Page 1 of 1

DSD.UVOpen Unable to open file

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:59 am
by esivaprasad
DSD.UVOpen Unable to open file.
Hass file unable to open.

Sequencer have parametes as normal and same parameters will be use for every job in the sequencer. But a job got a extra slash (/).All jobs completed successfully except that job.

All Parameters are default from UNIX.(defined in Unix)
Schedule tool Unicenter call the scripts from UNIX


Job..xProcess: |job..Vehicle.InVeh: DSD.UVOpen Unable to open file '/DSIU_02/Dstage/dat/CV/hash//Vehi'.|

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 7:19 am
by ray.wurlod
Does the parameter value for the directory have a terminating slash and this particular job have a slash between the parameter reference and the hashed file name?

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 7:50 am
by chulett
A "double slash" usually isn't a problem. Ignoring that, are you certain the hashed file at that path otherwise exists and is accessible?

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 8:27 am
by esivaprasad
ray.wurlod wrote:Does the parameter value for the directory have a terminating slash and this particular job have a slash between the parameter reference and the hashed file name? ...
Ray,

Thanks a lot for your quick response.
we have parameter value for each directory (/) and also we have a slash between parametrs reference and hash file name .
(At this point when job was runninh it took one extra slash(/) and job was aborted..)
I am trying for root cause.

Thank you,

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 8:34 am
by esivaprasad
chulett wrote:A "double slash" usually isn't a problem. Ignoring that, are you certain the hashed file at that path otherwise exists and is accessible? ...
Chulett,

Thank you for your help.
Ignored the slash(/) and ran the job finshed successfully.
I am doing root cause analyzing.
Please help to me on this.

Thanks

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:15 am
by chulett
Wait... does 'ignored the slash' mean 'removed the extra slash' here? It fails with two slashes but works fine with one slash? :?

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:35 am
by esivaprasad
chulett wrote:Wait... does 'ignored the slash' mean 'removed the extra slash' here? It fails with two slashes but works fine with one slash? :? ...
with two slashes it failed but works fine with one slash.

I want root cause for this.

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:57 am
by ray.wurlod
Technically // is not legal in a UNIX pathname. That's your root cause.

Some UNIXes ignore it, but technically it's illegal.

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:59 am
by chulett
And *I* want... well, never mind what exactly it is that I want.

As I said, I've had no issues with this, from either sequential file pathnames to pathed hashed filename so perhaps it varies from UNIX to UNIX. As noted, this typically comes from combining two parameters with a hard-coded slash (or perhaps a parameter and a hard-coded "slash hashed file name" and then also including the slash at the end of the parameter value. I've not seen it cause a problem so it looks like you'll need to wait for more smarter peoples to help with this particular sticky wicket.

Code: Select all

#DirectoryPath#/#Filename#

#DirectoryPath#/HashedFileName
And hit Preview and there he is. That's what happens when you get distracted mid-post. :wink:

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 10:36 am
by esivaprasad
chulett wrote:And *I* want... well, never mind what exactly it is that I want.

As I said, I've had no issues with this, from either sequential file pathnames to pathed hashed filename so perhaps it varies from UNIX to UNIX. As noted, this typically comes from combining two parameters with a hard-coded slash (or perhaps a parameter and a hard-coded "slash hashed file name" and then also including the slash at the end of the parameter value. I've not seen it cause a problem so it looks like you'll need to wait for more smarter peoples to help with this particular sticky wicket.

Code: Select all

#DirectoryPath#/#Filename#

#DirectoryPath#/HashedFileName
And hit Preview and there he is. That's what happens when you get distracted mid-post. :wink:
Thank you very much.... :?

Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2009 10:40 am
by esivaprasad
ray.wurlod wrote:Technically // is not legal in a UNIX pathname. That's your root cause.

Some UNIXes ignore it, but technically it's illegal. ...
These jobs will run every day.
I am analyzing Why it came only one day.

Thanks,