Job Status = 3 (Abort)
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
Job Status = 3 (Abort)
I have a sequence job with two jobs, ie.
Job1 ====> Job2
Exception =====> Termination (Stop Sequence)
I wanted to test the exception abort routine and entered an incorrect File name in Job 1 so that it would abort. It did. The problem I face is, Job2 started and finished and the sequence ended normally.
Does someone know why the sequence didn't stop before starting Job 2. I think it's because the sequence did react quick enough to catch the abort.
I also tried to enter a condition in the trigger which worked and Job 2 did not execute but still the sequence did not end abnormally.
Has anyone else encountered this.
Thanks,
Job1 ====> Job2
Exception =====> Termination (Stop Sequence)
I wanted to test the exception abort routine and entered an incorrect File name in Job 1 so that it would abort. It did. The problem I face is, Job2 started and finished and the sequence ended normally.
Does someone know why the sequence didn't stop before starting Job 2. I think it's because the sequence did react quick enough to catch the abort.
I also tried to enter a condition in the trigger which worked and Job 2 did not execute but still the sequence did not end abnormally.
Has anyone else encountered this.
Thanks,
Jim Stewart
First, the trigger in Job 1 is unconditional.
Second, normally when an abort occurs in any job, the exception handling module get initiated which in turn initiates the termination module.
We didn't want to attach error handling in all Jobs of a sequence. From the documentation, we were able to make a generic error routine.
Is this the case???
Second, normally when an abort occurs in any job, the exception handling module get initiated which in turn initiates the termination module.
We didn't want to attach error handling in all Jobs of a sequence. From the documentation, we were able to make a generic error routine.
Is this the case???
Jim Stewart
The exception handler is not getting initiated and my colleagues and I figure that the the subsequent job is getting fired off before the exception handler is hit. The subsequent job finished normally and takes over the initial exception.
One solution is to put a Terminator stage on all jobs. This ensures that the job reports the abort.
Any thoughts??
One solution is to put a Terminator stage on all jobs. This ensures that the job reports the abort.
Any thoughts??
Jim Stewart
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Job1 needs an OK trigger or a Custom trigger, one that does not handle Failure (an Unconditional trigger does "handle" failure). When Job1 aborts, the Exception Handler should fire, provided that the "automatically handle activities that fail" check box in job properties is checked.
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Yes it is checked. I changed my design. There was a flaw in how the calling program received the abort. It did not catch it. It's works now.
I thought the forum was to be informative. Why the wisecrack "I'm sure you will" Like everyone in this forum, we try and learn from others. I respect your input, hopefully I can return the favor.
Sorry if my feedback offend you. It's not meant to be.
I thought the forum was to be informative. Why the wisecrack "I'm sure you will" Like everyone in this forum, we try and learn from others. I respect your input, hopefully I can return the favor.
Sorry if my feedback offend you. It's not meant to be.
Jim Stewart
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact: