrupted).

You must monitor your hashed files and convert them to 64-bit addressing before they get near 2GB - maybe at around 1.5GB.

I have no idea at all what you mean by "associate same address (0x80000000) to different 2GB files created".

narasimha · Post by **narasimha** » Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:22 pm

Sorry about that dumb question, maybe I did not put it right.

I was looking for something like this link

The virtual addresses that a process uses do not represent the actual physical location of an object in memory. Instead, the system maintains a page map for each process, which is an internal data structure used to translate virtual addresses into corresponding physical addresses. Each time a thread references an address, the system translates the virtual address to a physical address.

I guess now I am clear with it.
Thanks!