DSXchange

I have defined a parameter set within a parallel job which works when the job is executed. When I take the same parallel job and add it to a job sequence the parameters I enter when executing the job sequence are not being passed into the actual job. The job is using the default values from the parameter set.

Any idea's what I am missing?

I've got the same issue in that the values I'm supplying to the job sequence are not being used by the job activity. The job activity is using the values from the parameter set value file instead of those supplied to the job sequence.

Has anyone else come across this issue or know what the problem might be?

Welcome to DSXchange :D

Etiquette Note:(Ray style ):
Hijacking other threads is not encouraged in DSXchange. If you have a problem please post it in a new thread.

Now, for your problem.
Do you have other jobs in the sequence which take the parameters correctly from the parameter set?

Ask your support provider to ask IBM whether there are any known problems with passing values from parameter sets (after all, they are new in version 8) and, if so, whether there is a patch to address the issue.

If the answer is yes, please post the eCase number here so that others (with less than pro-active support providers) may request the correct patch.

Thanks for the responses guys.
I'll ensure use of the correct etiquette from now on.

As for the job I've tried to keep it simple.
A job sequence with one parameter set, using a value file, and one parameter being passed in, where the job sequence has only one job activity receiving the same.

In the job activity properties in the parameters grid I've mapped the parameters. For the parameter set you're provided with a drop down of "(As pre-defined)" ,which would take the default values of the parameter set if any where created, and the name of the parameter set I want to use, in this case, COMMON. For the other parameter I am able to select the job sequence parameter from a pop up box.

On running the job I supply some values to override those from the parameter set value file.
For the individual parameter the value I enter to the job sequence is correctly passed and used by the job activity, but for the parameter set it appears to go back and use the parameter set value file rather than the values that have been supplied at run time.

I'm also getting on to our IBM support to see if this is a bug.

Thanks again guys.
Anton

COMMON is a reserved word. Can you try using a different name for your parameter set?

Fix Pack 1 addresses a couple of parameter set issues, including problems when using $ENV settings. Perhaps your problem is fixed in this pack, which has been around less than a month.

Just an update on this one.
The described behaviour appears to be correct in that if you're using a parameter value file for a parameter set it should take all the values from that value file.

If you need to alter any of the values at runtime they should be amended within the parameter value file itself. This way any other job or routine in the sequence that uses that particular parameter set will all be looking at the same values.
You can have multiple parameter value files against a single parameter set and simply choose the appropriate one depending on what values you wish to submit.

Hope this makes sense.

I was about to post a new topic, but I found this one that is talking exactly about the same I am having problems with

Although I am working with Server version, I do have the same problem

Let me paste you the log from Director when launching a job
As you can see, job sequence JS_CargaMPD_ALI_Phase is launching AltaMatricula05_Lanz_CargaALI

I do have two parameter sets in either the sequence and the job beneath, and a single parameter also in both of them.

Parameter value is perfectly passed, but when it comes to the parameter sets, job launched takes default values
Both parameter sets have only one parameter itself, and only one value file

For me, it does not make sense that they are not passed correctly

I checked release notes for Fix Pack 1a, and it does not seem that its addressing this issue, althought I will install it

Can anybody help? Thanks

Ask for a patch to fix case 118296.

manuel.gomez wrote:I was about to post a new topic, but I found this one that is talking exactly about the same I am having problems with

Although I am working with Server version, I do have the same problem

Let me paste you the log from Director when launching a job

Code: Select all

Starting Job AltaMatricula05_Lanz_CargaALI.
ODBC_In_ALI = (As pre-defined)
ODBC_In_ALI.ODBC_NAME = InALI     (Compiled-in default)
Paths = (As pre-defined)
Paths.path_fich = E:\IBM\InformationServer\Server\Projects\Transformacion\files     (Compiled-in default)
GRUPO_FLOTA = A340
DSJobController = JS_CargaMPD_ALI_Phase

As you can see, job sequence JS_CargaMPD_ALI_Phase is launching AltaMatricula05_Lanz_CargaALI

I do have two parameter sets in either the sequence and the job beneath, and a single parameter also in both of them.

Parameter value is perfectly passed, but when it comes to the parameter sets, job launched takes default values
Both parameter sets have only one parameter itself, and only one value file

For me, it does not make sense that they are not passed correctly

I checked release notes for Fix Pack 1a, and it does not seem that its addressing this issue, althought I will install it

Can anybody help? Thanks

deanwalker wrote:Ask for a patch to fix case 118296.

Whats this case? Where is it described? Thanks

That's the IBM ecase reference to fix the bug mentioned in this thread, there are 3 existing customer support cases that have been resolved with this patch. Any request for a patch will come through your provider to IBM.

manuel.gomez wrote:

deanwalker wrote:Ask for a patch to fix case 118296.

Whats this case? Where is it described? Thanks

Hi -

Disregard my comment (which I have deleted) - I have done some more testing and things seems to work.

Regards
Peter

That's interesting, and not what I see when using the patch. Can you share any of the details ?

peterbaun wrote:Hi -

It is correct that this patch fixes the problem that you now can enter new values at run-time. Unfortunately it creates a new problem namely that if you use value files then the values in these are not used. The jobs always uses the values passed at run-time.

Regards
Peter

To me, after having installed fix pack 1a for server, problem has been solved (without installing patch for this particular ecase)